Content uploaded by Davide Lombardi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Davide Lombardi on Jul 17, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
BLOCKCHAIN GRAMMARS - DESIGNING WITH DAOS
The blockchain as a design platform for shape grammarists’ decentralised
collaboration
THEODOROS DOUNAS1and DAVIDE LOMBARDI2
1Robert Gordon University
1t.dounas@rgu.ac.uk
2Xi’an Jiaotong Liverpool University
2davide.lombardi@xjtlu.edu.cn
Abstract. This paper presents an application of Decentralised
Autonomous Organisation (DAO) in the field of design and AEC
industry. The model is applied in the realm of shape grammar proposing
the possibility of allowing multiple grammarists to collaborate in the
definition of a new grammar within a Blockchain environment that acts
as a distributed ledger. DAOs systems and Blockchain are introduced
as well as shape grammar and its fundamental rules. The collaborative
nature of a DAO with the inner logic of shape grammar, which bases
its principle and rules in multiple variations and combinations of simple
initial shapes, brings to the problem of recording and validating changes
and improvements in the design chain. For this reason, a voting system
to govern the process is introduced, based on both quantitative values,
i.e. number of votes, and qualitative power, i.e. the reputation of who
votes, applying a factor that scales the vote according to the expertise
of the voter. An example is provided showing a possible scenario in a
design environment along with validation criteria, and predicting future
stages applied in an always more BIM-oriented practice.
Keywords. Decentralised Autonomous Organisation; Shape
Grammar; Intelligent organisms; Distributed Ledger; Blockchain; .
1. Introduction
1.1. MOTIVATION.
The AEC industry remains a conservative, change-resistant, and risk-averse
industry compared to other industrialised industries that have incorporated a
plethora of digital tools in their operation. In particular Architects see themselves
as authors of artistic works, or at least that myth is perpetuated through marketing,
social media activities but also within schools of Architecture. Modern and
contemporary practices are based on the effort of collectives of experts working
together, even from different continents, from the early design stages till the
construction of the design proposal. CAD and BIM files are shared and updated
Intelligent & Informed, Proceedings of the 24th International Conference of the Association for
Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia (CAADRIA) 2019, Volume 2, 293-302. © 2019
and published by the Association for Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia (CAADRIA),
Hong Kong.
294 T. DOUNAS AND D. LOMBARDI
constantly with the introduction of solutions addressing all the possible issues that
a building can face. This new working style that killed the previous concept
of the architect as the sole genius who supervises the entire process brought
the problem of dealing with the authorship and the responsibility of who takes
decisions and makes changes in the project. In team collaboration the model that
has been identified as dominant in the past two decades is the BIM, a centralised
Building Information Model shared by all where each discipline shares and inputs
their own information. However, the manner in which this takes place has not
been investigated extensively. Is the model orchestrated by a single authority?
Are the disciplines and their experts deciding according to their own interests or
for the interests of their clients? What kind of mechanisms are there to ensure
the Building Information model and the architectural study are developed in a
competent, transparent, complete and collaborative manner?
A such the present paper presents a radical approach to collaboration and
collective authorship by proposing a decentralised model of decision making, by
running a shape grammar on a smart contract and digital ledger mechanism. Due
to the constraints of the length of paper at present we present the working model,
leaving testing and validation in a further paper. Still, the present paper describes
in detail the experimental and implementation set up and describes validation
criteria.
2. Context and frameworks: Blockchain(s) in the built environment
A Blockchain is a digital Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) that records
transactions, encrypting the difference between each transaction in a block of
information and embedding the cryptographic (#) hash into the next block,
forming a chain of blocks with encrypted hashes, hence the term Blockchain.
Common applications for Blockchains are cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and
Ethereum. Li et al [Li 2018] describe an extensive technical, political and social
framework for the application of Blockchain technologies in the construction
sector. Belle [Belle 2018] also describes organisational models of Blockchain
in the built environment and the impact they will have in whole countries
such as China. Earlier work by the authors have already described a technical
implementation framework of connecting Computer Aided Design applications
with the Blockchain [Dounas, Lombardi 2018]. Within the same publication, we
describe the four levels of integration that are possible between a Blockchain and
a CAD system.
3. Background
Distributed ledger technologies and specifically Blockchain are distributed
databases. They have a unique way of establishing consensus on which operation
& transaction on a network is true and which one is not when comparing distributed
sets of data. Compared with querying a central database directly, a Blockchain is
distributed in various computer nodes over the network. Due to the distributed
nature of the database, computational mechanisms had to be developed that would
synchronise all nodes of the database with a single version of the truth. The main
BLOCKCHAIN GRAMMARS - DESIGNING WITH DAOS 295
mechanisms with which nodes establish the truth between them are proof of work
and proof of stake. Both of the mechanisms create a new block on the Blockchain,
validating one operation.
