A Method for Evaluation of Streetscapes: Relationship between Visual Entropy and Interesting Streetscape
Abstract - 79
PDF

Keywords

Entropy
Complexity
Streetscapes
Urban facade
Image processing

How to Cite

1.
Karimimoshaver M, Khazaei F. A Method for Evaluation of Streetscapes: Relationship between Visual Entropy and Interesting Streetscape. Int. J. Archit. Eng. Technol. [Internet]. 2023 Sep. 15 [cited 2024 Feb. 22];10:16-29. Available from: https://avantipublishers.com/index.php/ijaet/article/view/1450

Abstract

The present research studies the complexity of urban facades, which is related to the visual diversity and correlation of the components of urban facades. It studies how the complexity of urban facades affects their desirability amongst citizens and what their preferences are when it comes to facade complexity. In addition, it addresses the complexity of urban facades in both quantitative and qualitative forms and investigates the relationship between quantitative and qualitative data and the desirability of using the correlation analysis method in urban facades.

To obtain quantitative data, a survey was conducted on Nowshahr citizens, and the data was analyzed through MATLAB software. The data obtained is the image entropy, which indicates the number of image irregularities. The results indicated that the Nowshahr citizens prefer the second complexity level, then the first complexity level, followed by the third complexity level, and finally the fourth complexity level, respectively.

There is a slight correlation in the results of the quantitative-qualitative data comparison. Therefore, using entropy as a measure of complexity cannot be confirmed in this study, and further research is needed.

https://doi.org/10.15377/2409-9821.2023.10.2
PDF

References

Lynch K. The image of the city. vol. 11. Massachusetts: MIT Press Cambridge; 1960.

Jacobs J. The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House; 1961.

Wang L, Zhang H, Liu X, Ji G. Exploring the synergy of building massing and façade design through evolutionary optimization. Front Archit Res. 2022; 11: 761-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2022.02.002

Pastore L, Andersen M. The influence of façade and space design on building occupants’ indoor experience. J Build Eng. 2022; 46: 103663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103663

Zenil H, Delahaye JP, Gaucherel C. Image characterization and classification by physical complexity. Complexity. 2011; 17: 26-42. https://doi.org/10.1002/cplx.20388

Zenil H, Soler-Toscano F, Delahaye JP, Gauvrit N. Two-dimensional Kolmogorov complexity and empirical validation of the Coding theorem method by compressibility. Peer J Comput Sci. 2015; 1: e23. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.23

Berlyne DE. Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. Washington D.C.: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation; 1974.

Imamoglu Ç. Complexity, liking, and familiarity: architecture and non-architecture Turkish students' assessments of traditional and modern house facades. J Environ Psychol. 2000; 20: 5-16. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1999.0155

Rapoport A. History and precedent in environmental design. Springer Science & Business Media; 1990. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0571-2

Stamps AE. Advances in visual diversity and entropy. Environ Plann B Plann Des. 2003; 30: 449-63. https://doi.org/10.1068/b12986

Grütter JK. Ästhetik der architektur grundlagen der architektur-wahrnehmung. 1987.

Teller J. A spherical metric for the field-oriented analysis of complex urban open spaces. Environ Plann B Plann Des. 2003; 30: 339-56. https://doi.org/10.1068/b12930

Salingaros NA. Urban space and its information field. J Urban Des (Abingdon). 1999; 4: 29-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809908724437

Samavatekbatan A, Gholami S, Karimimoshaver M. Assessing the visual impact of physical features of tall buildings: Height, top, color. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2016; 57: 53-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2015.11.008

Gosztonyi S. The role of geometry for adaptability: Comparison of shading systems and biological role models. J Facade Des Eng. 2018; 6: 163-74. https://doi.org/10.7480/jfde.2018.3.2574

Nguyen PA, Bokel R, Dobbelsteen A Van Den. Effects of a vertical green facąde on the thermal performance and cooling demand. J Facade Des Eng. 2019; 7: 44-63. https://doi.org/10.7480/jfde.2019.2.3819

Gaspari J, Naboni E, Ponzio C, Ricci A. A study on the impact of climate adaptive building shells on indoor comfort. J Facade Des Eng. 2018; 7: 27-40. https://doi.org/10.7480/jfde.2019.1.2778

Han J, Dong L. Quantitative indexes of streetscape visual evaluation and their validity analyses. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University 2016; 8: 764-9. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.2015.04.028

Daniel TC, Vining J. Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality. In: Altman I, Wohlwill JF, Eds. Behavior and the natural environment. Boston, MA: Springer; 1983, p. 39-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3539-9_3

Kaplan R, Kaplan S. The experience of nature: A psychological perspective: CUP Archive. 1989.

Kaplan R, Kaplan S, Ryan R. With people in mind: Design and management of everyday nature. Island Press; 1998.

Mahdieh A, Mustafa KMS, Suhardi M, Seyed RD. Determining the visual preference of urban landscapes. Sci Res Essays. 2011; 6: 1991-7. https://doi.org/10.5897/SRE11.171

Anderson ML. Embodied cognition: A field guide. Artif Intell. 2003; 149: 91-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(03)00054-7

Norman DA. The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic books; 1988.

