See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/331608014

From Drawing Shapes to Scripting Shapes: Architectural Theory Mediated by

Shape Machine

Conference Paper · February 2019

CITATIONS READS

9 606

2 authors:

Heather Ligler Athanassios Economou

Florida Atlantic University Georgia Institute of Technology
19 PUBLICATIONS 64 CITATIONS 62 PUBLICATIONS 412 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Heather Ligler on 08 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ACCEPTED to the Symposium on Simulation for Architecture + Urban Design (SimAUD 2019), Atlanta, GA
From Drawing Shapes to Scripting Shapes:
Architectural Theory Mediated by Shape Machine
Heather Ligler1 and Athanassios Economou2
1 2
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, USA
h.ligler@gatech.edu
ABSTRACT
The shape grammar formalism has offered a visual, rule-
based framework for interpreting architectural languages for
over forty years. However, the ability to implement
grammars within a technology that allows for direct
engagement with shape rules and productions so that they
can be dynamically simulated, shared, understood, modified,
and brought into a more active theoretical dialogue is only
partially achieved. The work here asks how a new
technology that allows shape rules to be implemented by
drawing shapes to specify scripts instead of writing code can
reinvigorate shape computation to advance formal analysis
and synthesis in architectural research. More precisely, a
case study to implement an analog grammar on John
Portman’s domestic language with a new shape grammar
interpreter, the Shape Machine, is presented to take on this
question. The results are illustrated as a visual catalog of
sample designs generated in the software. The results suggest
further insights on Portman’s language of the house
prompted by the machine-based specification.
Author Keywords
Shape Grammars; Shape Grammar Interpreter; Shape
Computation; Formal Composition; Rule-Based Design
ACM Classification Keywords
D.1.7 VISUAL PROGRAMMING; I.2.1ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE; I.6.1 SIMULATION AND MODELING;
J.5. ARTS AND HUMANITIES – Architecture
1 INTRODUCTION
Questions on the role of the computer in architectural
research cover a variety of concerns to date, but in the late
twentieth century a significant body of work in formal, visual
computations to understand architectural composition was
advanced. This specific trend was formalized in the 70s with
research in shape grammars and continued prominently into
the 90s. However, the initial value proposition of visual
calculating remains incompletely realized in available
software implementations to date. What happened? Do we
need formal theories in architectural design? Does
computing them add any value? Can a technology help to
support and communicate the implications of a theoretical
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, USA
economou@gatech.edu
proposition? Was this trend merely a fad? Was it too abstract
or too complicated to engage broader participation? Was it
ahead of its time? And by extension, has it been simply
misunderstood in the context of available technologies?
This study adopts a hypothesis that a new technology can
help revitalize possibilities for shape computation in
architectural research by providing a medium for engaging
shape rules and productions. To follow this aim, the research
experiments with an interpreter that allows a shape grammar
to be represented by drawing shapes in visual rules to specify
formal relationships and automating a production process to
generate designs without requiring users to interface directly
with the background script. The only programming required
of the grammar designer is authored in a visual language by
drawing shapes. Notably, the implementation is based on an
existing analog grammar computed by hand to speculate on
John Portman’s architectural principles as characterized by
his 1964 house, Entelechy I [1]. By translating from a hand-
authored grammar to a machine-based specification, the
research questions how the technology can inform the theory
on Portman’s architectural language. The visual calculations
are accomplished in the Shape Machine, a shape grammar
interpreter implemented as a plug-in for Rhino. In all, the
research aims to experiment with this prototype environment
for shape computation to critically engage in formal analysis
and synthesis with the machine.
2 BACKGROUND
The notion of visual algorithms for the description,
interpretation, and evaluation of creative artifacts emerged in
the 70s with the invention of the shape grammar formalism.
Shape grammars were introduced by Stiny and Gips to define
generative specifications for painting and sculpture [2], a
project that grew to consider how computer models could
more broadly inform criticism and design across the arts in a
theory of algorithmic aesthetics [3]. An initial expansion of
the project to address architecture focused on the language
of Andrea Palladio, resulting in Stiny and Mitchell’s
Palladian grammar. Essentially, the grammar is a
computational theory for generating Palladian villa plans
constructively with shape rules. Designs produced in the
grammar include both actual designs from Palladio’s corpus
and new interpretations that conjecture artificial design
solutions that Palladio never realized himself. Their novelty
is in how they precisely comply with the theory on his
