Sensponsive Classrooms: Ambient Intelligent Spaces that Facilitate Learning

Archi t e c ture , Ci ty & Informat ion Des ign (EuropIA.14)

Sensponsive Classrooms: Ambient Intelligent Spaces that Facilitate Learning

Konstantinos-Alketas OUNGRINIS TIE Lab, TU Crete

K4 Building, University Campus, Kounoupidiana Chania, Greece, 73133 [email protected]

Marianthi LIAPI TIE Lab, TU Crete

K4 Building, University Campus, Kounoupidiana Chania, Greece, 73133

[email protected]

Stratos GEORGOULAKIS TIE Lab, TU Crete


[email protected]

Dimitris MAIROPOULOS School of Architecture and Planning, MIT

77 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA, USA, 02139

[email protected]

Eleni LIONAKI TIE Lab, TU Crete


[email protected]

Sotiris NTZOUFRAS TIE Lab, TU Crete


[email protected]

Eythimia STATHOPOULOU TIE Lab, TU Crete


[email protected]

Marinela TELO TIE Lab, TU Crete


[email protected]

Abstract

The paper presents the stages of an ongoing research project that explores the interdisciplinary sensponsive design framework for the integration of intelligent systems in space. The overall approach belongs in the wider scope of ambient intelligence where the environment performs in a sensible way within a specific context, exhibiting behavior and acting beneficially toward human activity. The proposed design framework is implemented and tested within the context of educational spaces, toward the creation of the future classroom where space acts as an educator, an assistant that has an active role to support and amplify the learning process.

Keywords

Human-computer interaction; intelligent environments; responsive design; transformable design; interactive educational spaces.

Introduction

Contemporary architectural research became engaged with embedded technology through the integration of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) systems into the living space, targeting the creation of intelligent, responsive environments. Virtual, actual or hybrid, these environments have been enjoying widespread applications as a consequence of more powerful and intuitive software, as well as of the ability to experiment with 'approachable' electronic assemblies [1]. Exploring this ability and developing a deeper understanding of how to integrate ICT systems in space, architecture inadvertently reached a threshold. The animatic effect of our information-rich era has become a goal in its own. This fact marks a point where the difference between recreation and architecture must be identified. A space that is designed and fabricated with the inherent ability of “expression” might become self-referential, diminishing the utilitarian role of architecture. When it comes to spaces with a distinct function, like schools and other educational environments, this attribute could turn to be a serious hindrance in the performance of space and the activities of the people within.

Senspons ive Classrooms: Ambient In te l l i g en t Spaces that Fac i l i ta t e Learn ing

A holistic design framework is therefore needed to guarantee the successful application of responsiveness in space, in order to produce an informative, useful and symbolically rich outcome. The novelty in the proposed sensponsive framework is that it adds the element of sense into the response and creates a context for the way space learns and performs. This paper follows the application of the sensposive design approach into the creation of classrooms, educational spaces and learning environments in general.

All of the presented projects were developed at the Transformable Intelligent Environments Laboratory (TIE Lab) in the School of Architectural Engineering at the Technical University of Crete (TU Crete). TIE Lab is dedicated to the creation of environments that exhibit flexibility and adaptability through a human-centered, technology-driven architectural approach equipped with the appropriate design methods and tools, fabrication techniques, and implementation strategies. Moreover, all research projects in the Lab are multi-disciplinary, based in the field of architecture, and from there on expanding their scope within the domains of computer and electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, environmental engineering, pedagogy, psychology and neuroscience.

Sensposiveness as a branch of integrated ambient intelligence

Ambient Intelligence (AmI) is characterized by the seamless integration of technology for the production of environments that are sensitive and responsive to the presence of people [2]. The term sensponsive describes an architectural branch of AmI that is located within the domain of adaptable and responsive design, creating a new paradigm for the integration of artificial intelligence systems into space. The result is a user-friendly environment within which technology acts beneficially, in a non-intrusive way, to render space a subtle, yet active collaborator in people’s activities [3], [4].

