...Reich

Department of Solid Mechanics, Materials and Structures, Faculty of Engineering, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel, Phone: 1 972 3 6407385, Fax: 1 972 3 6429540 (This research was partly done while this author was at the Department of Civil an Environmental Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA and at the Engineering Design Research Center, Carnegie Mellon University.)

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...Coyne

Engineering Design Research Center, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA, USA

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...Konda

Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA, USA

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...Levy

Engineering Design Research Center, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA, USA

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...Monarch

Engineering Design Research Center, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA, USA, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA, USA

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...Subrahmanian

Engineering Design Research Center, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA, USA

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...Westerberg

Engineering Design Research Center, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA, USA

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...design.

In this focus we are still aware of some negative results from the use of the aforementioned GCSS compared to GDSS [22]. In particular, even though the quality of group decisions and the extent of participation had improved in both, the use of GCSS had negative influence on the communication process (efficiency and amount of information exchanged) - in contrast to the tools' goal. This may have many explanations including some offered in [22] and some that involve the fact that the empirical studies reviewed are founded on non-participatory situations, that is, the tools were not developed through participation nor were the evaluation criteria. In contrast, we (and others, [23, 24, 7]) argue that participatory action research is the suitable way to develop, evaluate, and evolve systems directed towards action.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...n-dim

n-dim is a group effort. The n-dim group consists of: Westerberg, Coyne, Levy, Konda, Monarch, Thomas, Dutoit, Reich, Subrahmanian, Srivastava, Gardner.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...environment.

One would not be wrong if one detects here a statement against ``strong'' AI. Further, stating that the environment will be able to learn does not release it from its inherent limitations since such ability cannot be realized in present technology unless significant control is exercised a priori [45].

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...[12].

Note that all these functions and more can be performed by the layout design tool ABLOOS [51] which is integrated in n-dim, the system described later.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...unused.

Similarly, Carp (1986) identified some of the bottlenecks preventing the success of the support-infill concept as the resistance of participants to perceive their roles within the framework of the new concept.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...resources.

Sannof (1991) discusses the utility of simulations in design. The critical issue is whether the reaction of participants to the simulation is an indication of their feeling to the built environment. Studies present conflicting opinions about this subject. Sanoff lists several guidelines for conducting simulations, but the critical one, finally, is the accumulation of studies with simulations and their comparisons to post occupancy studies which can accumulate experience leading to a better ability to predict the utility of simulations. This comment supports our view.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...rendering.

A rendering of a model can be something like a window presented to the user for interaction, a printed file, etc..

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...STEP

references?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...library.

Such guidelines can be found in many references including: [66], [67], and [68].

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...figure.

The particular rendering of the spaces in the ABLOOS' results should not be interpret verbatim as if the gaps between the spaces exist. Rather, they result from the way the rendering is designed to reflect constraints on the placement of spaces.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.