architectural language as described by the rules [4]. This
algorithmic approach to architectural theory inspired another
project in the 90s to author a custom software so that possible
Palladian villas could be generated in plans and elevations.
The project was inspired by the theory of shape grammars
and especially the Palladian grammar, but in the end offered
another interpretation on Palladio that departed from the
grammar in much of its theoretical import. The details are
articulated by the authors, but what is more interesting to
consider here is how the research motivated Hersey and
Freedman to propose an argument for a new type of theory
for architectural history, where possible and actual villas
would be studied together to foreground the architectural
style, symmetry, and geometry of a language of designs [5].
These initial strands of computational studies on Palladio
share an ambition to interpret a formal speculation with a
robust technology to rethink and enliven architectural theory.
By privileging a visual mode of representation and a
mechanical mode of interaction, they aim to offer an
understanding of rule-based geometric productions where
the computer model can be considered a partner [6]. The
project here revisits this aim in the context of recent
developments in shape computation. The research addresses
the current state of the art on shape grammars in terms of
theoretical foundations and refinements [7-9] as well as on
the implementation front to address the issue of an
appropriate technology for formal inquiry. Notably, research
progress in the last decade has delivered an increased ability
to experiment with more robust shape grammar interpreters
and implementations. Nonetheless, recent assessments on the
current landscape of the technology identify that the
available solutions still leave much to be desired in relation
to key concepts of shape grammar theory. The notion of
simple means to engage the user on the frontend that can
support emergence throughout a generative process is
especially unresolved [10].
The specific methods here test the impact of a new interpreter
in addressing John Portman’s domestic language. The
starting point is an initial shape grammar on the house that
was computed by drafting in an analog mode [1]. The new
interpreter, the Shape Machine, provides an unprecedented
medium for implementing this research to explore visual
calculating in Portman’s language of the house. The Shape
Machine is authored in Python and structured on the
maximal representation defined in the shape grammar
discourse to specify a minimum draftsman’s representation
for any shape [7, 11]. The backend recognition algorithms of
the machine are characterized by this maximal representation
[12, 13]. The current prototype provides this support for a
vocabulary of shapes that can be specified on the frontend in
an intuitive way by drawing arrangements of straight lines
and arcs in two-dimensional space. Interaction with the
engine occurs exclusively in the standard Rhino workspace
so that no hard-coded scripting is required of the user.
Recognition algorithms allow the machine to search for any
part embedded as a subshape of a given shape or an overall
design in progress as specified by a drawing. To complete
the plug-in, shape modification algorithms facilitate
productions in the engine, which are currently available for
all Euclidean transformations [13].
3 METHOD
The process of automating a shape grammar in the Shape
Machine is straightforward in the sense that the entire
activity occurs within the Rhino design environment. The
current version of the Shape Machine plug-in is operated
with five major components on the frontend: (a) the viewport
workspace for graphical definitions, preview displays of
candidate matches for rule application, and the generation of
a design; (b) the standard toolbar for drawing shapes
composed of lines and arcs to serve as inputs for the engine;
(c) a custom toolbar that calls the functions of the engine as
encoded for the transformations under which shape
recognition and shape modification apply; (d) the layers
panel for assigning attributes to shapes; and (e) the standard
command line to communicate feedback from the engine and
prompt user action or selection as required.
Programming by drawing shapes is achieved with a rule
template and an initial shape that can be defined anywhere
within the viewport workspace. The Shape Machine rule
template provides a format for specifying a left-hand side
(LHS) defining the search space for a rule to query in a
design and a right-hand side (RHS) defining the
transformation to change the shape as drawn in the rule.
These sides are separated by an arrow pointing from the LHS
to the RHS and stabilized with cross-shaped registration
marks in the lower left part of each side of the rule to
precisely coordinate the geometric transformation (see
Figures 2-6). Rhino layers are assigned in the plug-in as
labeling devices for attributes that distinguish the template
and shapes by default. Layers can be further customized to
encode additional descriptions to aid in the specificity of rule
application following common computer-aided design
conventions. Following this setup, calculations in the
grammar are in the direct product algebras U x V to specify
12 12
a design space of straight lines, arcs, and labelled lines in
two-dimensions [8]. Assuming a shape rule is composed
with respect to this vocabulary and within the space of the