In order to formulate the research framework regarding what it means to be sensponsive (sensponsiveness), we have to describe what a response with sense is and the content associated with the application of this new feature. Sensponsive design is defined through three basic characteristics: time, understanding and intention. Time refers to the act of providing a spatial response in a timely fashion, understanding refers to the act of monitoring and perceiving the context within which a response will take place, while intention refers to the act of assembling a pattern of specific responses. Time can also refer to delay, which is the time required for a ‘thinking’ entity to assess a situation, prior to understanding. In order to avoid too much complexity, the act of understanding aims to recognize specific human activities and behaviors that are deemed important by the designer.

Those three factors (time, understanding and intention) lead the process toward designing spatial behavior. Behavior leads inadvertently to another important factor, communication. Active communication, achieved between people and space, leads to further developments. Ever since the rise and the swarm-like diffusion of personal media, space has been gradually dislocated in the human mind to become the background in people’s activities. Through a sensponsive approach, space can elevate its importance by developing two new, human-centered features. First, it can become an active contributor to regulate the environment toward ad hoc conditions the user desires. Second, it can become a medium that is able to connect personal media devices with the artificial environment. When space starts acting in a way it makes sense in these conditions, people’s interaction with it will change, as a more sensible environment will surround them.

Within this framework, our research targets the next step beyond responsive architecture with the creation of a robotic spatial application that imbues space with cognitive skills and a 'sense' of why, when and how to respond to the users’ activities within and the prevailing environmental conditions. It is specifically targeted to augment the learning processes inside educational environments. The core of this approach lies in the logic behind the Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms in order to recognize human activities, understand their context, evaluate the efficiency of the hosting environment and plan fine-tuning spatial changes when necessary [5].

The key difference identified in a sensponsive environment is the intention for discreet responses with seamless, smooth transitions. The goal is for space to reach an appropriate arrangement without alarming people and provide architectural qualities critical for ‘sheltering’ an ad hoc situation. Along these lines, architects must identify those criteria that affect the time-related connections between people and space. This process will pinpoint the critical parameters that must be monitored and addressed to achieve comfort, spatial efficiency and the desired aesthetics in a certain sensible context formed around the activities of the people using space (Figure 1).


Figure 1: A diagrammatic representation of the sensponsive design framework. Following are the basic steps for the design of an architectural space through implementing a sensponsive

system: ! Activity evaluation system (AES). Initially it is important to identify the type and the intensity of the

human activities that take place, in relation to time, inside a specific environment. The designer can then set the environmental qualitative characteristics s/he wishes to make responsive. Basic actions in this step: o Identify major activities o Relate them with time o Identify what to diminish o Identify what to augment

! Dynamic building program (DBP). It is a flexible diagrammatic process, which changes in real-time, as it is linked to the AES. It is developed to re-configure its measurements every time the activities and the environmental conditions change. In its current state of development the DBP application examines the relation between optimum arrangements and existing conditions to produce visualizations that highlight the deviations calculated by the system. The purpose is not data precision but the development of a tool that provides better knowledge of spatial utilization and highlights ways to efficient solutions in future design. It also enables the design of reconfigurable settings that can adapt to changing spatial requirements. Basic actions in this step: o Set the desired value-range o Create a storyboard to present the utilization of space through time o Employ spatial economy techniques to increase efficiency


! Responsive System (RS). This system has two modes of operation. The first one is the interactive mode and it is fully controlled by the user. During this mode, spatial changes take place instantly in order to provide the best arrangement that supports the human activities hosted within. Re-configurable, kinetic spatial elements allow people to make the appropriate modifications within the allowances of the design. The second mode is the sensponsive one. In this mode, the designer shapes the core of the sensponsive behavior. The main attributes that define the performance of human activity are monitored in the most unobtrusive way possible. After a process of evaluation, the system decides whether a spatial intervention is necessary. Evaluation is a difficult task because it carries a high level of objectivity. However, a combination of participatory design, machine learning and argumentation processes can facilitate a self-regulating process. [6] This is when the ‘responding with sense’ mode manifests itself through the understanding factor, based on intention. The RS employs flexible configurations, smart materials, controllers and actuators in order to perform environmental changes, both spatial (volume, surface) and ambient (audio, visual, olfactory, haptic). Basic actions in this step: o Arrange an initial spatial condition according to specific user requirements. Pre-sets or start-from-scratch options

are available. o Identify critical parameters according to activities. o Set the best possible value-range and define the desired conditions. It is necessary to evaluate the status of a

condition regarding efficiency. o Evaluate and assess according to set areas determined by designer-user participation. Repeat the process and self-

regulate in time. o Get feedback and make a loop.

