Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Fifty years of shape grammars: A systematic mapping of its application in engineering and architecture

Fifty years of shape grammars: A systematic mapping of its application in engineering and... Shape grammars allow a designer to explore a diverse and broad design space. Especially among architects and engineers, the opportunity to evaluate numerous alternatives in the conceptual phase facilitates creativity. Since the introduction of shape grammars 50  years ago, significant research and development have been performed: new applications, combinations with optimisation and integration in digital environments, among others. Consequently, there is a need to map the existing literature to encourage further progress in the field and a lower threshold for those interested in learning more about shape grammars. This study, therefore, presents a systematic mapping of shape grammars in architecture and engineering. Mapping is performed by identifying a query of relevant keywords used in five databases, with the results forming the basis of the mapping. Each of the included articles is then screened to filter out those that do not fit the content criteria. The remaining publications are then evaluated and organised based on the attributes’ application, research type, implementation, engineering and optimisation. The outcome is organised in explanatory illustrations and tables. The final discussion highlights the extensive work performed with shape grammars in the generation of two-dimensional floor plans, an increase in digital development in recent years and the need for further research. The findings indicate a gap between the state of the art and the necessary level of applicability for shape grammars to be an attractive design tool, especially for non-experts. Keywords systematic mapping, shape grammars, architecture, engineering, optimisation, implementation Department of Structural Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway Corresponding author: Sverre Magnus Haakonsen, Department of Structural Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Richard Birkelandsvei 1A, Trondheim 7034, Norway. Email: sverre.m.haakonsen@ntnu.no 2 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) Introduction Motivation In a society increasingly influenced by the digital revolution that has taken place over recent decades, the demands for both architects and engineers to design effective, intriguing, and innovative structures have increased. Especially in the conceptual design phase, the possibility of quickly exploring and evaluating a diverse range of feasible design options facilitates well-informed decisions made by the designer, particu- larly when structural and environmental interests are included. Moreover, for a sufficient impact to be made, these methods should be readily available for a broader range of users, not only experts and researchers in academia, as is often the case today. Algorithm-aided design (AAD) aims to provide the user with tools to realise the objectives mentioned above. By utilising the continual growth in computational capacity, a designer can make parametric models where the influence of one or several parameters on the final structure can be investigated. However, the design space is still limited within the extrema of the parameters. Another approach that aims to alleviate this problem is to use rule-based operations in design. In 1972, Stiny and Gips released a publication proposing shape grammars ; derived from the formal grammars used in linguistics by Noam Chomsky, this formal language describes the generation of shapes using a rule-based formulation. Parallel to the development of shape grammars, the digital revolution granted scientists and professionals computational capacity, which seemed impossible at the time of Stiny and Gips’ introduction of the topic. Computational capacity has enabled the implementation of shape grammars in a digital environment, thereby facilitating the exploration of even more diverse and exciting structures. In 1981, Koning and Eisenberg presented a shape grammar derivation for the design language of Frank Lloyd Wright’s prairie houses, proving the applicability of shape grammars for architectural purposes and general shapes. Moreover, Mitchell included the practical considerations of available materials and fabrica- tion methods in his description of functional grammars, including physical constraints in the rules deriving architecture. Subsequently, numerous publications combining architecture and engineering with shape grammars followed. Additionally, novelties in the topics are often accompanied by a novel name for the grammar application – making the landscape hard to navigate for those interested in learning more about shape grammars. This study introduces an indispensable systematic mapping of the application of shape grammars in architecture, identifying current trends and knowledge gaps and providing a database of rele- vant articles. Definitions Shape grammars. Stiny and Gips first introduced shape grammars in their pioneering paper in 1972. Using the definitions established by Stiny in his paper ‘Introduction to shape and shape grammars’, a shape gram- mar has four components: (1) a finite set of shapes (2) a finite set of symbols (3) a finite set of shape rules (4) an initial shape. These rules are applied recursively as, for example, transformations, Boolean opera- tions, and additions or divisions of shapes. Despite of a fairly straight forward definition, the possibilities of making shapes with shape grammars is vast; for a meticulous historical description and evaluation of shape grammars since its origin, refer to Terry Knight’s ‘Shape and Other Things’. In architecture, a popular application of shape grammars is the generation of floor plans: rotations, splits, scaling and symmetry are just some of the many rules applicable for this purpose. Additionally, structurally conscious rules that assign materials to elements and dimensions, for example, beams and columns, could make the process more structurally aware. Design space. This is the domain of all possible solutions given by a problem’s parameters. Consider a sim- ple parametric example of a cube with three parameters, that is, width, length and height, ranging from 1 to Haakonsen et al 3 10 with a step size of 1. The design space for this cube is then all the possible configurations made by any combination of the three parameters. Hence, 10 = 1000 possible cubes exist in this design space. For more complicated models, the number of parameters and, thus, the design space quickly increase. Shape annealing. This is a method using simulated annealing for the optimisation of shapes and structures. The concept is analogous to the cooling of metal. At high temperatures, particles move around at high speed. When cooled, the movement decreases until they are finally at rest. Similarly, shape annealing initially explores a large variety of solutions at the beginning of the procedure, and the best performing solution is selected as the current solution. Gradually, the ‘temperature sinks’, and the changes in geometry become smaller, for example, slightly varying the dimensions of truss elements. Graphic statics. This is a visual and intuitive method for designing and analysing discrete structures. Based on simple geometry and force polygons, the designer quickly observes how the geometry of an element and the forces within relate to one another. Genetic optimisation. This is a popular optimisation routine based on the theory of natural selection. An opti- misation routine consists of several generations containing a pre-defined number of solutions called a popu- lation. In the first generation, random solutions are generated to form an entire population. From this population, the solutions (or individuals) performing best based on one or several objectives are used as parents for the next generation. Using these well-performing individuals as parents for the next generation, increasingly better solutions will emerge through each generation. Objectives For a shape grammar to be an integral part of a design process, it must be easily implemented, appropriate for optimisation, and manageable for non-experts. Therefore, the presented work aims to establish an over- view of the development and state of the art of shape grammar applications in architecture and structural engineering by a systematic mapping of the field. To that end, some research questions are formulated: •• What is the aim of shape grammars in existing research? •• How are engineering perspectives included in the derivation? •• How are shape grammars implemented? •• How are these factors affecting the use by non-experts? The remainder of this study will first present the research objectives related to the mapping process in this section, followed by a presentation of the research method in the Research Method section; the mapping scheme used to categorise the findings follows in Mapping Scheme, after which the findings are given and assessed in Discussion; finally, Conclusion draws conclusions from the findings. Research method A systematic mapping is chosen to answer the work’s research objectives; realising that this methodology is often mistaken with a classical literature review, the steps taken in this process are thoroughly described in this section. Unlike a more classical literature review, systematic mapping aims to identify all relevant literature within a research field and to categorise it based on relevant topics and applications. This study takes inspiration 8,9 from Petersen et al. who present a procedure for gathering and categorising as much relevant literature as 4 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) Figure 1. Flowchart representing the mapping process from beginning to end. possible within a reasonable amount of time. Although the method is not yet generally known and accepted in engineering, pertinent examples of successful mappings, such as the work of Labonnote et al. exist. Mapping procedures support the identification of knowledge gaps in the literature while reducing the risk of neglecting relevant articles, thus enabling a more accurate concentration of available resources where they are most needed. In short, a search query is defined and used to search through several online databases before gathering all results for a screening process where irrelevant publications are filtered out, as illustrated in Figure 1. Subsequently, a thorough classification process aiming to answer the initial research questions from the above page follows. Search phrasing/database search 11 12 The relevant articles were gathered from the following online databases: Scopus, Oria/NTNU, Web of 13 14 15 Science, Engineering Village and ScienceDirect. The same search query was used for all databases, as presented in Table 1. The columns are joined together by the Boolean operators ‘AND’ or ‘NOT’, whereas the elements within each column are joined by the ‘OR’ Boolean, as shown below: (SHAPE GRAMMARS OR STRUCTURAL GRAMMARS) AND (STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING OR CIVIL ENGINEERING) NOT (LANGUAGE OR LINGUISTIC) The search was carried out on 8 February 2021. Table 2 presents the number of articles obtained from each database. After removing duplicates, 1855 publications remained and were considered for the screening process. Screening For the screening process, the inclusion of publications was determined based on both quantitative and quali- tative inclusion criteria. The quantitative criteria were as follows: •• Written in English. •• Published in a peer-reviewed journal. This criterion is included due to the amount of literature and the fact that one project often results in several conference papers, proceedings and a journal paper. Moreover, peer review is likely to ensure a greater overall quality of the included publications. •• Published in 1985 or later. •• Full-text available online. Haakonsen et al 5 Table 1. Matrix representation of the keywords used in the search query. What With Without Shape grammars Structural engineering Language Structural grammars Civil engineering Linguistic Functional grammars Building design Generative grammars Construction Spatial grammars Engineering Design grammars Structures Architecture Design Table 2. Number of articles obtained from each database using the search matrix from Table 1. Database Search results Scopus 782 Oria/NTNU 618 Web of science 276 Engineering village 557 ScienceDirect 179 The qualitative criteria were as follows: •• The abstract mentions the use of shape grammars – either in their original form or as a derivation. •• The topic of the article concerns buildings or other structures where architecture or structural engi- neering has an influential impact on the design. Examples are houses, bridges, facades and other building elements. Architectural fields such as urban layout planning and road maps are not included due to their lack of structural engineering concerns. Similarly, topics where structural engineering is vital but architecture is negligible are not included. Verification After the screening process, 83 publications were retained for further mapping. Before undertaking this process, a snowballing procedure seeking relevant publications from the references of the included publi- cations – provided that they fulfil the inclusion criteria – was performed to ensure a representative mapping; 17–28 12 additional articles were obtained from this procedure. Subsequently, another iteration of snowballing was undertaken without yielding new results, and 95 publications composed the final collection. However, reading through the included publications, a noteworthy tendency possibly affects the map- ping: different applications of shape grammars tend to receive a new name based on their application, pos- sibly causing articles of relevance to remain undiscovered. This tendency is readily shown in Figure 2; here, a word cloud represents the different words preceding or following ‘grammar(s)’ to highlight the variation in terminology. Despite significant variation, all articles use the term ‘shape grammars’ at least once. Therefore, it is assumed that articles introducing a novel name for shape grammars that reflects their objec- tive have to introduce the concept of shape grammars and are thus covered by the search query used in this mapping study. 