shape rule template, it is ready for application.
Rule application is initiated by selecting the transformation
under which the rule applies from the Shape Machine
toolbar. For the purposes of this study, only the isometry and
similarity transformations were used for applying rules.
Once the transformation is specified, the Shape Machine
asks the user to select a shape rule. This selection must
include the rule template which is essential to the precise
encoding of the geometric data. Subsequently, the Shape
Machine requests the input of a design where the rule should
be applied, which prompts the designer to select an initial
shape or design already instantiated in the workspace. Then,
the command line provides the information for how many
matches are found based on these inputs and the graphical
display highlights a single match of the LHS in one color
with a preview of the application of the RHS highlighted in
a second color. At this point, if there is more than one match
for the shape rule, the user can cycle through a preview of
each match to understand the complete implications of the
rule with respect to the design under consideration. The user
can then choose whether to apply the rule, try another one,
or exit the production. Rule application can be selected in
two modes so that a rule can either be applied directly for one
match or in parallel for all matches under a command in the
software called “apply all.” When a rule is applied, the entire
design selection is redrafted in its maximal representation.
4 CASE STUDY
The implementation focuses on the automation of the
Entelechy grammar. To distinguish this project from
previous work, the shape-machined grammar is more
precisely called the Portm-Ino grammar. The name is given
to postulate how the house in Portman’s conception is a
systematic, residential configuration along the lines of Le
Corbusier’s Dom-Ino framework. Readers interested in more
background information on the formal analysis of the
original house design and the resulting analog grammar are
referred to [1]. The key detail to include briefly is that the
house is composed systematically as a nested framework of
major and minor spaces. The major spaces define the
(a) (b) (c)
(j) (i) (h)
(k) (l) (m)
Figure 1. A sample derivation for a 3 x 3 design as produced by Portm-Ino grammar implemented in the Shape Machine.
underlying field of square n x m cells so that Entelechy I is
characterized by a 3 x 5 major grid resulting in fifteen major
spaces layered with a minor grid of twenty-four circular
minor spaces centered at the corner intersections of major
cells in the grid. In the original Entelechy I design, major
spaces are divided to demarcate one side of the house for
public entertaining use with double-height living spaces
(denoted by an X in the plans) and the other side for private
family use with bedrooms and adjacent casual living spaces.
Within the housing system, the minor spaces are articulated
with hollow or exploded curvilinear columns utilized as
support spaces for atmospheric and accessory uses including
lightwells, stair wells, closets, studies, libraries, half-
bathrooms, and micro-galleries.
Figure 1 is useful for a visual overview of the generation of
a design in the Shape Machine. The detailed derivation for a
3 x 3 major grid as automated in the software is shown in a
boustrophedon manner to briefly outline the character of
each of the stages and to introduce the system of the house
language. Two plans execute the shape rules of stage 1 to
define a framework as a tartan grid (Figures 1a-1b); the next
six steps in the production illustrate the development in stage
2 to clarify a configuration in the language (Figures 1c-1h);
and the remaining process illustrates the application of the
shape rules of stage 3 until the last plan, which is produced
with a combination of the final shape rules of stage 3 and the
termination process to end the automation (Figures 1i-1o).
(d) (e)
(g) (f)
(n) (o)
These stages follow the logic of the Entelechy grammar for
ease of comparison. Readers familiar with the analog
grammar will notice a simplified output so that shape rules
and productions are focused on a single plan. Given its
function as a piano nobile defining the entry of the house, the
upper level is privileged. It follows that the ground level and
roof can be derived from the logic of the intermediate floor
that mediates above and below. Parallel productions are left
for future work when the interface can more readily support
these computations without manual intervention. A visual
illustration demonstrating the application of the subset of
shape rules used in the production of Figure 1 is available at
http://www.shape.gatech.edu/Machine/.
Additional detail on the implemented grammar is presented
in two parts. First, a selection of rules (Figures 2-6) will be
discussed in terms of their visual and verbal specification. In
order to illustrate rule application, each rule is also paired
with a subsequent matching illustration that shows each non-
equivalent LHS match for that rule found in the Shape
Machine (Figures 7-11). This set of illustrations all refer to
the design production of Figure 1 to give a more
comprehensive picture of interacting with the shape rules and
productions of the grammar in the software. Following this
snapshot, a sample catalog of complete designs generated in
the machine-based specification is presented and discussed
to illustrate some results from the implementation.
