Architecture as service: a case of design on demand (DoD)

Abstract

The Internet-of-Things (IoT) can facilitate a perception-driven architectural service. A highly personalized adaptive Architecture-as-Service (AaS), meeting individual demands and expectations, is an example of Design-on-Demand—as needed and when it’s needed. This goes beyond reactive smart environments in the direction of a dwelling’s anticipatory characteristics, i.e., adapting to changing requirements. For such an architecture to be possible, intelligent materials need to be integrated via the IoT in new structures adapted to life and work circumstance of our time. The IoT is the only practical implementation that can handle the large number of processes involved and connect to computational resources on the cloud. The personalized AaS is protected via blockchain technology and made available, on demand or according to what the context suggests. For this purpose, a decentralized autonomous organization is put in place. Distributed across a large array of various devices, the ledger representing the blockchain enables digital ownership and, more important, interactions without a central control. The data informing the project was acquired from experiments in a Cave Automatic Virtual Environment (CAVE)-type virtual reality (VR) system. The same VR facility was used as a modeling medium for the future of a new kind of on-demand adaptive architecture.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

(image source: http://www.coelux.com)

Notes

  1. 1.

    For a definition of Neo-nomad, see D’Andrea (2006) and Abbas (2004).

  2. 2.

    For an idea of the project, see http://socks-studio.com/2015/10/03/the-artic-city-a-project-by-frei-otto-and-kenzo-tange/.

  3. 3.

    See: http://www.architectmagazine.com/technology/cesar-pellis-1966-urban-nucleus-p-a-award-winning-plan_o.

References

  1. Abbas Y (2004) Neo-nomads and the nature of the spaces of flows. In: Proceedings of UbiComp in the urban frontier conference, pp 12–13

  2. Alter A (2012) Drunk tank pink: and other unexpected forces that shape how we think, feel, and behave. The Penguin Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bain R (2015) Reviewed: CoeLux skylight. LUX. http://luxreview.com/review/2015/03/coelux-skylight. Accessed 20 July 2015

  4. Bajay G et al (2017) A study of existing ontologies in the IoT domain. https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.00112. Accessed 15 Sept 2017

  5. Benavente-Peces C, Ahrens A, Filipe J (2014) Advances in technologies and techniques for ambient intelligence. J Ambient Intell Hum Comput 5(5):621–622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-014-0244-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bengisu M (2018) Biomimetic materials and design. Cuaderno 70. Centro de Estudios en Diseño y Comunicación, pp 97–103 ISSN 1668-0227

  7. Bermudez-Edo M et al (2016) IoT: a lightweight semantic model for the internet of things and its use with dynamic semantics. In: Proceedings of 2016 international IEEE conferences on ubiquitous intelligence and computing, advanced and trusted computing, scalable computing and communications, cloud and big data computing, internet of people, and smart world congress (UIC/ATC/ScalCom/CBDCom/IoP/SmartWorld), pp 90–97. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7816831/, https://doi.org/10.1109/UIC-ATC-ScalCom-CBDCom-IoP-SmartWorld.2016.0035. Accessed 5 May 2017

  8. Buterin V (2015) On public and private blockchains. https://blog.etheruem.org. https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/08/07/on-public-and-private-blockchains. See also Ethereum. Ethereum White Paper. https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/White-Paper, https://www.ethereum.org. Accessed 5 May 2017

  9. Catlow R, Garrett M, Jones N, Skinner S (eds) (2017) Artists rethinking the blockchain. Liverpool University Press, Liverpool

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chandler D (2014) Seeing things: a new transparent display system could provide heads-up data. MIT News. http://news.mit.edu/2014/seeing-things-a-new-transparent-display-system-could-provide-heads-up-data-0121. Accessed 15 Feb 2015

  11. Cominelli L et al (2017) A multimodal perceptron framework for users’ emotional state assessment in social robotics. Future Internet 9(3):42. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi9030042

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. D’Andrea A (2006) Neo-nomadism: a theory of post-identitarian mobility in the global age. Mobilities 1(1):95–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Engine (n.d.) https://www.enginegroup.co.uk/. Accessed 10 Sept 2017