6 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) Figure 2. World cloud illustrating the variation in terminology for the same underlying shape grammar procedure. Classification and mapping scheme Next, the 95 publications were subjected to detailed reading to identify patterns and topics answering the research questions of the Objectives section. Three attributes were defined: research type, application and implementation; moreover, two YES/NO attributes describing optimisation and engineering aspects were included. The publications are credited with optimisation if the derivation of shape grammar objects uses an automatic procedure to improve the final result. Engineering aspects are credited for publications that evaluate or restrict the shape derivations by taking engineering considerations into account. These could address any aspect, for example, structural and environmental engineering, and rely on an analysis or a rule of thumb. Mapping scheme The three attributes identified in the previous section are defined in detail below, with the categories of each attribute presented in Tables 3–5. Research type. This attribute defines the motivation for the application of shape grammars in the publica- tions. It is divided into six categories covering the overall objectives of the research. Application area. For which parts of a structure are the shape grammar applied? Here, the articles are catego- rised based on the main application in the article, which is not necessarily the application stated in the abstract. Moreover, in cases where multiple applications are present, the dominant application is used for this attribute. The secondary application is listed in Table 6 for the reader’s perusal. Articles without an appropri- ate category are placed in a miscellaneous category to avoid confusion. Implementation. If shape grammars are to be available to non-experts, the implementation of an interpreter is a paramount concern. This attribute identifies how the articles address the implementation of shape gram- mars and, consequently, how available they are for untrained persons. Haakonsen et al 7 Table 3. Research type attribute. Analysis An existing shape grammar framework is used as a tool for the evaluation and/or analysis of existing architecture or structures. A deeper understanding of an architect’s work or an architectural style is sought Case studies An existing shape grammar framework is used to recreate existing architecture Development This involves a proposal to improve or extend shape grammars either by modifying the original theory or through optimisation Novel designs An existing shape grammar method is used to design novel structures. Only articles with a sufficient focus on novel design are placed in this group; to be placed in this group, it is not enough to create variations of the design in a case study Education Shape grammars are used in education to increase the understanding of a design process Review A review of existing shape grammar articles or the theory itself is discussed Table 4. Application attribute. Floor plan The design of building floor plans. The placement and relation between different functional rooms Building detail Design of specific elements of a building Facade The design of specific elements of a building facades Global shape A three-dimensional representation of a complete global building shape Miscellaneous Articles falling outside the above categories Table 5. Implementation attribute. Not Specified The procedure for shape grammar implementation is left unspecified by the authors Scripting A shape grammar interpreter is created solely for the presented example. Often with its own graphical user interface (GUI) Integration The interpreter is designed as an extension to a commercial CAD software Results and discussion This section presents and discusses the outcome of the mapping process described in the previous section to answer the defined research questions. First, the application and research type attribute results are presented and discussed, first separately and then together. Next, the presence of optimisation and engineering consid- erations follows, after which there is a final evaluation of the impact of computers on the application and implementation of shape grammars. The distribution of publications within each attribute is presented in the three bar graphs in Figure 3. For the application attribute, some publications contained two applications of almost equal significance; although only one application per publication is used in the mapping, Table 6 includes the secondary application in the relevant publications. Research type For the research type attribute, Figure 3 shows that 86% of the publications either examine the development of shape grammars or use the framework to analyse or recreate existing architecture in analysis and case studies. 8 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) Figure 3. Distributions of publications within the categories of each attribute. For novel design, relatively little research seems to have been conducted, with only 7% of the publica- 27–33 tions belonging to this category. These are the publications where the main contribution is the generation of new design with existing theory, not an example of new architecture created with the novel method in a publication, of which there are several. Finally, the mapping yielded two and four publications that are categorised as review and education, respectively: Sönmez presents a review of methods for automatic architectural design task, including shape grammars, while Woodbury describes and discusses set grammars and design spaces concern- ing computer-aided design in detail. Abdelmohsen establishes a course exploring design through gen- erative methods, Wu implements a shape grammar for teaching students about Chinese bracket systems, while Sedrez and Pereira present their work on fractal shapes as a tool for increasing stu- dents’ knowledge of shape vocabulary, Ashton, on the other hand, takes inspiration from the work of Frank Lloyd Wright in her shape grammar-inspired mathematics class. From this point, the categories education and review are not further discussed, as the theory and application of shape grammars are secondary concerns. Application area The application of shape grammars in the mapped publications is diverse, ranging from detailing Greek 40 29 orders to modelling entire buildings. As shown in Figure 3, floor plan generation is the most common application, accounting for 39% of the total publications. Most publications in this category use shape gram- 41–44 mars to derive two-dimensional plan layouts, with some investigating traditional vernacular houses and 18,45 others investigating churches and libraries. Some publications demonstrating the generation of three- dimensional buildings are also included in this category in cases where only two-dimensional grammar rules 25,46,47 are used, and the third dimension is formed by an extrusion from this plan. Global shape, the second most popular application, accounts for 29% of the publications. Although build- ings are the most frequent topic, truss design and other applications are also included. The final three catego- ries are relatively equal in the number of publications. The misc category is used when none of the above categories are appropriate, for example, erecting a thin-tile vault and the rapid prototyping of physical models. Haakonsen et al 9 Application and research type Further pursuing an understanding of the trends, the two attributes research type and application are plot- ted together as a bubble chart in Figure 4. As previously mentioned, the most popular application areas are floor plan and global shape; for research within the development attribute, both applications are predomi- nant. Also interesting are the case studies and analysis categories within research type: Floor plan is, by far, the most popular category compared to global shape, for which only two publications are present in each category. A plausible interpretation of this finding could be the complexity in designing a shape grammar interpreter for global shapes compared to floor plans. The application attribute of novel design substantiates this further: no publications aspire for novelties in floor plans, whereas six publications pursue novelties in global shapes. One also finds one article each in this category for both building detail and facade. Building detail is scattered relatively evenly within research type, although analysis is the most populous category with six publications; however, the meagre number of publications belonging to this category – the same applies for the facade category – does not provide sufficient data for well- founded conclusions. Contemporary modelling in building design is seldom two-dimensional. Thus, shape grammars’ feasibility to model three dimensional structures such as buildings and bridges is a key feature for it to be used by a larger amount of users. Nevertheless, when looking at the objectives of the publications mapped as development, few of the publications seem to focus on this – both in floor plans and global shape. Hohmann et al. is an interesting publication concerning the usability of shape gram- mars for three-dimensional building models. Their work identifies shape grammars’ flexibility as a prom- ising tool in the digital reconstruction of buildings and the lack of existing knowledge regarding modelling complex three-dimensional geometries. Another interesting point is the general need for expertise in a programming language – which is further discussed later. Figure 4. Distribution of publications by research type and application. The magnitude and intensity of the bubbles indicate the number of publications within each category. 10 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) Optimisation and engineering This section further discusses the results of the Application and Research Type section by considering the presence of optimisation routines and engineering matters in the publications. Figure 5 breaks down the bub- ble plot in Figure 4 to a swarm plot; each dot represents a publication, while the colour manifests the pres- ence of optimisation. Twenty publications, or 21%, incorporate some optimisation routine in their shape grammar application. Most articles with optimisation, totalling 14 in numbers, are located in the develop- ment category of the research type attribute. Apart from those, there are five articles concerning novel design: 27,28,30 four on global shape and one on a facade problem. For global shape, three publications are applica- 7 3 32 tions of shape annealing theory, and one uses grammatical evolution to design shelters. Vazquez et al. optimise the brick layout of masonry screen walls to enhance their environmental performance. The final article is located within analysis and contrasts classic optimisation with graphic statics and finite element methods and shape annealing with grammars. Considering the application area of the optimisation articles, global shape and floor plan are the most occurring, with 10 and five publications, respectively; the remain- ing publications are evenly distributed among the remaining categories, with one in building detail, one in miscellaneous, and two in facade. Moreover, in Figure 5, (a) further distinction is made between those articles incorporating engineering concerns and those with a purely architectural design; see the Mapping Scheme section. In addition to Figure 5. Swarm plot presenting the categorisation of publications with respect to the engineering and optimisation attributes. Haakonsen et al 11 colours indicating optimisation, diamond markers exhibit the publications where engineering considerations are present. Of the 19 publications including optimisation, 13 also involve engineering; only six publications 52–55 optimise for architectural purposes, of which four belong to floor plan and the others belong to global 32,56 shape. Table 7 presents all the articles that include optimisation. The publications where both optimisation and engineering are significant parts are predominantly catego- rised as global shape. The general themes for these publications are shape annealing for truss design and grammatical evolution for global shape optimisation. In the publications where shape annealing for truss design is employed, the authors of the original publication, Shea and Cagan appear as contributors in all the other publications employing this method. For the remaining optimisation articles, the diversity among authors and research groups is more significant. Furthermore, only two publications seek to develop an opti- misation routine in combination with shape grammars for ‘regular’ buildings, that is, houses and offices: the first, by Phillipp Geyer from 2008, uses multidisciplinary design optimisation for the generation of building models ; the second, written by Boonstra et al. in 2020, is part of a larger project designing a toolbox for the spatial design optimisation of