The power of programming with shape rules is in their ability
to encode precise relationships that interpret a design
intention with a visual representation. Figures 2-6 illustrate
rules from stages 2 and 3 of the grammar chosen to give
examples of how shape rules can describe the specification
of an entry, walls, elements of structure and exterior skin,
bedrooms, and a fireplace. Each rule is articulated with the
Shape Machine rule template to specify the transformation
from LHS to RHS. The rules are exported directly from the
software and depict the visual specification needed to apply
the rule in a shape computation.
Figure 2 gives an example of how a rule can be programmed
to specify a primary entry for a configuration in stage 2 of
the grammar. On the LHS, the emergent eight-sided shape of
lines and arcs reflects the resultant major space produced
when the minor grid of circles is added to a design (Figure
1c). The double line on top of the figure designates the front
orientation (Figure 1d). On the RHS, the double line is
translated to reflect the recessed entry and the exterior-
oriented side of the eight-sided shape is trimmed so that the
space will no longer be recognized as a closed interior shape.
A triangle shape label is also added on the RHS to further
articulate the entry. The rule is applied under similarity in the
Shape Machine to the design of Figure 1d to produce the
design of Figure 1e. Figure 7 shows how the machine finds
three non-equivalent matches of the LHS of the rule, each
reflecting an instance of the embedded shape that can
potentially become the main entry of a design. The entry
choice relates to both exterior conditions as influenced by the
site context and interior conditions as the entry implies the
possibilities for the symmetric or asymmetric arrangement of
the interior space. The match of Figure 7b was applied in the
implementation of the 3 x 3 design to reflect a bilaterally
symmetric organization as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 2. A shape rule to locate the primary recessed entry.
The next four rules are from stage 3 to define the detailed
architectonics of a design. This stage had significant
development in the Portm-Ino grammar as the
implementation raised the bar in terms of the desirable level
of detail, with a goal to achieve the articulation expected in
an architectural floor plan. Figure 3 depicts a rule for
generating wall locations after the development of a
configuration has carved out the spaces and volumes of a
design, leaving the lines of the resulting enclosed spaces
intact as shown in Figure 1h. The LHS of this rule essentially
looks for the remaining lines of the major grid that demarcate
a division of space as measured between the circular minor
spaces. The RHS develops the representation from a single
line to a double line to effectively produce a wall. Figure 8
shows the seventeen non-equivalent LHS matches of this
rule when applied under similarity in the Shape Machine to
the design of Figure 1h. These are all applied in parallel to
generate the thickened walls of a design.
Figure 3. A shape rule to designate generic thickened walls.
Proceeding to the architectonic development of minor
spaces, Figure 4 illustrates a shape rule for specifying the
curvilinear wall segments that form the enclosure for an
exterior hollow column along the side and back orientation
of the perimeter. The LHS looks for the circular minor spaces
with the T-shape inside that designates these locations as
shown in Figure 1j. The RHS adds the elements, which
include the four structural components of the column
oriented to the cardinal directions and two exterior partitions
that continue the enclosure system when it meets these
particular hollow columns at the perimeter. The resulting
enclosed minor space is also labelled with a line to denote an
unassigned space in the plan that can be developed in the
rules that follow for a particular use or feature of a design.
Figure 9 shows the six matches of the LHS of this rule found
in the Shape Machine. All of these matches are applied in
parallel in the production of the Figure 1 design.
Figure 4. A shape rule to add curvilinear wall elements.
Moving on to the particularities of the interior spatial
arrangement, the relationship defining bedroom locations is
specified in Figure 5. Bedrooms in the language of the house
are always in direct connection with one minor space that is
enclosed as a private bedroom study or closet. Additionally,
bedrooms always have exposure to at least one operable
window wall for an immediate connection to natural light, (a) (b) (c)
view, and ventilation. The LHS designates this relationship
Figure 7. Three non-equivalent matches of the LHS of the shape
by defining a search space that includes: (a) an unassigned
rule to locate the entry (Figure 2).
minor space denoted by the circle with a line centered across
its diameter; and (b) a major space enclosed by three walls,
one of which must be located on the exterior. The RHS
develops the bedroom to articulate the assignment of the
single minor space, the curvilinear enclosure elements that
close off the space from the other three adjacent minor
spaces, and the labeling of the bedroom as denoted by the
circular label. Figure 10 shows the three non-equivalent (a) (b) (c)
matches of the LHS of the rule found when applied to Figure
1l. The matches of Figure 10a and c were instantiated in two
applications of the rule in the Figure 1 design.