  14. Farahi B (2013) The living breathing wall, “sound + sight + space” exhibitions at School of Cinematic Art at USC (Nov. 2013); re-exhibited for a group exhibition at ‘BLINDSPOT INITIATIVE’ at Keystone Gallery Space (Feb. 2014). http://www.suckerpunchdaily.com/2014/05/28/the-living-breathing-wall/. Accessed 24 May 2015

  15. Fox M (2016) Interactive architecture: adaptive world (architecture briefs). Princeton Architectural Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gadrey J (2000) The characterization of goods and services: an alternative approach. Rev Income Wealth 46(3):369–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Haber S, Stornetta WS (1991) How to timestamp a digital document. J Cryptol 3(2):99–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Haber S, Stornetta WS (1997) Secure names for bitstrings. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM conference on computer and communication Security, pp 28–35

  19. Hachem S, Texeira T, Issarny V (2011) Ontologies for the internet of things. In: 12th International middleware conference. https://hal.inria.fr/hal-00642193/document. Accessed 10 Sept 2018

  20. Hanselka H, Nuffer J (2009) Intelligent materials. In: Bullinger HJ (ed) Technology guide. Springer, Berlin, pp 48–51

    Google Scholar 

  21. Higgins S (2015) IBM reveals proof of concept for blockchain-powered Internet of Things. Coindesk. https://www.coindesk.com/ibm-reveals-proof-concept-blockchain-powered-internet-things/ Accessed 10 Sept 2018

  22. Hill K, Mattu S (2018) The house that spied on me. https://gizmodo.com/the-house-that-spied-on-me-1822429852. Accessed 2 Feb 2018

  23. Khandve PV (2014) Nanotechnology for building material. Int J Basic Appl Res 4:146–151

    Google Scholar 

  24. Konarzewska B (2017) Smart materials in architecture: useful tools with practical applications or fascinating inventions for experimental design? IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 245:052098. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/245/5/052098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kou W, Li H, Zhou K (2016) Turning video resource management into cloud computing. Future Internet 8(3):35. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi8030035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kretzer M, Rossi D (2012) ShapeShift. Leonardo 45(5):480–481. https://doi.org/10.1162/LEON_a_00451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kronenburg R (2007) Flexible: architecture that responds to change. Laurence King, London

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mohamed ASY (2017) Smart material innovative technologies in architecture; towards innovative design paradigm. Energy Procedia 115:139–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.05.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Moholy-Nagy L (1947) Vision in motion. Paul Theobald and Company, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  30. Murray J (1997) Hamlet on the holodeck: the future of narrative in cyberspace. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  31. Nadin M (1995) Negotiating the world of make-believe: the aesthetic compass. Real-Time imaging 1. Academic Press, London, pp 173–190

    Google Scholar 

  32. Nadin M (2003) Anticipation—the end is where we start from. Lars Müller Verlag, Basel

    Google Scholar 

  33. Nadin M (2012) The anticipatory profile. An attempt to describe anticipation as process. Int J Gen Syst 41(1):43–75

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Narayanan A, Clark J (2017) Bitcoin’s academic pedigree. Acmqueue 15(4). https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3136559. Accessed 10 Sept 2017

  35. Naz A (2016) Interactive living space design for neo-nomads: Anticipation through spatial articulation. In: Nadin M (ed) Anticipation across disciplines, 1st edn. Springer, Basel, pp 393–403

    Google Scholar 

  36. Naz A (2017) Interactive living space for neo-nomads: an anticipatory approach. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Dallas

  37. Naz A, Kopper R, McMahan RP, Nadin M (2017) Emotional qualities of VR space. In: Virtual reality conference, pp 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2017.7892225

  38. Neumeier M (2009) The designful company: how to build a culture of nonstop innovation. New Riders, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  39. Pallasmaa J (2005) The eyes of the skin: architecture and the senses. Wiley-Academy, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  40. Papadopoulou A, Laucks J, Tibbits S (2017) Auxetic materials in design and architecture. MIT IDC. http://idc.mit.edu/2017/12/05/auxetic-materials-in-design-and-architecture/. Accessed 10 Dec 2017. https://doi.org/10.1038/natrevmats.2017.78

  41. Parthenopoulou NK, Malindretos M (2016) The use of innovative materials in innovative architectural applications. Combining forces for high performance structures. ScienceDirect. Mater Today Proc 3(3):898–912

