Kim, T W and Fischer, M (2014) Automated generation of user activity-space pairs in space-use analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(5): 04014007, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Automation of space-use analysis consists of two parts: automated generation of activity-space pairs and automated computation of space utilization based on the pairs. However, existing user presence models require architects to manually generate activity-space pairs because space-use types and their impact on the generation have not been formalized in a single method. This paper presents a formalized method that enables a computer to map activities onto spaces to generate such pairs by choosing spatial requirements of an activity, finding appropriate spaces, and mapping the activity onto found spaces. Validation tests show that activity-space pairs generated by this method conform to the pairs generated by expert architects, and the method is acceptable from the architects' perspectives. Automated space-use analysis powered by this method significantly enhances speed and consistency of utilization prediction. This paper contributes to virtual design and construction by providing a means to connect activities with spaces automatically.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | knowledge-based systems; space utilization; space-use analysis; space-use type; space-use type differentiator; user presence model |
| Index terms: | validation, mapping, architect, automation, virtual design and construction, knowledge-based system, presence, computation |
| Subjects: | computational methods, digital design, professional development, environmental science, artificial intelligence, spatial and geospatial analysis, automation and robotics, profession |
| Topics: | Information Management, Sustainability, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here