(d) (e) (f)

Figure 5. A shape rule to locate bedrooms.
To complete the description of select specific rules and their
applications, Figure 6 is offered to illustrate a rule for placing
the fireplace. The LHS specifies a query for a space
characterized by two adjacent double-height major spaces.
The RHS adds the double-height fireplace centered within
this volume and oriented to provide potential access from (g) (h) (i)
both sides. The fireplace is tailored to fit between two hollow
columns. Figure 11 depicts the three non-equivalent matches
for this rule when applied in the Shape Machine under
similarity. The match of Figure 11a was applied to produce
the final 3 x 3 design as shown in Figure 1o.

(j) (k) (l)

Figure 6. A shape rule to locate a fireplace.

This account of select shape rules and their production
demonstrates how abstract rules can represent architectural
reasoning in a compressed visual medium. These rules (m) (n) (o)
depend entirely on their context, so that a change in the range
of inquiry equally shifts the possibilities of the description
[14]. To gain a more comprehensive view of the grammar,
Figure 12 illustrates thirty plans produced in the software
with the complete set of shape rules. The resulting catalog
includes sample designs in the language for a series of n x m
grids. The pair of 3 x 5 designs includes the plan of the
original Entelechy I as produced in the machine (Figure 12n). (p) (q)
Read as five columns, the contrast between pairs of
variations captures the flexibility of the language as the n x Figure 8. Seventeen non-equivalent matches of the LHS of the
shape rule to locate walls (Figure 3).
m canvas increases from XS to S to M to L to XL. The