! Formation and Reconfiguration. This is the architectural component of the sensponsive framework and it involves a vertical operation that takes place right after the activity analysis. It provides the optimum spatial features -functional, aesthetic and symbolic- related to specific human activities. In this step, a variety of spatial formations and reconfigurations are designed based on the data acquired from the DBP. This step is actually responsible for the initial spatial arrangements of the interactive phase and the micro-adjustments of the sensponsive phase. The spatial features are divided into two main categories, material and ambient, directed by both the designer and the users. The basic actions are a) identify and set qualitative elements (lighting, temperature, acoustics, ventilation, colors and virtual perspective) and b) identify and set spatial characteristics (geometry, perspective, volume, surface, spatial landmarks in the actual perspective and smart materials to reduce energy consumption). It is very important in this component to consider the “human-in-the-loop” mode, during which the system is calibrating itself constantly in regard to people’s behavior in space [7]. Basic actions in this step: o Identify and set qualitative elements

! Lighting ! Temperature ! Acoustics ! Ventilation ! Colors ! Virtual perspective

o Identify and set geometrical/spatial characteristics ! Geometry (Perspective, Euclidian, Topological, Relationships) ! Volume ! Surface ! Spatial landmarks (cognition beacons in the actual perspective) ! Smart materials to reduce energy consumption

The aforementioned steps can be achieved only through a human-centered approach in order to reduce the feeling of the uncanny and provide patterns of human behavior in relation to space. These patterns can be analyzed to provide the critical parameters that must be monitored and addressed in order to achieve comfort and spatial efficiency. From there on, it is an issue of programming and algorithmic design using tools from the broader area of AI research, and more specifically the domains of Machine Learning, State Estimation, and Decision Making. The system needs to support decision-making under complex preference policies and has to take into account different factors. These policies have a dynamic nature and are influenced by the particular


state of the environment. The decision process needs to be able to synthesize together different aspects of a preference policy and to adapt to new input from the current environment [8]. At the same time, multi-agent systems using argumentation technology for decision-making will handle arguments supporting different (possible conflicting) available options by using context-related information to decide on the better course of action at a given moment [9], [10].

The sensponsive design approach is currently applied in a number of on-going research projects that present different contexts and thus different design intentions. Especially regarding educational spaces, we have developed design approaches that wish to address the maintenance of focus along with multimodal learning issues, as follows:

! Intention: Help students perform better and maintain focus. ! Understanding: Recognize lack of focus mainly through the restlessness of a student’s body. ! Reformation: Perform spatial changes to direct lighting, to affect acoustics and alter the proportions

of space in order to change perspective and help students focus on specific activities. Moreover, provide additional environmental stimuli to help students remember easier the knowledge acquired.

A sensponsive framework for educational environments. The S|G projects

The original research framework created to explore the application of the sensponsive approach is dubbed Spirit|Ghost. It aims to provide a paradigm as it demonstrates how a space with integrated ICT can assist in the efficiency of an activity taking place within it by understanding and affecting specific characteristics with critical parameters. The operation is divided in two main phases. The first one, Spirit, monitors space, identifies the nature and context of the activities taking place and evaluates how successful the existing spatial configuration is in hosting them, providing it that way with the element of sense. Spirit has a mission to comprehend, not to engage in a reaction. If there is cause for intervention, the second phase, Ghost, takes place with active spatial and environmental changes. It comprises the second objective, the integration of digitally-controlled mediators inside architectural elements. The name is influenced by the global presence of animism in cultures. This provided us with the psychological context in which people can react positively within a sentient changing environment, as well as with the theoretical framework to develop our human-computer interaction protocols. The S|G research framework is currently under the fourth stage of its development. Each stage has a specific research goal to accomplish, resolving issues toward the completion of a full-scale working prototype in the future.