buildings. Finally, there are five publications in which engineering aspects without optimisation appear: one combines graphic statics with shape grammars when designing equilib- rium structures ; another evaluates the energy performance of the building envelope after the grammar deri- 60 61 vation ; a third uses a spatial zoning procedure for structural designs ; and the final two use knowledge-based 62,63 constraints and design codes, respectively. Impact of computers on shape grammars This final section discusses the impact of computational development on shape grammar research. Figure 3 shows how most articles describe either a case-specific implementation of shape grammars through scripting or no description of their implementation. Only 11 cases offer integration into commercial software, such as 64 65 66 33,36,40,59,67,68 SketchUp, CityEngine and Grasshopper ; 50% of these publications opted for Grasshopper, thus demonstrating the possibility of extending the functionalities of existing software with third-party extensions. For a user already familiar with Grasshopper or another software, the threshold for experiment- ing with shape grammars might be lower when the user interface and basic functionalities are known before- hand, mitigating the need to familiarise oneself with new software for each specific shape grammar application. Moreover, such implementations allow shape grammars to be part of a more extensive pipeline of operations in a complete design process. Table 8 provides a complete overview of the publications where either scripting or the integration of an interpreter is described. The bar graphs in Figure 6 further reveal how the implementation of grammar interpreters has been solved over the years; here, each category of the imple- mentation attribute is represented by different colours in the bar chart. Notice how articles with either no description or scripting are somewhat proportionally distributed each year – from 1985 to 2020. The first publication where integration into commercial software is demonstrated, appears as late as 2008 by Philipp Geyer. He demonstrates the implementation of a multi-objective optimisation with shape grammar inside the commercial software ModelCenter, for an industrial hall building. Despite the entire category of integration articles being pub- 36,69 lished after this, only in 2014 was more than one article published, indicating that further research is necessary in the coming years. The publications using Grasshopper as the tool for implementation take this one step further. For non-experts, it is not viable to create their own shape grammar interpreter – nor to download shape-specific engines from academic research – when starting with shape grammars in projects. Consequently, using familiar software while experimenting with new ideas and techniques could facilitate extended use of shape grammars. As such, Grasshopper is a promising software; it is popular among both engineers and architects due to the intuitive workflow, numerous third-party extensions, and an open-source developer community. Beginners can learn from a vast range of tutoring videos and an intuitive user 12 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) interface, whereas experts benefit from the possibility to customise and extend the functionalities. Not to mention the full integration into the CAD program Rhino. Despite all of this, the findings in the mapping, where only six publications integrate their research into Grasshopper, is somewhat surprising, especially when perusing the content of these publications. The benefits of integrating a shape grammar implementa- tion inside Grasshopper is clearly demonstrated, for example, by Vazquez et al. who illustrate how other third-party plug-ins can be connected to their interpreter; hence, enabling, for example, optimisation of sunlight without having to implement this function themselves. However, none of the publications encapsu- lates their interpreter into a new shape grammar plug-in for others to use — leaving undiscovered territory between experts and novices ripe for future research projects. Computational development can also explain the distribution and evolution of optimisation features. The publications including optimisation and the total number of publications per year are illustrated in Figure 6; there are seemingly two clusters of articles including optimisation: one containing articles in the 1990s and the other containing publications after 2006. In the first cluster, the same researchers appear in 4/5 of the articles. These are the same authors as discussed concerning shape annealing in the subsection – and are more likely to reflect a competent research group on the topic than a general trend shared among several institutions and research groups. Regarding authors, the other cluster is more diversified than the first. Grouping them by contributions from different authors, where an author can be present in one group only, the 15 publications of this cluster are divided into 12 groups, indicating more diverse applications and a broader appeal among researchers. The continual increase in publications per year within the scope of this article, combined with the growth in optimisation, as mentioned above, and digital implementation, indicates optimistic prospects for further development of shape grammars in general and combined with engineering applications in particular. Figure 6. Distribution of publications within each year of publication. Haakonsen et al 13 Table 6. Mapping of the articles based on research type and application. Application Secondary Application Research Type Building facade Floor plan Global Misc Building Facade Floor plan Global detail shape Detail Shape Analysis 40, 68, 100, 101 18, 21, 22, 95 48, 51, 22, 95, — — — 91, 93, 25, 44, 45, 105, 104 98, 99 92, 94, 106 102–104 Case studies 62, 96, 97 19, 41–43, 75, 111 49 111 96 62 — 107 46, 63, 108–110 Development 72, 86 23, 73, 20, 24, 47, 17, 26, 50, — 17, 26, — — 47, 60 83, 89 52–55, 60, 56–59, 61, 57, 80, 88 67, 69 70, 74, 78, 80, 71, 76, 77, 84, 85, 87, 79, 88, 90 81, 82, 112 113, 114 Education 37 — — 38 36, 39 — — - — Novel design 31 33 — 27–30, 32 - 29 — — — Review — — — — 34, 35 — — — — Table 7. Papers where optimisation is a substantial part of the work. Research type Architectural Engineering Development 52–56 57, 58, 70–75 Analysis — 51 Novel design 32 27, 28, 30, 33 Table 8. Papers where the shape grammar interpreter is described. Research type Scripting Integration Development 17, 20, 23, 26, 47, 50, 52–56, 58, 60, 61, 70–90 57, 59, 67, 69 Analysis 45, 91–94 40, 68, 95 Case studies 46, 49, 62, 63, 96 97 Novel design 27, 29, 30 32, 33 Education 37 36, 38 Conclusion This study presented a systematic mapping of shape grammars in architecture and engineering – a topic that has seen a continuous annual increase in publications since 1985 and that, therefore, is in need of systematic mapping to evaluate the current landscape. Three primary attributes were used in response to the research objectives from Objectives; the integral takeaways are as follows: R 14 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) •• Despite the diversity of shape grammar applications, most historical progress concerns the generation of floor plans without any engineering considerations. •• When including structural engineering, optimisation generally follows. Initially, the combination of shape grammars and engineering usually involved optimising truss structures; more recently, examples of increasingly advanced generations of more complex grammars have been demon- strated. An increased computational capacity seems to stimulate a more sophisticated use of shape grammars in design. •• Performance-driven optimisation in combination with shape grammars was demonstrated by a hand- ful of researchers on truss structures in the 1990s. In the last 15 years, there have been more diverse optimisation applications in buildings and structures, including objectives such as structural effi- ciency, environmental performance, solar energy generation, and floor plan layout. •• The implementation of shape grammars is primarily performed in case-specific interpreters with a graphical user interface designed specifically for the task at hand – demanding relatively high exper- tise by the user. Since 2008, the integration of shape grammars as third party plug-ins to commercial software have emerged. Eleven percent of the evaluated publications implemented their interpreter in commercial software. •• Considering the presented findings, the recent increase in the integration of interpreters and perfor- mance optimisation, number of articles, and variety of applications within the articles predict an encouraging direction for the use of shape grammars as a design tool encouraging better and more diverse solutions than would otherwise be possible, for example, through the combination of gram- mars and evolutionary optimisation. Nevertheless, more research on the implementation and facilita- tion of access to non-experts is needed before shape grammars can be deemed attainable to a broader range of practitioners. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the Norwegian Railroad Directorate for the funding of this work and Bane NOR for their support and intellectual resources. An appreciation is also directed toward Bunji Izumi, Steinar Hillersøy Dyvik, and Marcin Luczkowski for their feedback and discussions. Declaration of conflicting interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. ORCID iD Sverre Magnus Haakonsen https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2105-0985 Notes 1. ScienceDirect allows only eight Boolean operators in the query. Consequently, the entire ‘AND’ column of the search matrix was omitted. 2. This is included because the databases did not contain material before this year. To avoid bias, references older than this are not sought out anywhere else. 3. A combination of shape grammars and evolutionary optimisation. Haakonsen et al 15 References 1 Stiny G and Gips J. Shape grammars and the generative specification of painting and sculpture. IFIP Congress 1971; 2(2): 125–135. 2 Chomsky N. Topics in the theory of generative grammar, volume 56. Walter de Gruyter, 2013, p. 12. 3 Koning H and Eizenberg J. The language of the prairie: frank Lloyd wright's prairie houses. Environ Planning B: Planning Design 1981; 8(3): 295–323. 4 Mitchell WJ. Functional grammars: an introduction, 1991. 5 Stiny G. Introduction to shape and shape grammars. Environ Planning B: Planning Design 1980; 7(3): 343–351. 6 Knight T. Shapes and other things. Nexus Netw J 2015; 17(3): 963–980. 7 Cagan J and Mitchell W. Optimally directed shape generation by shape annealing. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 1993; 20(1): 5–12. 8 Petersen K, Feldt R and Mujtaba S, et al. Systematic mapping studies in software engineering. 12th Int Conf Eval Assess Softw Eng; 12: 1–10. 9 Petersen K, Vakkalanka S and Kuzniarz L. Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: an update. Inf Softw Technology 2015; 64: 1–18. 10 Labonnote N, Rønnquist A and Manum B, et al. Additive construction: state-of-the-art, challenges and opportuni- ties. Automation in Construction 2016; 72: 347–366. 11 Elsevier. About scopus - abstract and citation database: elsevier. 2021; Online; accessed 31-August-2021, https:// www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus 12 NTNU. Oria. 2021. https://bibsys-almaprimo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/search?vid=NTNU_UB [Online; accessed 31-August-2021]. 13 Clarivate. Web of Science, 2021. Online, https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/basic-search (accessed 31 August 2021). 14 Elsevier. Engineering village, 2021. Online; accessed 31-August-2021, https://www.engineeringvillage.com/ 15 Elsevier. Science direct, 2021. Online; accessed 31-August- 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/ 16 Wohlin C. Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering, pp. 1–10. 17 Aliaga DG, Rosen PA and Bekins DR. Style grammars for interactive visualization of architecture. IEEE Transactions Visualization Computer Graphics 2007; 13(4): 786–797. 18 Buelinckx H. Wren's language of city church designs: a formal generative classification. Environ Planning B: Planning Design 1993; 20(6): 645–676. 19 C ¸ ağdas¸ G. A shape grammar: the language of traditional turkish houses. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 1996; 23(4): 443–464. 20 Duarte JP. A discursive grammar for customizing mass housing: the case of Siza's houses at Malagueira. Automation in Construction 2005; 14(2): 265–275. 21 Eloy S and Duarte JP. Inferring a shape grammar: translating designer's knowledge. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing 2014; 28(2): 153–168. 22 Flemming U. More than the sum of parts: the grammar of queen anne houses. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 1987; 14(3): 323–350. 23 Gadde R, Marlet R and Paragios N. Learning grammars for architecture-specific facade parsing. Int J Computer Vis 2016; 117(3): 290–316. 24 Grasl T. Transformational palladians. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2012; 39(1): 83–95. 25 Lee JH, Ostwald MJ and Gu N. A combined plan graph and massing grammar approach to frank Lloyd wright's prairie architecture. Nexus Netw J 2017; 19(2): 279–299. 26 Müller P, Wonka P and Haegler S, et al. Procedural modeling of buildings. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Papers; 2006, pp. 614–623. 27 Shea K and Cagan J. Innovative dome design: applying geodesic patterns with shape annealing. AI EDAM 1997; 11(5): 379–394. 28 Shea K and Cagan J. Languages and semantics of grammatical discrete structures. Ai Edam 1999; 13(4): 241–251. 