de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean
English
 
Help Guide Disclaimer Contact us Login
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Conference Paper

Graph-based models of space in architecture and cognitive science: a comparative analysis

MPS-Authors
http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons83918

Franz,  G
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons84072

Mallot,  HA
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons84883

Wiener,  JM
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

Locator
There are no locators available
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts available
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Franz, G., Mallot, H., & Wiener, J. (2005). Graph-based models of space in architecture and cognitive science: a comparative analysis. Architecture, Engineering and Construction of Build Environments, 30-38.


Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-D4B7-E
Abstract
Graph-based operationalizations of space are used in architecture as well as in cognitive science. In such models, environments are usually described by means of nodes and edges, roughly corresponding to places and their spatial relations. In the field of cognitive science, view and place graphs are models of mental representations of environments and used for the explanation of wayfinding behavior such as exploration and route planning. In architecture, space syntax and visibility graph analysis aim at identifying and describing structural properties of built environments that determine their usage and experience. In cognitive science, mental representations of space cannot be seen independently from the formal and configurational properties of the corresponding environments that are well captured by architectural description systems. Vice versa, formal descriptions of space as used in architecture gain plausibility and relevance by incorporating results from cognitive research that allow the prediction and explanation of actual human behavior. In this paper approaches from the two different disciplines are therefore reviewed and compared. Special interest concerns their scope, structure, and representational content. Parallels, differences, and specific strengths are discussed. The goal of this paper is to provide a a common basis for an interdisciplinary exchange. Furthermore, based on recent empiric work, strategies to integrate aspects from both disciplines are outlined.