Project S|G 01

Our first working prototype was a basic, simplified model. The goal was to test the feasibility in principal of the whole system. We chose a simple geometry (a square), one parameter to monitor (crowd density), one spatial change (linear displacement of a partition), and a simple behavior (to increase available surface if overcrowding persists). We created two models, one virtual, on Grasshopper, and one real, equipped with sensors, Arduino controllers and motors. The 'bridge' between the two models was Firefly. The virtual model showed two limits, the actual and the dynamic one, that followed the intensity of the parameter and inscribed the limits of the required space. The activity that took place on the real model informed the virtual one, and depending on the suggestions of the system, the limits of real space changed to accommodate the given situation until a new state of equilibrium was found through fine-tuning (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Project S|G 01. Working prototype.


Project S|G 02

Our second working prototype is a more complex model, still though within an enclosed, defined space. The goal was to develop an activity recognition system that would have the ability of verification. We identified four main types of activities taking place within an educational context –lecture, workshop, study and free time. Each one presents certain characteristics and requires different settings to be performed efficiently. The success of this project was based on the minimum amount of factors we monitored to assess the type of activity within the given area. These are:

! Temperature ! Sound ! Proxemics 1 (personal space) ! Proxemics 2 (people) ! Positioning ! Analysis of movement in vectors

Initially we worked with simulations. The amount of data received strained the system and demanded the work to be distributed. After a successful row of simulations, we proceeded with building a special setting where we tested the results. The linked working environments were Rhino – Grasshopper – Firefly – Actual Interactive Setting. The latter is comprised of a gridded surface that is monitored by photocells, microphones, and a webcam. A projector is used to show the overlapping of the two models and test the fidelity. Fiducial markers act as people for the image recognition via reacTIVision. In this experiment, the system successfully recognized the four types of educational activities set (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Project S|G 02. Simulation of human presence and activity.

Project S|G 03

The third stage of this research project moved into the Ghost phase, through a new working prototype. After the recognition and evaluation phase of Spirit (S|G 02), the system verified the requirement for spatial adjustments so that space can exhibit the best possible features for the prevailing working program.

The aim of S|G 03 is twofold. The first is to establish an immediate connection between decision maker (designer, user) and spatial arrangement, via a design platform that can directly control the physical environment (Figure 4). The second is to examine one possible response, as the continuation of the previous project, and adjust the spatial conditions to accommodate the changing needs of the educational activity identified earlier. For the purposes of this stage, we specifically focused our research on the activity of lecture. Therefore we designated three basic lecture types and studied their spatial requirements, assuming that the lecturer will have the option to switch to the desired setting regarding the type of lecture s/he wants. Each basic lecture type distinguishes itself from the rest by its shape, acoustics and lighting quality. In addition to these, color, ventilation and temperature unobtrusively help improve the learning process.


Figure 4: Project S|G 03 working prototype with the Rhino-Grasshoper-Firefly bridge.

We followed a method that initially analyzed the optimal spatial characteristics for the different types of

lectures, experimented with different typologies of spaces, investigated techniques for application in existing rooms with minimal deviation from the starting phase (common rectangular typology), and finally, developed an “esoskeleton” to hold the interior wall covering that was comprised of custom-designed fabric. The linked working environments were Rhino – Grasshopper – Firefly – Actual Interactive Setting.

Based on these steps, a scaled actuated model was designed and fabricated. The sensponsive system exhibits the following modes of operation:

! The Interactive, during which the transformation is evident and adjusts all elements in the appropriate position for the recognized activity.

! The Sensponsive, during which the transformations are subtle, in the edge of human perception. These fine-tuning adjustments target to fortify the attention levels, the focus and the memory/learning capability of the audience.

The scaled model presented the interactive transformations and the direct link between user and the environment. The fine-tuning phase is presented via simulations and is the subject of the next S|G Project.

