Systems Theory

Definition

Systems theory, in the chapter's usage, is the logical machinery for defining and transforming interior volumes: "a system, a 'set of elements or parts that is coherently organized and interconnected in a pattern or structure,' is the logical basis for defining and transforming interior volumes via visible surface mathematics" (Meadows quoted, p. 187, via note 4). A system is specified by its characteristics — "the components, constraints, interrelationships, interface, boundary, purpose, environment, input, and output" — which "when aggregated, produce a pattern or structure within a system, representing an expression of an observed regularity, and exist in both biotic and abiotic systems." The theory's design translation is algorithmic intervention: "The digital design process expresses an algorithm to intervene in a system and segment a complex design query into several simplified sub-problems, and later reconstructed to create a solution" (after Meadows and Rocker, note 1).

Two derived instruments carry the theory into practice. The model: "an abstract representation of system developed to aid in the understanding and/or predicting of its behavior," created and tested through "a rigorous method" — modeling being the chapter's name for the rigorous testing regime between concept and fabrication. Systemic articulation: the organization of "such a set of elements or behaviors… to form aggregates or modular component-based systems and, therefore, manipulate volume, surface, and mass" — the design operation of subdividing a system "into smaller parts that can be independently created and used in different systems." The theory is deliberately scale-neutral and matter-neutral: its systems "exist in both biotic and abiotic systems," which is what allows a butterfly's cuticular nanostructure and a student's tiled installation to be processed by the same method.

Key Thinkers

• Jonathon R. Anderson & Laura Lovell-Anderson — the transposers: systems theory as interior architecture's "logical basis" for volume transformation, systemic articulation as its "method for problem solving" (2018).
• Donella Meadows — Thinking in Systems: A Primer (Chelsea Green, 2009), the source of the system definition (p. 187) and the intervention algorithm; the most-cited source in the chapter's notes (notes 1, 4, 5, 7). Not yet paged (see log).
• I.M. Rocker — "When Code Matters" (Architectural Design 76, 2006), co-source of the algorithmic-intervention formula (note 1). Not yet paged (see log).
• Michael Hensel, Achim Menges & Michael Weinstock — Emergent Technologies and Design (2010), the systemic aggregate: "unbound elements lying in loose frictional contact" (note 11). Not yet paged (see log).

Related Concepts

• emergence — the output logic: aggregated characteristics "produce a pattern or structure"; systemic computation and emergence are the theory's two outputs.
• autogenic-design — the process concept: the system, configured with variable inputs, is what "self-generates" the design.
• surface-mathematics — the mathematical medium: the system's surface parameters are what "visible surface mathematics" manipulates.
• boundaries — the system's specified edge: "boundary" is named as a system characteristic — the first wiki source to give the boundary a formal (input/output) definition alongside its social, material and territorial registers.
• computational-design — the medium of intervention: visual scripting as the "systemic (and rule-based) computation" that models and manipulates the system.
• the-gyroid — the applied case: biotic system characteristics (50% fill / 50% porosity, boundary, purpose) processed as design input.

Source Support

Sources in the wiki that discuss this concept:

• Transforming Interior Volumes (Anderson & Lovell-Anderson 2018) — the concept's interior-design deployment: Meadows's system definition and characteristics, the algorithm-to-intervene formula, the model as "abstract representation of system," and systemic articulation as the method forming aggregates and modular component systems.
• Productions: spatial practices, processes, and effects (Odom 2018) — a second, effects-system register: systems theory extended from volume-transformation to effect-production. The POP system includes "material technical components and the organization of these components: the installation, the generated effects, the emergent conditions, and the human experiences combined into one" — where Meadows's system had "purpose," Odom's has output: "The totality of the system including individual visitors and interactive, informative components – whether simply a spatial sequence, spatial proximity to material, or active user-generated manipulation or manipulation via sensors – expands the system and intertwines constituencies into a coherent, if not completely self-aware, ecology." And the system's telos is plural: "The system simultaneously seeks multiple resolutions, rather than a singular condition defined as a 'solution'" — systematized generative processes rather than problem-solving (note 2: POPs are not "focused primarily on the view that design is a discreet 'problem-solving' exercise"). Where Anderson & Lovell-Anderson's system transforms a volume, Odom's produces an ecology of effects — see productions, production-oriented-practices, ecology.
• source-notes/marinic-2018-why-this-why-now
• source-notes/vanucci-2018-inside-out-outside-in

Open Questions

• Systems theory entered design through the Design Methods Movement's optimism and was later indicted with it (see design-methods-movement). Does the chapter's revival — systems theory as interior architecture's "logical basis" — repeat the movement's unexamined premise that a design problem can be segmented "into several simplified sub-problems, and later reconstructed," or has the biological-paradigm version (Hensel/Menges/Weinstock) actually changed the machinery?
• Meadows's system has a "purpose"; the chapter's systems have input parameters. Can a design system have a purpose it did not choose — and if the purpose is the studio brief, is the "system" just the assignment's formalization?
• The system characteristics include "boundary" — in Meadows a defined edge of input/output exchange. Does the chapter's systems reading of the interior volume conflict with the wiki's boundary cluster, where boundaries are social rules (partition-of-space), thick edges (thick-edge), or creases (crease)? Which register does a mathematical surface's boundary belong to?
• Systemic articulation claims to be "a method for problem solving" in an undergraduate curriculum. Is systems theory here a design method (generating form) or an analysis method (understanding what was made) — and does the chapter's own studio practice honor the distinction?