29 Wonka P, Wimmer M and Sillion F, et al. Instant architecture. ACM Trans Graphics 2003; 22(3): 669–677. 16 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) 30 Shea K and Smith IF. Improving full-scale transmission tower design through topology and shape optimization. J Structural Engineering 2006; 132(5): 781–790. 31 Knight T and Sass L. Looks count: computing and constructing visually expressive mass customized housing. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing: AI EDAM 2010; 24(3): 425–445. 32 O’Neill M, McDermott J and Swafford JM, et al. Evolutionary design using grammatical evolution and shape grammars: designing a shelter. Int J Des Eng 2010; 3(1): 4–24. 33 Vazquez E, Duarte J and Poerschke U. Masonry screen walls: a digital framework for design generation and envi- ronmental performance optimization. Architectural Sci Rev 2020; 64(3): 1–13. 34 Sönmez NO. A review of the use of examples for automating architectural design tasks. Computer-Aided Des 2018; 96: 13–30. 35 Woodbury RF. Searching for designs: paradigm and practice. Building Environ 1991; 26(1): 61–73. 36 Abdelmohsen SM. An inquiry into designing in context using generative systems. Int J Architectural Comput 2014; 12(4): 477–494. 37 Wu Q. Bracket teaching program: A shape grammar interpreter. Automation in Construction 2005; 14(6): 716–723. 38 Sedrez MR and Pereira ATC. Fractal shape. Nexus Netw J 2012; 14(1): 97–107. 39 Ashton B. Integrating elements of frank Lloyd wright's architectural and decorative designs in a liberal arts math- ematics class. J Mathematics Arts 2010; 4(3): 143–161. 40 D’Oliveira PFCC, et al. A detail shape grammar. Using alberti’s column system rules to evaluate the longitudinal elevation of the nave of sant’andrea church generation. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing: AI EDAM 2018; 32(3): 295–307. 41 Chiou S and Krishnamurti R. Example taiwanese traditional houses. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 1996; 23(2): 191–216. 42 Colakoglu B. Design by grammar: an interpretation and generation of vernacular hayat houses in contemporary context. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2005; 32(1): 141–149. 43 Lambe NR and Dongre AR. A shape grammar approach to contextual design: a case study of the pol houses of ahmedabad, india. Environ Plann B: Urban Analytics City Sci 2019; 46(5): 845–861. 44 Yousefniapasha M, Teeling C and Rollo J, et al. Shape grammar, culture, and generation of vernacular houses (a practice on the villages adjacent to rice fields of mazandaran. In: the north of Iran). Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science; 2019, p. 2399808319843919. 45 Mamoli M. A shape grammar for the building-type definition of the ancient greek and roman library and the evalu- ation of library plans. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing 2020; 34(2): 191–206. 46 Duarte JP. Towards the mass customization of housing: the grammar of siza's houses at malagueira. Environ Planning B: Plann Des 2005; 32(3): 347–380. 47 Tran H and Khoshelham K. Procedural reconstruction of 3d indoor models from lidar data using reversible jump markov chain monte carlo. Remote Sensing 2020; 12(5): 838. 48 Kamath AV. Making grammars for material and tectonic complexity: an example of a thin-tile vault. Des Stud 2020; 69: 100944. 49 Wang Y and Duarte JP. Automatic generation and fabrication of designs. Automation in Construction 2002; 11(3): 291–302. 50 Hohmann B, Havemann S and Krispel U, et al. A gml shape grammar for semantically enriched 3d building mod- els. Comput Graphics 2010; 34(4): 322–334. 51 Muslimin R. Parametric, grammatical, and perceptual iterations on structural design synthesis. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing 2018; 32(3): 269–281. 52 Granadeiro V, Pina L and Duarte JP, et al. A general indirect representation for optimization of generative design systems by genetic algorithms: application to a shape grammar-based design system. Automation in Construction 2013; 35: 374–382. 53 Ruiz-Montiel M, Boned J and Gavilanes J, et al. Design with shape grammars and reinforcement learning. Adv Eng Inform 2013; 27(2): 230–245. 54 Ozdemir S and Ozdemir Y. Prioritizing store plan alternatives produced with shape grammar using multi-criteria decision-making techniques. Environ Plann B: Urban Analytics City Sci 2018; 45(4): 751–771. 55 Ozdemir Y and Ozdemir S. Extended prioritizing of store plan alternatives produced with shape grammar using the generalized choquet integral method. Environ Plann B: Urban Analytics City Sci 2019; 46(5): 931–947. 56 Chouchoulas O and Day A. Design exploration using a shape grammar with a genetic algorithm. Open House International, 2007. Haakonsen et al 17 57 Geyer P. Multidisciplinary grammars supporting design optimization of buildings. Res Eng Des 2008; 18(4): 197–216. 58 Boonstra S, van der Blom K and Hofmeyer H, et al. Conceptual structural system layouts via design response grammars and evolutionary algorithms. Automation in Construction 2020; 116: 103009. 59 Lee J, Mueller C and Fivet C. Automatic generation of diverse equilibrium structures through shape grammars and graphic statics. Int J Space Structures 2016; 31(2–4): 147–164. 60 Granadeiro V, Duarte JP and Correia JR, et al. Building envelope shape design in early stages of the design process: integrating architectural design systems and energy simulation. Automation in Construction 2013; 32: 196–209. 61 Claessens DP, Boonstra S and Hofmeyer H. Spatial zoning for better structural topology design and performance. Adv Eng Inform 2020; 46: 101162. 62 Baker NC and Fenves SJ. Manipulating shape and its function. J Comput Civil Eng 1990; 4(3): 221–238. 63 Smith G and Ceranic B. Spatial layout planning in sub-surface rail station design for effective fire evacuation. Architectural Eng Des Management 2008; 4(2): 99–120. 64 Trimble. Sketchup. https://www.sketchup.com/, 2021. [Online; accessed 21-June-2021]. 65 ArcGIS. Cityengine. 2021; Online; accessed 21-June-2021, https://www.esri.com/en-us/arcgis/products/arcgis- cityengine/overview 66 Associates M. Grasshopper3d, 2021. [Online; accessed 21- June-2021], https://www.grasshopper3d.com/ 67 Veloso P, Celani G and Scheeren R. From the generation of layouts to the production of construction documents: an application in the customization of apartment plans. Automation in Construction 2018; 96: 224–235. 68 Capone M and Lanzara E. Scan-to-bim vs 3d ideal model hbim: parametric tools to study domes geometry. International Archives of the Photogrammetry. Remote Sensing & Spatial Information Sciences, 2019. 69 Ruiz-Montiel M, Belmonte MV and Boned J, et al. Layered shape grammars. Computer-Aided Des 2014; 56: 104–119. 70 Reddy G and Cagan J. An improved shape annealing algorithm for truss topology generation, 1995. 71 Mandow L, Pérez-de-la Cruz JL and Rodŕıguez-Gavilań AB, et al. Architectural planning with shape grammars and reinforcement learning: habitability and energy efficiency. Eng Appl Artif Intelligence 2020; 96: 103909. 72 Gero JS, Louis SJ and Kundu S. Evolutionary learning of novel grammars for design improvement. AI EDAM 1994; 8(2): 83–94. 73 Youssef AM, Zhai ZJ and Reffat RM. Generating proper building envelopes for photovoltaics integration with shape grammar theory. Energy and Buildings 2018; 158: 326–341. 74 Puentes L, Cagan J and McComb C. Heuristic-guided solution search through a two-tiered design grammar. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 2020; 20(1): 10. 75 Reddy GM and Cagan J. Optimally directed truss topology generation using shape annealing. J Mech Des 1995; 117: 206–209. 76 Hua H. A bi-directional procedural model for architectural design. Computer Graphics Forum 2016; 36: 219–231. 77 Wang XY, Liu YF and Zhang K. A graph grammar approach to the design and validation of floor plans. Computer J 2020; 63(1): 137–150. 78 Dounas T. Animation as a computational framework for architectural design composition. Architectural Sci Rev 2020; 63(2): 222–232. 79 Yue K and Krishnamurti R. Developing a tractable shape grammar, 2010. 80 Hou F, Qi Y and Qin H. Drawing-based procedural modeling of chinese architectures. IEEE Trans Visualization Computer Graphics 2012; 18(1): 30–42. 81 Yue K, Krishnamurti R and Grobler F. Estimating the interior layout of buildings using a shape grammar to capture building style. J Computing Civil Engineering 2012; 26(1): 113–130. 82 Mackenzie CA. Heuristic search and tree systems inference for structural pattern recognition. Knowledge-Based Syst 1988; 1(2): 78–89. 83 Müller P, Zeng G and Wonka P, et al. Image-based procedural modeling of facades. ACM Trans Graph 2007; 26(3): 85. 84 Dang M, Lienhard S and Ceylan D, et al. Interactive design of probability density functions for shape grammars. ACM Trans Graphics 2015; 34(6): 1–13. 85 Tepavčević B and Stojaković V. Procedural modeling in architecture based on statistical and fuzzy inference. Automation in Construction 2013; 35: 329–337. 86 Edelsbrunner J, Havemann S and Sourin A, et al. Procedural modeling of architecture with round geometry. Comput Graphics 2017; 64: 14–25. 18 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) 87 Krecklau L and Kobbelt L. Procedural modeling of interconnected structures. Computer Graphics Forum 2011; 30: 335–344. 88 Hou F, Qin H and Qi Y. Procedure-based component and architecture modeling from a single image. Vis Computer 2016; 32(2): 151–166. 89 Simon L, Teboul O and Koutsourakis P, et al. Random exploration of the procedural space for single-view 3d modeling of buildings. Int Journal Computer Vision 2011; 93(2): 253–271. 90 Tran H, Khoshelham K and Kealy A, et al. Shape grammar approach to 3d modeling of indoor environments using point clouds. J Comput Civil Eng 2019; 33(1): 04018055. 91 Dehbi Y, Gröger G and Plümer L. Identification and modelling of translational and axial symmetries and their hierarchical structures in building footprints by formal grammars. Trans GIS 2016; 20(5): 645–663. 92 Aksamija A, Yue K and Kim H, et al. Integration of knowledge-based and generative systems for building charac- terization and prediction. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing 2010; 24(1): 3–16. 93 Seebohm T and Wallace W. Rule-based representation of design in architectural practice. Automation in Construction 1998; 8(1): 73–85. 94 Hosny SS. Shape grammars: style generators in computer-aided architectural design. Journal Engineering Applied Science-Cairo 2003; 50(1): 37–56. 95 Quattrini R and Baleani E. Theoretical background and historical analysis for 3d reconstruction model. Villa thiene at cicogna. J Cult Heritage 2015; 16(1): 119–125. 96 Jesus D, Coelho A and Sousa AA. Layered shape grammars for procedural modelling of buildings. Vis Computer 2016; 32(6): 933–943. 97 Calogero E, Kaminski J and Arnold D. Using procedural modeling to explore alternative designs for the louvre. J Comput Cult Heritage 2013; 6(4): 1–22. 98 Muslimin R.. A grammatical note on utzon's vaults. Nexus Netw J 2020; 22(4): 1175–1200. 99 Phillips MG. Framing what we see: the role of ornament in structuring Louis Sullivan's design logic. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2008; 35(5): 772–793. 100 Yavuz AÖ and Sağıroğlu Ö. Reviewing the bricks used in the traditional architecture with the shape grammar method. Gazi Univ J Sci 2016; 29(4): 741–749. 101 Rezoug A and Ozkar M. Visual rules for socio-spatial analysis: inferring a grammar of use in an inhabited climat de france. Dearq 2020; 27: 50–61. 102 Lee JH, Ostwald MJ and Gu N. A justified plan graph (jpg) grammar approach to identifying spatial design pat- terns in an architectural style. Environ Plann B: Urban Analytics City Sci 2018; 45(1): 67–89. 103 Eloy S and Duarte JP. A transformation-grammar-based methodology for the adaptation of existing housetypes: the case of the 'rabo-de-bacalhau'. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2015; 42(5): 775–800. 104 Sc Chiou and Krishnamurti R. The grammar of taiwanese traditional vernacular dwellings. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 1995; 22(6): 689–720. 105 Andrew I, et al. Computing style. Nexus Netw J 2011; 13(1): 183–193. 106 Krüger M, Duarte JP and Coutinho F. Decoding de re aedificatoria: using grammars to trace alberti’s influence on portuguese classical architecture. Nexus Netw J 2011; 13(1): 171–182. 107 Radford AD and Gero JS. Towards generative expert systems for architectural detailing. Computer-Aided Des 1985; 17(9): 428–435. 108 Griz C, Amorim L and Mendes L, et al. A customization grammar: describing the customization process of apart- ment design. Int J Architectural Comput 2017; 15(3): 203–214. 109 Eloy S and Duarte JP. A transfformation grammar for housing rehabilitation. Nexus Netw J 2011; 13(1): 49–71. 110 Erem Ö and Abbasoğlu Ermiyagil MS. Adapted design generation for turkish vernacular housing grammar. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2016; 43(5): 893–919. 111 Sass L. A Palladian construction grammar-design reasoning with shape grammars and rapid prototyping. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2007; 34(1): 87–106. 112 Stouffs R and Tunçer B. Typological descriptions as generative guides for historical architecture. Nexus Netw J 2015; 17(3): 785–805. 113 Lee JH, Ostwald MJ and Gu N. A syntactical and grammatical approach to architectural configuration, analysis and generation. Architectural Sci Rev 2015; 58(3): 189–204. 114 Howe AS. Designing for automated construction. Automation in Construction 2000; 9(3): 259–276. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Architectural Computing SAGE

Fifty years of shape grammars: A systematic mapping of its application in engineering and architecture

Download PDF