Project S|G 04

Spirit|Ghost 04 proceeds to provide more detail toward the implementation of the system in actual classrooms, focusing upon two different phases of the logic diagram and operation of the project. It aims to identify those outputs of the system addressing the spatial setting factors that affect the learning environment and have a great impact on the students’ achievement, performance and concentration, as well as on the teachers’ effectiveness and efficiency. These settings directly influence the health, emotions, behavior and performance of learners, depending on the individual’s culture, age, gender, and developmental level, the subject being studied and the activity being conducted [11].

This stage analyses and clarifies the specific parameters and characteristics that have the most significant impact on the spatial quality of the lecturing environment: geometry, color and lighting, acoustics and ventilation. Moreover, it addresses the way in which these parameters respond to each one of the different lecturing activities (lecture, discussion and presentation) as well as in the sensponsive operation (Figure 5).


Figure 5: Sensponsive classroom design parameters.

! Geometry The research concluded in choosing five scenarios with different spatial requirements and qualities. These modes are: lecture (typical lecture room), board (courses that require a board or any potential writing surface), presentation (presentation using audio-visual mediums), discussion and debate. Each one of the aforementioned modes was thoroughly analyzed in spatial and qualitative terms.

! Color and Lighting Good lighting quality consists of a combination of natural and artificial light that is not too sharp, thus creating many shadows, nor too poor, avoiding eyestrain and headaches. It is also crucial to direct light in specific points or areas. Color has also a significant effect on the learing performance as it is associated with direct psychological moods and can provide stimulation and increase memory.


! Acoustics Noise has a negative influence on speech functions. In addition, it has implications on the students’ psychology and performance as it accelerates tiredness. Among the ways to improve the acoustics of a lecture room are to provide the ceiling and sidewalls with the ability to change their acoustic behavior between reflective, diffusive and absorbent and to adjust the acoustic behavior of the room appropriately.

! Ventilation The regulation of ventilation must supply fresh air for breathing, clear away pollutants and odours to improve air quality, help remove excessive moisture in the air and improve thermal comfort during warm weather conditions by increasing air movement and removing heat. Adjustments in the ventilation can also provide stimuli for regaining focus (eg. lower temperature).

After collecting this data, the team had a clear vision of the general possibilities of the structure, its components, as well as its geometry. The virtual model and the physical model have been designed, for the time being, to switch between three modes (out of the five) -lecture, discussion and presentation- and facilitate our first physical implementation (Figure 6).

Figure 6: Project S|G 04 visualization of the sensponsive classroom’s flexible, transformable structure.

! Structural logic and description The current structural logic of the physical space provides all the data and the potential to proceed with the desired and necessary changes for the optimization of the spatial quality. The structure consists of three main segments: the floor platform, the ceiling infrastructure and the flexible surface that forms the sidewalls and the ceiling. The dimensions of the room were chosen from the standard lecture rooms in our university facilities.

! Floor infrastructure The floor platform has a rectangular shape (10mX6m). Its longest side is divided in equal successive and parallel stripes (1mX6m). The stripes are also subdivided into tiles that indicate the seating surface per person, forming simultaneously an orthogonal grid on the total area of the floor (0.5mX1m). Each floor stripe can be elevated automatically via a scissor lifting mechanism, creating a variety of possible inclinations, depending on the chosen (by users) or the identified (by the system) activity.

! Ceiling infrastructure The infrastructure attached to the ceiling of the existing room consists of a variety of 3d-printed parts (rotating elements and articulated arms), magnetic cylinders and spheres as well as servo motors, that all together constitute a complex mechanism which shapes the flexible surface into desired positions.

! Flexible surface (side walls and ceiling) The sidewalls and the ceiling of the room are formed by a flexible surface, which is divided into interchangeable stripes of two different materials. The first one is a soft, flexible layer consisting of a mixture of iron powder and silicone, covered on both sides with magnetic tape to further enhance the magnetic force of the surface. The connection between this type of stripe and the ceiling infrastructure relies exclusively on magnetism. The flexible structure is suspended from the magnets, following the movements of its mechanism to create the desired geometry. Each magnetic stripe has three control points responsible for its movement. The magnetic stripes are connected to each other, covered by a flexible elastic material, preferably fabric, in order to create a single uniform surface.