(a) (b) (c)
(d) (e) (f)
Figure 9. Six non-equivalent matches of the LHS of the shape rule
to add curvilinear wall elements to non-corner perimeter hollow
columns at the side and back orientations (Figure 4).
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 10. Three non-equivalent matches of the LHS of the shape
rule to locate bedrooms (Figure 5).
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 11. Three non-equivalent matches of the LHS of the shape
rule to locate a double-height fireplace (Figure 6).
designs can additionally be read as six rows characterized by
the depth of their major grid structure as a 2-series in the top
pair of rows, a 3-series in the middle pair, and a 4-series in
the bottom pair of rows.
These results verify a sample of possible designs in the house
language though more candidates can be generated with the
grammar. A first grouping of designs distinguishes a subset
characterized by the axial division of public and private
zones observed in the design of Entelechy I to include Figure
12a, c, f, g, j, k, m, n, p, q, and z. While these designs
certainly convey the systematic expressiveness of the house
language, the question brought forward by implementing the
grammar in the Shape Machine focused on how this system
could address not just potential Entelechy variations that
look nearly alike, but what other designs the system could
generate through possible variations of the house language
Portman never considered. The more precise inquiry focused
on how to release the constraints of the axial division of
public and private space to explore alternative potentials in
the new medium. This pursuit extends the investigation to
understand how the distribution of major volumes in a design
expressed vertically to connect levels as well as horizontally
to define circulation halls can be more expressive. The
hypothesis developed in shape rules to test its possibilities in
the productions suggests that the organization depends on the
relationship between the entry and the planar circulation of
the upper level as mitigated by the modular structure of the
major grid. This relationship is arranged in terms of an entry
sequence that connects to the embedded network of figural
minor spaces for another layer of connection. This
multivalent coordination foreshadows Portman’s elaborate
use of circulation in his designs for commercial hotels and
urban habitats that are primed for further expansion.
Considering the columns of XS, S, M, L, and XL designs,
each shows a different range of possible locations for the
entry to initiate this understanding as assigned in the shape
rule of Figure 2. We can elaborate possibilities by discussing
the 2, 3, and 4-series of designs in sequence. To start, Figure
12 a-j all represent designs in the 2-series. These designs all
have the same entry sequence from the entry bridge to the
foyer, which meets the perimeter offering a view out to the
surrounding site. Circulation halls and double-height
volumes in these programs define rectangular and L-shaped
spaces, with the exception of a U-shaped hall in Figure 12d.
In terms of larger open volumes provided by major spaces to
vertically connect levels, designs range from having zero
openings (Figure 12a) to up to three openings (Figure 12e, j).
These reflect further possibilities in room arrangement from
open loft designs to three-bedroom programs.
Increasing capacity for variation with an enlarged canvas, all
designs in the 3-series have the characteristic entry sequence
to match the original Entelechy I (Figure 12k-t). Additional
figures of circulation halls and continuous double-height
volumes include a +-shape (Figure 12m) and T-shapes
(Figure 12n, o, s, t). Designs in the 3-series range in their
major double-height openings from one opening (Figure 12k,
m, p) all the way to an expansive six openings (Figure 12o).
Lastly, the 4-series builds on this logic with the same entry
sequence from the entry bridge to a foyer to a double-height
space that meets the perimeter (Figure 12u-dd). The designs
of the 4-series are unique in their foyers and central halls that
are doubled in depth so that the planar space emerges as an
expanded single-height volume with additional expressive
possibilities. For example, the design in Figure 12w shows a
rotational symmetry at the interior hall so that three corner
bedrooms each have their own bathroom and adjacent major
double-height volume, suggesting a context where desirable
views are offered on all sides. To contrast this, Figure 12bb
illustrates a long double-height hall along the back of the
house terminated by a corner bedroom, offering a significant
volumetric and visual connection to the exterior site. In this
series, open double-height volumes at the major scale
increase to consider up to seven openings (Figure 12y).
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

(f) (g) (h) (i) (j)

(k) (l) (m) (n) (o)

(p) (q) (r) (s) (t)

(u) (v) (w) (x) (y)

(z) (aa) (bb) (cc) (dd)