Karimimoshaver M, Winkemann P. A framework for assessing tall buildings’ impact on the city skyline: Aesthetic, visibility, and meaning dimensions. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2018; 73: 164-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2018.08.007

Stamps AE. Physical determinants of preferences for residential facades. Environ Behav. 1999; 31: 723-51. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139169921972326

Tucker C, Ostwald MJ, Chalup SK. A method for the visual analysis of streetscape character using digital image processing. 38th Annual Conference of the Architectural Science Association ANZAScA and the International Building Performance Simulation Association, 2004; 134-40.

Sun L, Yamasaki T, Aizawa K. Relationship between visual complexity and aesthetics: application to beauty prediction of photos. In: Agapito L, Bronstein M, Rother C, Eds. Computer Vision - ECCV 2014 Workshops. vol. 8925, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16178-5_2

Berlyne DE. Novelty, complexity, and hedonic value. Percept Psychophys. 1970; 8: 279-86. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212593

Cavalcante A, Mansouri A, Kacha L, Barros AK, Takeuchi Y, Matsumoto N, et al. Measuring streetscape complexity based on the statistics of local contrast and spatial frequency. PLoS One. 2014; 9(2): e87097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087097

Kaplan S, Kaplan R, Wendt JS. Rated preference and complexity for natural and urban visual material. Percept Psychophys. 1972; 12: 354-6. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03207221

Forsythe A. Visual Complexity: Is That All There Is? International Conference on Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics, Springer; 2009, p. 158-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02728-4_17

Cassarino M, Setti A. Complexity as key to designing cognitive-friendly environments for older people. Front Psychol. 2016; 7: 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01329

Purciel M, Neckerman KM, Lovasi GS, Quinn JW, Weiss C, Bader MDM, et al. Creating and validating GIS measures of urban design for health research. J Environ Psychol. 2009; 29: 457-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.03.004

Venturi R, Stierli M, Brownlee DB. Complexity and contradiction in architecture. vol. 1. The Museum of Modern Art; 1977.

Oliva A, Mack ML, Shrestha M, Peeper A. Identifying the perceptual dimensions of visual complexity of scenes. Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 2004; 26: 1041-6.

Berlyne DE. Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts; 1971.

Hussein D, Armstrong P. Building an arithmetic model to assess visual consistency in townscape. Civ Environ Struct Constr Archit Eng. 2016; 10: 457-64.

Brown G, Gifford R. Architects predict lay evaluations of large contemporary buildings: whose conceptual properties? J Environ Psychol. 2001: 21: 93-9. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2000.0176

Kacha L, Matsumoto N, Mansouri A. Electrophysiological evaluation of perceived complexity in streetscapes. J Asian Archit Build Eng. 2015; 14: 585-92. https://doi.org/10.3130/jaabe.14.585

Salingaros NA. Life and complexity in architecture from a thermodynamic analogy. Phys Essays. 1997; 10: 165-73. https://doi.org/10.4006/1.3028694

Klinger A, Salingaros NA. A pattern measure. Environ Plann B Plann Des. 2000; 27: 537-47. https://doi.org/10.1068/b2676

Krampen M. Meaning in the urban environment. Routledge; 2013. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203717226

Bovill C. Fractal geometry in architecture and design. Boston, MA: Birkhäuser; 1996. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0843-3

Mansouri A, Matsumoto N. Comparative study of complexity in streetscape composition. The World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology Conference, Paris: 2009.

Ahmed M. Entropy, emergence and cognitive patterns of complexity in the visual composition of streetscapes in Algeria and Japan (Thesis). Japan: Nagoya Institute of Technology; March 2011.

Junwei H. The visual quantitative analysis and empirical research of commercial pedestrian streetscape. J Theor Appl Inf Technol. 2013; 50: 76-83.

Zhang D. MATLAB digital image processing China machine press. Beiwanzhuang Avenue. 2009; 22: 173-85.

Zhang Y. A course on computer vision 2011: 96-114.

Act EP. Environmental planning and assessment act. Interpretation. 1979.

Stamps AEIII. Meta-analysis. In: Bechtel RB, Churchman A, Eds. Handbook of environmental psychology. John Wiley & Sons; 2002; pp. 222-32.

Stamps AEIII. Preliminary findings regarding effects of photographic and stimulus variables on preferences for environmental scenes. Percept Mot Skills. 1990; 71: 231-4. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1990.71.1.231

Stamps AEIII. Use of photographs to simulate environments: A meta-analysis. Percept Mot Skills. 1990; 71: 907-13. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1990.71.3.907

Stamps AEIII. Simulation effects on environmental preference. J Environ Manage. 1993; 38: 115-32. https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1993.1033

Stamps AEIII. Validating contextual urban design photoprotocols: replication and generalization from single residences to block faces. Environ Plann B Plann Des 1993; 20: 693-707. https://doi.org/10.1068/b200693

Zhu J. Information and entropy. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics 1995; 21: 84-90.

Yan D, Lingfu K, Liufeng W. A computational model of visual attention based on visual entropy. Acta Optica Sinica. 2009; 29. https://doi.org/10.3788/AOS20092909.2511

Tian Z, Zhou Y. The certification of the fundamental properties of information entropy. Journal of Inner Mongolia Normal University 2002; 31: 347-50.

DeVellis RF. Scale development: theory and applications. Contemp Sociol. 2016; 21(6): 876-7. https://doi.org/10.2307/2075704

Pallant J. SPSS survival manual: A step-by-step guide to data analysis with SPSS. New York: McGrath Hill; 2007.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.