18 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/fifty-years-of-shape-grammars-a-systematic-mapping-of-its-application-BsLbjNp9eY

References (111)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2022
ISSN
1478-0771
eISSN
2048-3988
DOI
10.1177/14780771221089882
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Shape grammars allow a designer to explore a diverse and broad design space. Especially among architects and engineers, the opportunity to evaluate numerous alternatives in the conceptual phase facilitates creativity. Since the introduction of shape grammars 50  years ago, significant research and development have been performed: new applications, combinations with optimisation and integration in digital environments, among others. Consequently, there is a need to map the existing literature to encourage further progress in the field and a lower threshold for those interested in learning more about shape grammars. This study, therefore, presents a systematic mapping of shape grammars in architecture and engineering. Mapping is performed by identifying a query of relevant keywords used in five databases, with the results forming the basis of the mapping. Each of the included articles is then screened to filter out those that do not fit the content criteria. The remaining publications are then evaluated and organised based on the attributes’ application, research type, implementation, engineering and optimisation. The outcome is organised in explanatory illustrations and tables. The final discussion highlights the extensive work performed with shape grammars in the generation of two-dimensional floor plans, an increase in digital development in recent years and the need for further research. The findings indicate a gap between the state of the art and the necessary level of applicability for shape grammars to be an attractive design tool, especially for non-experts. Keywords systematic mapping, shape grammars, architecture, engineering, optimisation, implementation Department of Structural Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway Corresponding author: Sverre Magnus Haakonsen, Department of Structural Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Richard Birkelandsvei 1A, Trondheim 7034, Norway. Email: sverre.m.haakonsen@ntnu.no 2 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) Introduction Motivation In a society increasingly influenced by the digital revolution that has taken place over recent decades, the demands for both architects and engineers to design effective, intriguing, and innovative structures have increased. Especially in the conceptual design phase, the possibility of quickly exploring and evaluating a diverse range of feasible design options facilitates well-informed decisions made by the designer, particu- larly when structural and environmental interests are included. Moreover, for a sufficient impact to be made, these methods should be readily available for a broader range of users, not only experts and researchers in academia, as is often the case today. Algorithm-aided design (AAD) aims to provide the user with tools to realise the objectives mentioned above. By utilising the continual growth in computational capacity, a designer can make parametric models where the influence of one or several parameters on the final structure can be investigated. However, the design space is still limited within the extrema of the parameters. Another approach that aims to alleviate this problem is to use rule-based operations in design. In 1972, Stiny and Gips released a publication proposing shape grammars ; derived from the formal grammars used in linguistics by Noam Chomsky, this formal language describes the generation of shapes using a rule-based formulation. Parallel to the development of shape grammars, the digital revolution granted scientists and professionals computational capacity, which seemed impossible at the time of Stiny and Gips’ introduction of the topic. Computational capacity has enabled the implementation of shape grammars in a digital environment, thereby facilitating the exploration of even more diverse and exciting structures. In 1981, Koning and Eisenberg presented a shape grammar derivation for the design language of Frank Lloyd Wright’s prairie houses, proving the applicability of shape grammars for architectural purposes and general shapes. Moreover, Mitchell included the practical considerations of available materials and fabrica- tion methods in his description of functional grammars, including physical constraints in the rules deriving architecture. Subsequently, numerous publications combining architecture and engineering with shape grammars followed. Additionally, novelties in the topics are often accompanied by a novel name for the grammar application – making the landscape hard to navigate for those interested in learning more about shape grammars. This study introduces an indispensable systematic mapping of the application of shape grammars in architecture, identifying current trends and knowledge gaps and providing a database of rele- vant articles. Definitions Shape grammars. Stiny and Gips first introduced shape grammars in their pioneering paper in 1972. Using the definitions established by Stiny in his paper ‘Introduction to shape and shape grammars’, a shape gram- mar has four components: (1) a finite set of shapes (2) a finite set of symbols (3) a finite set of shape rules (4) an initial shape. These rules are applied recursively as, for example, transformations, Boolean opera- tions, and additions or divisions of shapes. Despite of a fairly straight forward definition, the possibilities of making shapes with shape grammars is vast; for a meticulous historical description and evaluation of shape grammars since its origin, refer to Terry Knight’s ‘Shape and Other Things’. In architecture, a popular application of shape grammars is the generation of floor plans: rotations, splits, scaling and symmetry are just some of the many rules applicable for this purpose. Additionally, structurally conscious rules that assign materials to elements and dimensions, for example, beams and columns, could make the process more structurally aware. Design space. This is the domain of all possible solutions given by a problem’s parameters. Consider a sim- ple parametric example of a cube with three parameters, that is, width, length and height, ranging from 1 to Haakonsen et al 3 10 with a step size of 1. The design space for this cube is then all the possible configurations made by any combination of the three parameters. Hence, 10 = 1000 possible cubes exist in this design space. For more complicated models, the number of parameters and, thus, the design space quickly increase. Shape annealing. This is a method using simulated annealing for the optimisation of shapes and structures. The concept is analogous to the cooling of metal. At high temperatures, particles move around at high speed. When cooled, the movement decreases until they are finally at rest. Similarly, shape annealing initially explores a large variety of solutions at the beginning of the procedure, and the best performing solution is selected as the current solution. Gradually, the ‘temperature sinks’, and the changes in geometry become smaller, for example, slightly varying the dimensions of truss elements. Graphic statics. This is a visual and intuitive method for designing and analysing discrete structures. Based on simple geometry and force polygons, the designer quickly observes how the geometry of an element and the forces within relate to one another. Genetic optimisation. This is a popular optimisation routine based on the theory of natural selection. An opti- misation routine consists of several generations containing a pre-defined number of solutions called a popu- lation. In the first generation, random solutions are generated to form an entire population. From this population, the solutions (or individuals) performing best based on one or several objectives are used as parents for the next generation. Using these well-performing individuals as parents for the next generation, increasingly better solutions will emerge through each generation. Objectives For a shape grammar to be an integral part of a design process, it must be easily implemented, appropriate for optimisation, and manageable for non-experts. Therefore, the presented work aims to establish an over- view of the development and state of the art of shape grammar applications in architecture and structural engineering by a systematic mapping of the field. To that end, some research questions are formulated: •• What is the aim of shape grammars in existing research? •• How are engineering perspectives included in the derivation? •• How are shape grammars implemented? •• How are these factors affecting the use by non-experts? The remainder of this study will first present the research objectives related to the mapping process in this section, followed by a presentation of the research method in the Research Method section; the mapping scheme used to categorise the findings follows in Mapping Scheme, after which the findings are given and assessed in Discussion; finally, Conclusion draws conclusions from the findings. Research method A systematic mapping is chosen to answer the work’s research objectives; realising that this methodology is often mistaken with a classical literature review, the steps taken in this process are thoroughly described in this section. Unlike a more classical literature review, systematic mapping aims to identify all relevant literature within a research field and to categorise it based on relevant topics and applications. This study takes inspiration 8,9 from Petersen et al. who present a procedure for gathering and categorising as much relevant literature as 4 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) Figure 1. Flowchart representing the mapping process from beginning to end. possible within a reasonable amount of time. Although the method is not yet generally known and accepted in engineering, pertinent examples of successful mappings, such as the work of Labonnote et al. exist. Mapping procedures support the identification of knowledge gaps in the literature while reducing the risk of neglecting relevant articles, thus enabling a more accurate concentration of available resources where they are most needed. In short, a search query is defined and used to search through several online databases before gathering all results for a screening process where irrelevant publications are filtered out, as illustrated in Figure 1. Subsequently, a thorough classification process aiming to answer the initial research questions from the above page follows. Search phrasing/database search 11 12 The relevant articles were gathered from the following online databases: Scopus, Oria/NTNU, Web of 13 14 15 Science, Engineering Village and ScienceDirect. The same search query was used for all databases, as presented in Table 1. The columns are joined together by the Boolean operators ‘AND’ or ‘NOT’, whereas the elements within each column are joined by the ‘OR’ Boolean, as shown below: (SHAPE GRAMMARS OR STRUCTURAL GRAMMARS) AND (STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING OR CIVIL ENGINEERING) NOT (LANGUAGE OR LINGUISTIC) The search was carried out on 8 February 2021. Table 2 presents the number of articles obtained from each database. After removing duplicates, 1855 publications remained and were considered for the screening process. Screening For the screening process, the inclusion of publications was determined based on both quantitative and quali- tative inclusion criteria. The quantitative criteria were as follows: •• Written in English. •• Published in a peer-reviewed journal. This criterion is included due to the amount of literature and the fact that one project often results in several conference papers, proceedings and a journal paper. Moreover, peer review is likely to ensure a greater overall quality of the included publications. •• Published in 1985 or later. •• Full-text available online. Haakonsen et al 5 Table 1. Matrix representation of the keywords used in the search query. What With Without Shape grammars Structural engineering Language Structural grammars Civil engineering Linguistic Functional grammars Building design Generative grammars Construction Spatial grammars Engineering Design grammars Structures Architecture Design Table 2. Number of articles obtained from each database using the search matrix from Table 1. Database Search results Scopus 782 Oria/NTNU 618 Web of science 276 Engineering village 557 ScienceDirect 179 The qualitative criteria were as follows: •• The abstract mentions the use of shape grammars – either in their original form or as a derivation. •• The topic of the article concerns buildings or other structures where architecture or structural engi- neering has an influential impact on the design. Examples are houses, bridges, facades and other building elements. Architectural fields such as urban layout planning and road maps are not included due to their lack of structural engineering concerns. Similarly, topics where structural engineering is vital but architecture is negligible are not included. Verification After the screening process, 83 publications were retained for further mapping. Before undertaking this process, a snowballing procedure seeking relevant publications from the references of the included publi- cations – provided that they fulfil the inclusion criteria – was performed to ensure a representative mapping; 17–28 12 additional articles were obtained from this procedure. Subsequently, another iteration of snowballing was undertaken without yielding new results, and 95 publications composed the final collection. However, reading through the included publications, a noteworthy tendency possibly affects the map- ping: different applications of shape grammars tend to receive a new name based on their application, pos- sibly causing articles of relevance to remain undiscovered. This tendency is readily shown in Figure 2; here, a word cloud represents the different words preceding or following ‘grammar(s)’ to highlight the variation in terminology. Despite significant variation, all articles use the term ‘shape grammars’ at least once. Therefore, it is assumed that articles introducing a novel name for shape grammars that reflects their objec- tive have to introduce the concept of shape grammars and are thus covered by the search query used in this mapping study. 