Figure 12. A visual sample of mechanically produced design variations in the Entelechy language for a series of n x m grids. The 3 x 5
plan labeled n is the original 1964 design of Entelechy I as produced by Portm-Ino grammar implemented in the Shape Machine.
 5 CONCLUSION
The Shape Machine provides a generous medium for
elaborating the formal theory on Portman’s language of the
house in an active way. Like working in any new medium,
opportunities were found in the process that confirmed the
novelty of this environment and provided new insights on the
architectural theory too. Specifically, three theoretical
concepts to differentiate Portman’s language of the house
came forward. First, a logic of networked circulation
preconditioned for expansion is seen in the house as a system
initiated at the entry. This circulation in the house is
horizontally built into the logic of major spaces and
vertically built into the minor spaces to suggest a network
ready for change to address new concerns. Second, a
modular measure for parameters that scale is inscribed in the
house to pragmatically allow for adaptations mitigated by the
module. This modularity is intentionally plural to provide
multiple interrelated measures based on increments that
allow for playful symmetries, asymmetries, and proportions
to be explored within a design in the language. Finally, the
language of the house illustrates a structural character that
tests the expressiveness of simple geometries. This
simplicity is seen in the fact that the geometric vocabulary is
essentially defined by a circle and a square. Future work will
aim to address how the language can be restructured in the
Shape Machine for arguments beyond the domestic scale.
More generally, the shape-machined implementation
promotes a rule-based visual approach that can be readily
picked up and continued. This productive format is
conducive to our paradigms of knowledge sharing today –
via machine-readable files, scripts, searches, hashtags, and
more. The advantages of this prototype environment cannot
be overemphasized in terms of the simplicity and
accessibility of the user interface, the time-savings afforded
by being able to encode a custom function by programming
with shapes, and the alleviation of fatigue from repetitive
tasks that can be easily automated. The current prototype of
the Shape Machine computes with shapes composed of
straight lines and arcs in two-dimensional space. Rules are
applicable under all Euclidean transformations. Shape
computation as a comprehensive program suggests an
expansion of the engine to include shapes in two and three-
dimensional space as well as further transformations,
parametric definitions, parallel productions, and interfaces
for recording or predictively suggesting rules.
The Shape Machine provides researchers with a technology
that allows them to try shape rules out, test the hypotheses
they put forward, and generate productions that synthesize
the overall expressiveness and impact of their interpretation.
More specifically, the methods presented here provide a way
to precisely define a formal theory in architectural research.
Automating the process in the Shape Machine confirmed
analytical intuitions, challenged them productively, and also
demonstrated how a shape rule can be recast just like a design
– for many different decompositions according to purposes
that evolve [14]. As a medium, the Shape Machine provides
View publication stats
a way to critically foreground a variety of architectural issues
in a dynamic interaction to suggest that a computational
architectural theory is within reach.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work relies on the generous collaboration of the Shape
Computation Lab (SCL). Shape Machine is a project of the
SCL at the School of Architecture, College of Design,
Georgia Institute of Technology. The research and
implementation of the interpreter is led by Tzu-Chieh Kurt
Hong.
REFERENCES
1. Ligler, H. and Economou, A. Entelechy revisited: On
the generative specification of John Portman’s
architectural language. Environment and Planning B:
Urban Analytics and City Science, 45(4), 623–648,
2018.
2. Stiny, G. and Gips, J. Shape Grammars and the
Generative Specification of Painting and Sculpture. In
C.V. Frieman (Ed.) Information Processing 71, 1972.
3. Stiny, G. and Gips, J. Algorithmic Aesthetics: Computer
Models for Criticism and Design in the Arts. University
of California Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1978.
4. Stiny, G. and Mitchell, W.J. The Palladian Grammar.
Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 5:
1978, 5-18.
5. Hersey, G. and Freedman, R. Possible Palladian Villas.
MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1992.
6. Knight, T. and Stiny, G. Classical and non-classical
computation. ARQ: Architectural Research Quarterly 5:
2001, 355-372.
7. Stiny, G. Introduction to shape and shape grammars.
Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 7:
1980, 343-351.
8. Stiny. G. Shape: Talking about Seeing and Doing. MIT
Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2006.
9. Knight, T. Transformations in design: A formal
approach to innovation in the visual arts. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1994.
10. Eloy, S., Pauwels, P., and Economou, A. AI EDAM
special issue: Advances in implemented shape
grammars: Solutions and applications. Artificial
Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and
Manufacturing, 32(2), 131-137, 2018.
11. Stiny, G. A new line on drafting systems. Design
Computing. 1: 1986, 5-19.
12. Krishnamurti, R. The construction of shapes.
Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 8:
1981, 5-40.
13. Hong, T. K. and Economou, A. Shape Machine.
Forthcoming.
14. Earl, C. Shape boundaries. Environment and Planning
B: Planning and Design 24: 1997, 669-687.