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Pereira R et al (2010) An architecture for distributed high performance video processing in the cloud. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE third international conference on cloud computing, pp 482–489

  43. Rogers CA, Barker DK, Jaeger CA (1989) Introduction to smart materials and structures. In: Proceedings of U.S. Army Research Office workshop on smart materials, structures and mathematical issues, pp 17–28

  44. Sheng QZ, Shakshuki EM, Ma J (2014) Advances in ambient intelligence technologies. J Ambient Intell Hum Comput 5(3):341–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-013-0200-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Shostack GL (1984) Designing services that deliver. Harvard Bus Rev 62(1):133–139

    Google Scholar 

  46. Stapelkamp T (2017) Design as service. https://designismakingsense.de/service_design_thinking/was-ist-service-design. Accessed 23 Oct 2017 (in German)

  47. Stav T et al (September 2018) Quantum entanglement of the spin and orbital angular momentum of photons using metamaterials. Science 361(6407):1101–1104. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat9042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Switch on sunlight for a brighter future (2014) Phys.org. https://phys.org/news/2014-04-sunlight-brighter-future.html. Accessed 16 May 2014

  49. Szabo N (1996) Smart contracts: building blocks for digital markets. For a partial rewrite of the original article appearing in Extropy #16, see: http://www.alamut.com/subj/economics/nick_szabo/smartContracts.html. Accessed 23 Oct 2017

  50. Telhan O et al (2010) Interaction design with building facades. In: The 4th tangible and embedded interaction conference (TEI’10), pp 291–294

  51. Thompson AC (2018) The mirrors at CES had a lot to say about your life and looks. Cnet. https://www.cnet.com/news/tech-mirrors-at-ces-2018-lot-to-say-about-your-life-looks/ Accessed 19 Jan 2018

  52. Vasisht D, Ballis P (2018) Research for practice: toward a network of connected things. Commun ACM 61(7):52–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Wallsmart: an interactive paint (2014) Materia. https://materia.nl/article/wallsmart-interactive-paint/ Accessed 23 July 2015

  54. Xie X et al (2017) A review of smart materials in tactile actuators for information delivery. C J Carbon Res 3(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/c3040038

    Google Scholar 

  55. Yasar AUH, Malik H, Shakshuki EM, Khan Z (2016) Emerging technologies in ambient systems. J Ambient Intell Hum Comput 7(4):455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-016-0377-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Zhong J et al (2015) Self-powered human-interactive transparent nanopaper systems. ACS Nano 9(7):7399–7406. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.5b02414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Zumthor P (2006) Atmospheres: architectural environments; surrounding objects. Birkhäuser, Basel

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Several very careful reviewers provided feedback over the last 9 months. So did peers working in computer science (VR, in particular) and AI. For all these we are grateful. If not everything they drew our attention to was improved to meet their exigencies, it is because in some cases we ourselves continue to dig deeper into the subject in order to further clarify what our study proposes. The research upon which this paper is based involved a large number of subjects (129), as well as the cooperation of several laboratories. We hereby acknowledge support from the IRB at the University of Texas at Dallas (approval number 05-19) and at Duke University. Cooperation with Dr. Regis Kopper at the Duke University DiVE (Duke immersive Virtual Environment), and with Dr. Ryan P. McMahan of the VR Group at the University of Texas at Dallas is gratefully acknowledged here. The authors benefited from expertise in blockchain technology provided by Alastair Hewitt, and the expertise in nanotechnology of Dr. Ray Baughman, Director of the NanoTech Institute at UT-Dallas. The lab of the antÉ Institute for Research in Anticipatory Systems (ATEC School, UT-Dallas) provided funding and facilities for experimental work. Over many years, one of the authors benefited from interaction with Jaron Lanier (and, of course, experienced his prosopagnosia). The VR visionary never tires of redefining the field. We share in his optimism that technology will do better.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Asma Naz.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nadin, M., Naz, A. Architecture as service: a case of design on demand (DoD). J Ambient Intell Human Comput 10, 4751–4769 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-018-1147-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Adaptive
  • Architecture-as-Service (AaS)
  • Interaction
  • Anticipatory Profile