6 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) Figure 2. World cloud illustrating the variation in terminology for the same underlying shape grammar procedure. Classification and mapping scheme Next, the 95 publications were subjected to detailed reading to identify patterns and topics answering the research questions of the Objectives section. Three attributes were defined: research type, application and implementation; moreover, two YES/NO attributes describing optimisation and engineering aspects were included. The publications are credited with optimisation if the derivation of shape grammar objects uses an automatic procedure to improve the final result. Engineering aspects are credited for publications that evaluate or restrict the shape derivations by taking engineering considerations into account. These could address any aspect, for example, structural and environmental engineering, and rely on an analysis or a rule of thumb. Mapping scheme The three attributes identified in the previous section are defined in detail below, with the categories of each attribute presented in Tables 3–5. Research type. This attribute defines the motivation for the application of shape grammars in the publica- tions. It is divided into six categories covering the overall objectives of the research. Application area. For which parts of a structure are the shape grammar applied? Here, the articles are catego- rised based on the main application in the article, which is not necessarily the application stated in the abstract. Moreover, in cases where multiple applications are present, the dominant application is used for this attribute. The secondary application is listed in Table 6 for the reader’s perusal. Articles without an appropri- ate category are placed in a miscellaneous category to avoid confusion. Implementation. If shape grammars are to be available to non-experts, the implementation of an interpreter is a paramount concern. This attribute identifies how the articles address the implementation of shape gram- mars and, consequently, how available they are for untrained persons. Haakonsen et al 7 Table 3. Research type attribute. Analysis An existing shape grammar framework is used as a tool for the evaluation and/or analysis of existing architecture or structures. A deeper understanding of an architect’s work or an architectural style is sought Case studies An existing shape grammar framework is used to recreate existing architecture Development This involves a proposal to improve or extend shape grammars either by modifying the original theory or through optimisation Novel designs An existing shape grammar method is used to design novel structures. Only articles with a sufficient focus on novel design are placed in this group; to be placed in this group, it is not enough to create variations of the design in a case study Education Shape grammars are used in education to increase the understanding of a design process Review A review of existing shape grammar articles or the theory itself is discussed Table 4. Application attribute. Floor plan The design of building floor plans. The placement and relation between different functional rooms Building detail Design of specific elements of a building Facade The design of specific elements of a building facades Global shape A three-dimensional representation of a complete global building shape Miscellaneous Articles falling outside the above categories Table 5. Implementation attribute. Not Specified The procedure for shape grammar implementation is left unspecified by the authors Scripting A shape grammar interpreter is created solely for the presented example. Often with its own graphical user interface (GUI) Integration The interpreter is designed as an extension to a commercial CAD software Results and discussion This section presents and discusses the outcome of the mapping process described in the previous section to answer the defined research questions. First, the application and research type attribute results are presented and discussed, first separately and then together. Next, the presence of optimisation and engineering consid- erations follows, after which there is a final evaluation of the impact of computers on the application and implementation of shape grammars. The distribution of publications within each attribute is presented in the three bar graphs in Figure 3. For the application attribute, some publications contained two applications of almost equal significance; although only one application per publication is used in the mapping, Table 6 includes the secondary application in the relevant publications. Research type For the research type attribute, Figure 3 shows that 86% of the publications either examine the development of shape grammars or use the framework to analyse or recreate existing architecture in analysis and case studies. 8 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) Figure 3. Distributions of publications within the categories of each attribute. For novel design, relatively little research seems to have been conducted, with only 7% of the publica- 27–33 tions belonging to this category. These are the publications where the main contribution is the generation of new design with existing theory, not an example of new architecture created with the novel method in a publication, of which there are several. Finally, the mapping yielded two and four publications that are categorised as review and education, respectively: Sönmez presents a review of methods for automatic architectural design task, including shape grammars, while Woodbury describes and discusses set grammars and design spaces concern- ing computer-aided design in detail. Abdelmohsen establishes a course exploring design through gen- erative methods, Wu implements a shape grammar for teaching students about Chinese bracket systems, while Sedrez and Pereira present their work on fractal shapes as a tool for increasing stu- dents’ knowledge of shape vocabulary, Ashton, on the other hand, takes inspiration from the work of Frank Lloyd Wright in her shape grammar-inspired mathematics class. From this point, the categories education and review are not further discussed, as the theory and application of shape grammars are secondary concerns. Application area The application of shape grammars in the mapped publications is diverse, ranging from detailing Greek 40 29 orders to modelling entire buildings. As shown in Figure 3, floor plan generation is the most common application, accounting for 39% of the total publications. Most publications in this category use shape gram- 41–44 mars to derive two-dimensional plan layouts, with some investigating traditional vernacular houses and 18,45 others investigating churches and libraries. Some publications demonstrating the generation of three- dimensional buildings are also included in this category in cases where only two-dimensional grammar rules 25,46,47 are used, and the third dimension is formed by an extrusion from this plan. Global shape, the second most popular application, accounts for 29% of the publications. Although build- ings are the most frequent topic, truss design and other applications are also included. The final three catego- ries are relatively equal in the number of publications. The misc category is used when none of the above categories are appropriate, for example, erecting a thin-tile vault and the rapid prototyping of physical models. Haakonsen et al 9 Application and research type Further pursuing an understanding of the trends, the two attributes research type and application are plot- ted together as a bubble chart in Figure 4. As previously mentioned, the most popular application areas are floor plan and global shape; for research within the development attribute, both applications are predomi- nant. Also interesting are the case studies and analysis categories within research type: Floor plan is, by far, the most popular category compared to global shape, for which only two publications are present in each category. A plausible interpretation of this finding could be the complexity in designing a shape grammar interpreter for global shapes compared to floor plans. The application attribute of novel design substantiates this further: no publications aspire for novelties in floor plans, whereas six publications pursue novelties in global shapes. One also finds one article each in this category for both building detail and facade. Building detail is scattered relatively evenly within research type, although analysis is the most populous category with six publications; however, the meagre number of publications belonging to this category – the same applies for the facade category – does not provide sufficient data for well- founded conclusions. Contemporary modelling in building design is seldom two-dimensional. Thus, shape grammars’ feasibility to model three dimensional structures such as buildings and bridges is a key feature for it to be used by a larger amount of users. Nevertheless, when looking at the objectives of the publications mapped as development, few of the publications seem to focus on this – both in floor plans and global shape. Hohmann et al. is an interesting publication concerning the usability of shape gram- mars for three-dimensional building models. Their work identifies shape grammars’ flexibility as a prom- ising tool in the digital reconstruction of buildings and the lack of existing knowledge regarding modelling complex three-dimensional geometries. Another interesting point is the general need for expertise in a programming language – which is further discussed later. Figure 4. Distribution of publications by research type and application. The magnitude and intensity of the bubbles indicate the number of publications within each category. 10 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) Optimisation and engineering This section further discusses the results of the Application and Research Type section by considering the presence of optimisation routines and engineering matters in the publications. Figure 5 breaks down the bub- ble plot in Figure 4 to a swarm plot; each dot represents a publication, while the colour manifests the pres- ence of optimisation. Twenty publications, or 21%, incorporate some optimisation routine in their shape grammar application. Most articles with optimisation, totalling 14 in numbers, are located in the develop- ment category of the research type attribute. Apart from those, there are five articles concerning novel design: 27,28,30 four on global shape and one on a facade problem. For global shape, three publications are applica- 7 3 32 tions of shape annealing theory, and one uses grammatical evolution to design shelters. Vazquez et al. optimise the brick layout of masonry screen walls to enhance their environmental performance. The final article is located within analysis and contrasts classic optimisation with graphic statics and finite element methods and shape annealing with grammars. Considering the application area of the optimisation articles, global shape and floor plan are the most occurring, with 10 and five publications, respectively; the remain- ing publications are evenly distributed among the remaining categories, with one in building detail, one in miscellaneous, and two in facade. Moreover, in Figure 5, (a) further distinction is made between those articles incorporating engineering concerns and those with a purely architectural design; see the Mapping Scheme section. In addition to Figure 5. Swarm plot presenting the categorisation of publications with respect to the engineering and optimisation attributes. Haakonsen et al 11 colours indicating optimisation, diamond markers exhibit the publications where engineering considerations are present. Of the 19 publications including optimisation, 13 also involve engineering; only six publications 52–55 optimise for architectural purposes, of which four belong to floor plan and the others belong to global 32,56 shape. Table 7 presents all the articles that include optimisation. The publications where both optimisation and engineering are significant parts are predominantly catego- rised as global shape. The general themes for these publications are shape annealing for truss design and grammatical evolution for global shape optimisation. In the publications where shape annealing for truss design is employed, the authors of the original publication, Shea and Cagan appear as contributors in all the other publications employing this method. For the remaining optimisation articles, the diversity among authors and research groups is more significant. Furthermore, only two publications seek to develop an opti- misation routine in combination with shape grammars for ‘regular’ buildings, that is, houses and offices: the first, by Phillipp Geyer from 2008, uses multidisciplinary design optimisation for the generation of building models ; the second, written by Boonstra et al. in 2020, is part of a larger project designing a toolbox for the spatial