! Connection of floor platform and flexible surface The floor stripes are also designed with a complex rail as well as with rolling return mechanisms that connect them to the flexible surface. The rail mechanism allows the ceiling stripes to slide on the floor stripes in order to attain and apply the required changes to the room’s width. In addition, the rolling return mechanisms secure the pulling and managing of the remaining flexible material (fabric and ceiling stripe) after the spatial change, also maintaining the smoothness of the surface, avoiding creases, folds or excessive stretching of the material (Figure 7).

The S|G 04 in its current state works toward the fabrication of the physical scaled model, the integration of the required embedded systems and the compilation of the appropriate coding for its operation.

Figure 7: Project S|G 04 visualization of the sensponsive classroom’s interior space during different lecture

modes.

Conclusion This design research approach is stably progressing to resolve the upcoming issues toward the development of

a fully operational AmI-imbued space, under the sensponsive design framework. So far, it shows great potential through the aforementioned projects because of a unique feature for architectural solutions: the benefit of measuring and adjusting the efficiency of space, thus the successful implementation of an artificial environment, a capability provided by the activity-based design process and the logic that supports it. The evaluation of the produced space is one of the most important goals and a revolutionary aspect of this design approach because, in a way, architects can actively pursue their design goals even at a post-occupancy phase.

Educational spaces provide a context that greatly facilitates this research goal as it assigns the system with clear tasks to be performed, with a measurable effect. We are quite confident that this design approach is an effective solution for increasing the quality of life in a measurable way by creating ‘augmented value’ environments for people, as well as for spatially addressing issues related to well-being and comfort. It is a long path, along which architecture cannot remain an autonomous discipline. But this is not a negative fact as collaboration with other disciplines is always a positive influence providing the fresh perspective and the inspiration to achieve the ‘next logical step’.

References

[1] Emile H.L. Aarts and José Luis Encarnação. 2006. True Visions: The Emergence of Ambient Intelligence. Springer. Retrieved from http://www.springer.com/physics/applied+%26+technical+physics/book/978-3-540-28972-2 (April 04, 2014).

[2] Konstantinos-Alketas Oungrinis. 2012. Transformable Architecture: Motion, Adaptation, Flexibility. Ion Publications, Athens.

[3] R. McCallki, S. O’Neilli, F. Carrolli, D. Benyoni, and M. Smythi. 2005. Responsive Environments, Place and Presence. In Psychology Journal, 3(1), pages 35-73.

[4] K. Ntalianis, A. Doulamis, N. Tsapatsoulis, and N. Doulamis. 2010. Human action annotation, modeling and analysis based on implicit user interaction. In Multimedia Tools and Applications, 50(1), pages 199-225.


[5] P. Moraitis, and N. Spanoudakis. 2007. Argumentation-based agent interaction in an ambient intelligence context. In IEEE Intelligent Systems, Special Issue on Argumentation Technology, 22(6), pages 84-93.

[6] N. Streitz and G. Privat. 2009. Ambient Intelligence. In C. Stephanidis, editor, "Looking to the Future", Universal Access Handbook, pages 60.1-60.17. CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL.

[7] C. Dimitrakakis and M. Lagoudakis. 2008. Rollout Sampling Approximate Policy Iteration. In Machine Learning, 72 (3), pages 157-171.

[8] G. Chalkiadakis and C. Boutilier. 2012. Sequentially Optimal Repeated Coalition Formation under Uncertainty. In Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 24(3), pages 441-484.

[9] A. Paraschos, N. Spanoudakis and M. Lagoudakis. 2012. Model-Driven Behavior Specification for Robotic Teams. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Valencia, Spain.

[10] M. Liapi, D. Linaraki and G. Voradaki. 2012. Sensponsive architecture as a tool to stimulate the senses and alleviate the psychological disorders of an individual. In Cognitive Processing. 13(1), pages 233-237.

Sensponsive Classrooms: Ambient Intelligent Spaces that Facilitate Learning

Documents

Transcript of Sensponsive Classrooms: Ambient Intelligent Spaces that Facilitate Learning