design optimisation of buildings. Finally, there are five publications in which engineering aspects without optimisation appear: one combines graphic statics with shape grammars when designing equilib- rium structures ; another evaluates the energy performance of the building envelope after the grammar deri- 60 61 vation ; a third uses a spatial zoning procedure for structural designs ; and the final two use knowledge-based 62,63 constraints and design codes, respectively. Impact of computers on shape grammars This final section discusses the impact of computational development on shape grammar research. Figure 3 shows how most articles describe either a case-specific implementation of shape grammars through scripting or no description of their implementation. Only 11 cases offer integration into commercial software, such as 64 65 66 33,36,40,59,67,68 SketchUp, CityEngine and Grasshopper ; 50% of these publications opted for Grasshopper, thus demonstrating the possibility of extending the functionalities of existing software with third-party extensions. For a user already familiar with Grasshopper or another software, the threshold for experiment- ing with shape grammars might be lower when the user interface and basic functionalities are known before- hand, mitigating the need to familiarise oneself with new software for each specific shape grammar application. Moreover, such implementations allow shape grammars to be part of a more extensive pipeline of operations in a complete design process. Table 8 provides a complete overview of the publications where either scripting or the integration of an interpreter is described. The bar graphs in Figure 6 further reveal how the implementation of grammar interpreters has been solved over the years; here, each category of the imple- mentation attribute is represented by different colours in the bar chart. Notice how articles with either no description or scripting are somewhat proportionally distributed each year – from 1985 to 2020. The first publication where integration into commercial software is demonstrated, appears as late as 2008 by Philipp Geyer. He demonstrates the implementation of a multi-objective optimisation with shape grammar inside the commercial software ModelCenter, for an industrial hall building. Despite the entire category of integration articles being pub- 36,69 lished after this, only in 2014 was more than one article published, indicating that further research is necessary in the coming years. The publications using Grasshopper as the tool for implementation take this one step further. For non-experts, it is not viable to create their own shape grammar interpreter – nor to download shape-specific engines from academic research – when starting with shape grammars in projects. Consequently, using familiar software while experimenting with new ideas and techniques could facilitate extended use of shape grammars. As such, Grasshopper is a promising software; it is popular among both engineers and architects due to the intuitive workflow, numerous third-party extensions, and an open-source developer community. Beginners can learn from a vast range of tutoring videos and an intuitive user 12 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) interface, whereas experts benefit from the possibility to customise and extend the functionalities. Not to mention the full integration into the CAD program Rhino. Despite all of this, the findings in the mapping, where only six publications integrate their research into Grasshopper, is somewhat surprising, especially when perusing the content of these publications. The benefits of integrating a shape grammar implementa- tion inside Grasshopper is clearly demonstrated, for example, by Vazquez et al. who illustrate how other third-party plug-ins can be connected to their interpreter; hence, enabling, for example, optimisation of sunlight without having to implement this function themselves. However, none of the publications encapsu- lates their interpreter into a new shape grammar plug-in for others to use — leaving undiscovered territory between experts and novices ripe for future research projects. Computational development can also explain the distribution and evolution of optimisation features. The publications including optimisation and the total number of publications per year are illustrated in Figure 6; there are seemingly two clusters of articles including optimisation: one containing articles in the 1990s and the other containing publications after 2006. In the first cluster, the same researchers appear in 4/5 of the articles. These are the same authors as discussed concerning shape annealing in the subsection – and are more likely to reflect a competent research group on the topic than a general trend shared among several institutions and research groups. Regarding authors, the other cluster is more diversified than the first. Grouping them by contributions from different authors, where an author can be present in one group only, the 15 publications of this cluster are divided into 12 groups, indicating more diverse applications and a broader appeal among researchers. The continual increase in publications per year within the scope of this article, combined with the growth in optimisation, as mentioned above, and digital implementation, indicates optimistic prospects for further development of shape grammars in general and combined with engineering applications in particular. Figure 6. Distribution of publications within each year of publication. Haakonsen et al 13 Table 6. Mapping of the articles based on research type and application. Application Secondary Application Research Type Building facade Floor plan Global Misc Building Facade Floor plan Global detail shape Detail Shape Analysis 40, 68, 100, 101 18, 21, 22, 95 48, 51, 22, 95, — — — 91, 93, 25, 44, 45, 105, 104 98, 99 92, 94, 106 102–104 Case studies 62, 96, 97 19, 41–43, 75, 111 49 111 96 62 — 107 46, 63, 108–110 Development 72, 86 23, 73, 20, 24, 47, 17, 26, 50, — 17, 26, — — 47, 60 83, 89 52–55, 60, 56–59, 61, 57, 80, 88 67, 69 70, 74, 78, 80, 71, 76, 77, 84, 85, 87, 79, 88, 90 81, 82, 112 113, 114 Education 37 — — 38 36, 39 — — - — Novel design 31 33 — 27–30, 32 - 29 — — — Review — — — — 34, 35 — — — — Table 7. Papers where optimisation is a substantial part of the work. Research type Architectural Engineering Development 52–56 57, 58, 70–75 Analysis — 51 Novel design 32 27, 28, 30, 33 Table 8. Papers where the shape grammar interpreter is described. Research type Scripting Integration Development 17, 20, 23, 26, 47, 50, 52–56, 58, 60, 61, 70–90 57, 59, 67, 69 Analysis 45, 91–94 40, 68, 95 Case studies 46, 49, 62, 63, 96 97 Novel design 27, 29, 30 32, 33 Education 37 36, 38 Conclusion This study presented a systematic mapping of shape grammars in architecture and engineering – a topic that has seen a continuous annual increase in publications since 1985 and that, therefore, is in need of systematic mapping to evaluate the current landscape. Three primary attributes were used in response to the research objectives from Objectives; the integral takeaways are as follows: R 14 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) •• Despite the diversity of shape grammar applications, most historical progress concerns the generation of floor plans without any engineering considerations. •• When including structural engineering, optimisation generally follows. Initially, the combination of shape grammars and engineering usually involved optimising truss structures; more recently, examples of increasingly advanced generations of more complex grammars have been demon- strated. An increased computational capacity seems to stimulate a more sophisticated use of shape grammars in design. •• Performance-driven optimisation in combination with shape grammars was demonstrated by a hand- ful of researchers on truss structures in the 1990s. In the last 15 years, there have been more diverse optimisation applications in buildings and structures, including objectives such as structural effi- ciency, environmental performance, solar energy generation, and floor plan layout. •• The implementation of shape grammars is primarily performed in case-specific interpreters with a graphical user interface designed specifically for the task at hand – demanding relatively high exper- tise by the user. Since 2008, the integration of shape grammars as third party plug-ins to commercial software have emerged. Eleven percent of the evaluated publications implemented their interpreter in commercial software. •• Considering the presented findings, the recent increase in the integration of interpreters and perfor- mance optimisation, number of articles, and variety of applications within the articles predict an encouraging direction for the use of shape grammars as a design tool encouraging better and more diverse solutions than would otherwise be possible, for example, through the combination of gram- mars and evolutionary optimisation. Nevertheless, more research on the implementation and facilita- tion of access to non-experts is needed before shape grammars can be deemed attainable to a broader range of practitioners. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the Norwegian Railroad Directorate for the funding of this work and Bane NOR for their support and intellectual resources. An appreciation is also directed toward Bunji Izumi, Steinar Hillersøy Dyvik, and Marcin Luczkowski for their feedback and discussions. Declaration of conflicting interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. ORCID iD Sverre Magnus Haakonsen https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2105-0985 Notes 1. ScienceDirect allows only eight Boolean operators in the query. Consequently, the entire ‘AND’ column of the search matrix was omitted. 2. This is included because the databases did not contain material before this year. To avoid bias, references older than this are not sought out anywhere else. 3. A combination of shape grammars and evolutionary optimisation. Haakonsen et al 15 References 1 Stiny G and Gips J. Shape grammars and the generative specification of painting and sculpture. IFIP Congress 1971; 2(2): 125–135. 2 Chomsky N. Topics in the theory of generative grammar, volume 56. Walter de Gruyter, 2013, p. 12. 3 Koning H and Eizenberg J. The language of the prairie: frank Lloyd wright's prairie houses. Environ Planning B: Planning Design 1981; 8(3): 295–323. 4 Mitchell WJ. Functional grammars: an introduction, 1991. 5 Stiny G. Introduction to shape and shape grammars. Environ Planning B: Planning Design 1980; 7(3): 343–351. 6 Knight T. Shapes and other things. Nexus Netw J 2015; 17(3): 963–980. 7 Cagan J and Mitchell W. Optimally directed shape generation by shape annealing. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 1993; 20(1): 5–12. 8 Petersen K, Feldt R and Mujtaba S, et al. Systematic mapping studies in software engineering. 12th Int Conf Eval Assess Softw Eng; 12: 1–10. 9 Petersen K, Vakkalanka S and Kuzniarz L. Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: an update. Inf Softw Technology 2015; 64: 1–18. 10 Labonnote N, Rønnquist A and Manum B, et al. Additive construction: state-of-the-art, challenges and opportuni- ties. Automation in Construction 2016; 72: 347–366. 11 Elsevier. About scopus - abstract and citation database: elsevier. 2021; Online; accessed 31-August-2021, https:// www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus 12 NTNU. Oria. 2021. https://bibsys-almaprimo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/search?vid=NTNU_UB [Online; accessed 31-August-2021]. 13 Clarivate. Web of Science, 2021. Online, https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/basic-search (accessed 31 August 2021). 14 Elsevier. Engineering village, 2021. Online; accessed 31-August-2021, https://www.engineeringvillage.com/ 15 Elsevier. Science direct, 2021. Online; accessed 31-August- 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/ 16 Wohlin C. Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering, pp. 1–10. 17 Aliaga DG, Rosen PA and Bekins DR. Style grammars for interactive visualization of architecture. IEEE Transactions Visualization Computer Graphics 2007; 13(4): 786–797. 18 Buelinckx H. Wren's language of city church designs: a formal generative classification. Environ Planning B: Planning Design 1993; 20(6): 645–676. 19 C ¸ ağdas¸ G. A shape grammar: the language of traditional turkish houses. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 1996; 23(4): 443–464. 20 Duarte JP. A discursive grammar for customizing mass housing: the case of Siza's houses at Malagueira. Automation in Construction 2005; 14(2): 265–275. 21 Eloy S and Duarte JP. Inferring a shape grammar: translating designer's knowledge. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing 2014; 28(2): 153–168. 22 Flemming U. More than the sum of parts: the grammar of queen anne houses. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 1987; 14(3): 323–350. 23 Gadde R, Marlet R and Paragios N. Learning grammars for architecture-specific facade parsing. Int J Computer Vis 2016; 117(3): 290–316. 24 Grasl T. Transformational palladians. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2012; 39(1): 83–95. 25 Lee JH, Ostwald MJ and Gu N. A combined plan graph and massing grammar approach to frank Lloyd wright's prairie architecture. Nexus Netw J 2017; 19(2): 279–299. 26 Müller P, Wonka P and Haegler S, et al. Procedural modeling of buildings. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Papers; 2006, pp. 614–623. 27 Shea K and Cagan J. Innovative dome design: applying geodesic patterns with shape annealing. AI EDAM 1997; 11(5): 379–394. 28 Shea K and Cagan J. Languages and semantics of grammatical discrete structures. Ai Edam 1999; 13(4): 241–251. 29 Wonka P, Wimmer M and Sillion F, et al. Instant architecture. ACM Trans Graphics 2003; 22(3): 669–677. 16 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) 30 Shea K and Smith IF. Improving full-scale transmission tower design through topology and shape optimization. J Structural Engineering 2006; 132(5): 781–790. 31 Knight T and Sass L. Looks count: computing and constructing visually expressive mass customized housing. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing: AI EDAM 2010; 24(3): 425–445. 32 O’Neill M, McDermott J and Swafford JM, et al. Evolutionary design using grammatical evolution and shape grammars: designing a shelter. Int J Des Eng 2010; 3(1): 4–24. 33 Vazquez E, Duarte J and Poerschke U. Masonry screen walls: a digital framework for design generation and envi- ronmental performance optimization. Architectural Sci Rev 2020; 64(3): 1–13. 34 Sönmez NO. A review of the use of examples for automating architectural design tasks. Computer-Aided Des 2018; 96: 13–30. 35 Woodbury RF. Searching for designs: paradigm and practice. Building Environ 1991; 26(1): 61–73. 36 Abdelmohsen SM. An inquiry into designing in context using generative systems. Int J Architectural Comput 2014; 12(4): 477–494. 37 Wu Q. Bracket teaching program: A shape grammar interpreter. Automation in Construction 2005; 14(6): 716–723. 38 Sedrez MR and Pereira ATC. Fractal shape. Nexus Netw J 2012; 14(1): 97–107. 39 Ashton B. Integrating elements of frank Lloyd wright's architectural and decorative designs in a liberal arts math- ematics class. J Mathematics Arts 2010; 4(3): 143–161. 40 D’Oliveira PFCC, et al. A detail shape grammar. Using alberti’s column system rules to evaluate the longitudinal elevation of the nave of sant’andrea church generation. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing: AI EDAM 2018; 32(3): 295–307. 41 Chiou S and Krishnamurti R. Example taiwanese traditional houses. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 1996; 23(2): 191–216. 42 Colakoglu B. Design by grammar: an interpretation and generation of vernacular hayat houses in contemporary context. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2005; 32(1): 141–149. 43 Lambe NR and Dongre AR. A shape grammar approach to contextual design: a case study of the pol houses of ahmedabad, india. Environ Plann B: Urban Analytics City Sci 2019; 46(5): 845–861. 44 Yousefniapasha M, Teeling C and Rollo J, et al. Shape grammar, culture, and generation of vernacular houses (a practice on the villages adjacent to rice fields of mazandaran. In: the north of Iran). Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science; 2019, p. 2399808319843919. 45 Mamoli M. A shape grammar for the building-type definition of the ancient greek and roman library and the evalu- ation of library plans. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing 2020; 34(2): 191–206. 46 Duarte JP. Towards the mass customization of housing: the grammar of siza's houses at malagueira. Environ Planning B: Plann Des 2005; 32(3): 347–380. 47 Tran H and Khoshelham K. Procedural reconstruction of 3d indoor models from lidar data using reversible jump markov chain monte carlo. Remote Sensing 2020; 12(5): 838. 48 Kamath AV. Making grammars for material and tectonic complexity: an example of a thin-tile vault. Des Stud 2020; 69: 100944. 49 Wang Y and Duarte JP. Automatic generation and fabrication of designs. Automation in Construction 2002; 11(3): 291–302. 50 Hohmann B, Havemann S and Krispel U, et al. A gml shape grammar for semantically enriched 3d building mod- els. Comput Graphics 2010; 34(4): 322–334. 51 Muslimin R. Parametric, grammatical, and perceptual iterations on structural design synthesis. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing 2018; 32(3): 269–281. 52 Granadeiro V, Pina L and Duarte JP, et al. A general indirect representation for optimization of generative design systems by genetic algorithms: application to a shape grammar-based design system. Automation in Construction 2013; 35: 374–382. 53 Ruiz-Montiel M, Boned J and Gavilanes J, et al. Design with shape grammars and reinforcement learning. Adv Eng Inform 2013; 27(2): 230–245. 54 Ozdemir S and Ozdemir Y. Prioritizing store plan alternatives produced with shape grammar using multi-criteria decision-making techniques. Environ Plann B: Urban Analytics City Sci 2018; 45(4): 751–771. 55 Ozdemir Y and Ozdemir S. Extended prioritizing of store plan alternatives produced with shape grammar using the generalized choquet integral method. Environ Plann B: Urban Analytics City Sci 2019; 46(5): 931–947. 56 Chouchoulas O and Day A. Design exploration using a shape grammar with a genetic algorithm. Open House International, 2007. Haakonsen et al 17 57 Geyer P. Multidisciplinary grammars supporting design optimization of buildings. Res Eng Des 2008; 18(4): 197–216. 58 Boonstra S, van der Blom K and Hofmeyer H, et al. Conceptual structural system layouts via design response grammars and evolutionary algorithms. Automation in Construction 2020; 116: 103009. 59 Lee J, Mueller C and Fivet C. Automatic generation of diverse equilibrium structures through shape grammars and graphic statics. Int J Space Structures 2016; 31(2–4): 147–164. 60 Granadeiro V, Duarte JP and Correia JR, et al. Building envelope shape design in early stages of the design process: integrating architectural design systems and energy simulation. Automation in Construction 2013; 32: 196–209. 61 Claessens DP, Boonstra S and Hofmeyer H. Spatial zoning for better structural topology design and performance. Adv Eng Inform 2020; 46: 101162. 62 Baker NC and Fenves SJ. Manipulating shape and its function. J Comput Civil Eng 1990; 4(3): 221–238. 63 Smith G and Ceranic B. Spatial layout planning in sub-surface rail station design for effective fire evacuation. Architectural Eng Des Management 2008; 4(2): 99–120. 64 Trimble. Sketchup. https://www.sketchup.com/, 2021. [Online; accessed 21-June-2021]. 65 ArcGIS. Cityengine. 2021; Online; accessed 21-June-2021, https://www.esri.com/en-us/arcgis/products/arcgis- cityengine/overview 66 Associates M. Grasshopper3d, 2021. [Online; accessed 21- June-2021], https://www.grasshopper3d.com/ 67 Veloso P, Celani G and Scheeren R. From the generation of layouts to the production of construction documents: an application in the customization of apartment plans. Automation in Construction 2018; 96: 224–235. 68 Capone M and Lanzara E. Scan-to-bim vs 3d ideal model hbim: parametric tools to study domes geometry. International Archives of the Photogrammetry. Remote Sensing & Spatial Information Sciences, 2019. 69 Ruiz-Montiel M, Belmonte MV and Boned J, et al. Layered shape grammars. Computer-Aided Des 2014; 56: 104–119. 70 Reddy G and Cagan J. An improved shape annealing algorithm for truss topology generation, 1995. 71 Mandow L, Pérez-de-la Cruz JL and Rodŕıguez-Gavilań AB, et al. Architectural planning with shape grammars and reinforcement learning: habitability and energy efficiency. Eng Appl Artif Intelligence 2020; 96: 103909. 72 Gero JS, Louis SJ and Kundu S. Evolutionary learning of novel grammars for design improvement. AI EDAM 1994; 8(2): 83–94. 73 Youssef AM, Zhai ZJ and Reffat RM. Generating proper building envelopes for photovoltaics integration with shape grammar theory. Energy and Buildings 2018; 158: 326–341. 74 Puentes L, Cagan J and McComb C. Heuristic-guided solution search through a two-tiered design grammar. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 2020; 20(1): 10. 75 Reddy GM and Cagan J. Optimally directed truss topology generation using shape annealing. J Mech Des 1995; 117: 206–209. 76 Hua H. A bi-directional procedural model for architectural design. Computer Graphics Forum 2016; 36: 219–231. 77 Wang XY, Liu YF and Zhang K. A graph grammar approach to the design and validation of floor plans. Computer J 2020; 63(1): 137–150. 78 Dounas T. Animation as a computational framework for architectural design composition. Architectural Sci Rev 2020; 63(2): 222–232. 79 Yue K and Krishnamurti R. Developing a tractable shape grammar, 2010. 80 Hou F, Qi Y and Qin H. Drawing-based procedural modeling of chinese architectures. IEEE Trans Visualization Computer Graphics 2012; 18(1): 30–42. 81 Yue K, Krishnamurti R and Grobler F. Estimating the interior layout of buildings using a shape grammar to capture building style. J Computing Civil Engineering 2012; 26(1): 113–130. 82 Mackenzie CA. Heuristic search and tree systems inference for structural pattern recognition. Knowledge-Based Syst 1988; 1(2): 78–89. 83 Müller P, Zeng G and Wonka P, et al. Image-based procedural modeling of facades. ACM Trans Graph 2007; 26(3): 85. 84 Dang M, Lienhard S and Ceylan D, et al. Interactive design of probability density functions for shape grammars. ACM Trans Graphics 2015; 34(6): 1–13. 85 Tepavčević B and Stojaković V. Procedural modeling in architecture based on statistical and fuzzy inference. Automation in Construction 2013; 35: 329–337. 86 Edelsbrunner J, Havemann S and Sourin A, et al. Procedural modeling of architecture with round geometry. Comput Graphics 2017; 64: 14–25. 18 International Journal of Architectural Computing 00(0) 87 Krecklau L and Kobbelt L. Procedural modeling of interconnected structures. Computer Graphics Forum 2011; 30: 335–344. 88 Hou F, Qin H and Qi Y. Procedure-based component and architecture modeling from a single image. Vis Computer 2016; 32(2): 151–166. 89 Simon L, Teboul O and Koutsourakis P, et al. Random exploration of the procedural space for single-view 3d modeling of buildings. Int Journal Computer Vision 2011; 93(2): 253–271. 90 Tran H, Khoshelham K and Kealy A, et al. Shape grammar approach to 3d modeling of indoor environments using point clouds. J Comput Civil Eng 2019; 33(1): 04018055. 91 Dehbi Y, Gröger G and Plümer L. Identification and modelling of translational and axial symmetries and their hierarchical structures in building footprints by formal grammars. Trans GIS 2016; 20(5): 645–663. 92 Aksamija A, Yue K and Kim H, et al. Integration of knowledge-based and generative systems for building charac- terization and prediction. Artif Intelligence Eng Des Anal Manufacturing 2010; 24(1): 3–16. 93 Seebohm T and Wallace W. Rule-based representation of design in architectural practice. Automation in Construction 1998; 8(1): 73–85. 94 Hosny SS. Shape grammars: style generators in computer-aided architectural design. Journal Engineering Applied Science-Cairo 2003; 50(1): 37–56. 95 Quattrini R and Baleani E. Theoretical background and historical analysis for 3d reconstruction model. Villa thiene at cicogna. J Cult Heritage 2015; 16(1): 119–125. 96 Jesus D, Coelho A and Sousa AA. Layered shape grammars for procedural modelling of buildings. Vis Computer 2016; 32(6): 933–943. 97 Calogero E, Kaminski J and Arnold D. Using procedural modeling to explore alternative designs for the louvre. J Comput Cult Heritage 2013; 6(4): 1–22. 98 Muslimin R.. A grammatical note on utzon's vaults. Nexus Netw J 2020; 22(4): 1175–1200. 99 Phillips MG. Framing what we see: the role of ornament in structuring Louis Sullivan's design logic. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2008; 35(5): 772–793. 100 Yavuz AÖ and Sağıroğlu Ö. Reviewing the bricks used in the traditional architecture with the shape grammar method. Gazi Univ J Sci 2016; 29(4): 741–749. 101 Rezoug A and Ozkar M. Visual rules for socio-spatial analysis: inferring a grammar of use in an inhabited climat de france. Dearq 2020; 27: 50–61. 102 Lee JH, Ostwald MJ and Gu N. A justified plan graph (jpg) grammar approach to identifying spatial design pat- terns in an architectural style. Environ Plann B: Urban Analytics City Sci 2018; 45(1): 67–89. 103 Eloy S and Duarte JP. A transformation-grammar-based methodology for the adaptation of existing housetypes: the case of the 'rabo-de-bacalhau'. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2015; 42(5): 775–800. 104 Sc Chiou and Krishnamurti R. The grammar of taiwanese traditional vernacular dwellings. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 1995; 22(6): 689–720. 105 Andrew I, et al. Computing style. Nexus Netw J 2011; 13(1): 183–193. 106 Krüger M, Duarte JP and Coutinho F. Decoding de re aedificatoria: using grammars to trace alberti’s influence on portuguese classical architecture. Nexus Netw J 2011; 13(1): 171–182. 107 Radford AD and Gero JS. Towards generative expert systems for architectural detailing. Computer-Aided Des 1985; 17(9): 428–435. 108 Griz C, Amorim L and Mendes L, et al. A customization grammar: describing the customization process of apart- ment design. Int J Architectural Comput 2017; 15(3): 203–214. 109 Eloy S and Duarte JP. A transfformation grammar for housing rehabilitation. Nexus Netw J 2011; 13(1): 49–71. 110 Erem Ö and Abbasoğlu Ermiyagil MS. Adapted design generation for turkish vernacular housing grammar. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2016; 43(5): 893–919. 111 Sass L. A Palladian construction grammar-design reasoning with shape grammars and rapid prototyping. Environ Plann B: Plann Des 2007; 34(1): 87–106. 112 Stouffs R and Tunçer B. Typological descriptions as generative guides for historical architecture. Nexus Netw J 2015; 17(3): 785–805. 113 Lee JH, Ostwald MJ and Gu N. A syntactical and grammatical approach to architectural configuration, analysis and generation. Architectural Sci Rev 2015; 58(3): 189–204. 114 Howe AS. Designing for automated construction. Automation in Construction 2000; 9(3): 259–276.

Journal

International Journal of Architectural Computing – SAGE

Published: Mar 1, 2023

Keywords: systematic mapping; shape grammars; architecture; engineering; optimisation; implementation

There are no references for this article.