In mechanisms where proof of work is employed, nodes on the network
compete between them to solve a complex mathematical equation that proves the
creation of a new block, thus validating an operation. As such to have any kind of
monetary reward for validating a block, a node not only needs to be fast but also
first with the correct result of the computation. In proof of stake the nodes and the
transaction/operation use other parameters that are designed to build trust. These
are the duration of how long a node has participated in the network and the amount
of transactions that one has verified. As such one would trust their validation of a
new block since a trustworthy node would hold a vast number of validated blocks
within their record. Ethereum and Bitcoin currently use proof of work, thus having
a geometrically increasing computational problem to solve, while Ethereum has
designed a system to transition to proof of stake mechanism, once the proof of
work mechanism becomes energy and computationally expensive.
Ethereum and its network have introduced the concept of the smart contract
as a use for Blockchains beyond currencies. Within this, a transaction does
not have to only be monetary but simply the execution of a computer code
when certain conditions are met. In the Ethereum network one can then build
smart agencies by using smart contracts, i.e. organisations that are governed and
their behaviour determined by smart contracts. Smart agencies, given enough
of participants and complexities can be determined to be thus Decentralised
Autonomous Organisations. In a DAO there is no board of directors or governors
and all decisions are taken and operated on the infrastructure of networks similar
to a decentralised and distributed one.
4. Methodology
We have used a combination of qualitative research and experimentation, with
the explicit goal of building a working prototype. Within the constraints of the
paper we describe the algebraic theoretical model for the DAO grammars, and the
process for creating the Blockchain infrastructure on the Ethereum network.
5. Implementation
5.1. DECENTRALISED AUTONOMOUS ORGANISATIONS D.A.O
All infrastructure projects in the area of DAOs (daostack.io, buckfeed.cc) describe
in their whitepapers the imbalance of growth and attention that takes place in
a growing organisation. Within this framework the internet is essentially an
infrastructure that allows peer-to-peer exchange of information. In parallel, a
Blockchain network can be conceptualised as a peer-to peer infrastructure for
value, as Blockchain solves the trust problem and the ownership of digital assets in
online transactions. Essentially, as a facsimile a DAO resembles more an organism
rather than an artificial organisation.
296 T. DOUNAS AND D. LOMBARDI
5.2. DAOSTACK.IO
The DAO as presented by DAO Stack is a new organisation that operates by smart
contracts on a Blockchain, i.e. decisions are taken and activated by the operation
of smart contracts. DAOstack at the time is using the Ethereum infrastructure,
even though there is a discussion on expanding the platform to other Blockchains
as well, as an ultra-organisation that operates across various distributed ledgers.
5.3. GOVERNANCE MECHANISM
For each decision taken in an organisation one can set up smart contracts that
execute code once an event takes place, but also, they can use smart contracts to
govern the organisation’s decision in a democratic manner. Instead of assigning
one vote to each agent, the DAO uses ‘Gen tockens ’and each agent’s reputation
in the organisation. Each agent in the DAO has a set number of GEN tokens
that they can vote with but also a set amount of reputation/influence that they can
stake in a vote. As such when a vote takes place, Gen tokens act as votes but
reputation/influence of the voting agents come into play.
5.4. TOPOLOGY OF AGENTS
There two manners in which agents within a DAO can be topologically distributed,
either in Assembly mode, which equates more or less with a central organisation
model or in a Fractal Federal governance where each agent has their own
sub-assembly mode, potentially in a recurring scale, with each subassembly having
N subassemblies.
Figure 1. Assembly (left) vs Fractal mode of organisation (right).
Within a decentralised autonomous organisation, one can of course, as in any
organisation have competition between the agents that participate. If structured
with current economic models, then the non-cooperative Nash equilibrium applies
BLOCKCHAIN GRAMMARS - DESIGNING WITH DAOS 297
in their competition, i.e. some of the agents will behave in a competitive manner
to strike a local win for them, but not one for the whole organisation. This
forms the key question on how a DAO will steer towards good decision making,
bottom-up avoiding both the pitfall of a non-cooperative Nash equilibrium, and
also be resilient, i.e. allow sharing of voting power, instead of concentrating voting
power to the agents with the most tokens. The first structural idea for DAOs is then
the incentivising and reward of open shareable resources [DAOstack whitepaper]
that lead to more growth and more openness, replacing essentially organisation
that operate within non-cooperative Nash equilibriums.
Returning to the voting power with GEN tokens and reputation: within
DAOstack one can transfer GEN tokens, but one cannot transfer reputation.
The DAO white paper mentions: “Reputation is used here interchangeably with
influence power, and can form the basis for a meritocratic governance system,
where those who are most appreciated - due to their past contributions - have the
most influence.” One way to award reputation is through proposals. For example,
within a shape grammar making organisation there could be a proposal to award
100 SG tokens to Shape Grammarist George Stiny for his contribution to the
field. Reputation can also be algorithmically computed by considering research
publications on shape grammars, citations and other research impact indexes. The
difference here is that a shape grammarist would translate their research impact
and influence H-Index and/or C-Index into decision making power within a larger
organisation, say one consisting of all shape grammarists in the world.
Essentially by using the GEN tokens and the reputation system, DAOstack
builds a system where voting of an elect minority aligns with the interests of the
grander majority, and ensures that the system is transparent, resilient -since even
the transfer of all gen tokens to one agent will not dissuade reputation voting power
but also reputation guarantees that certain propositions will always receive the
attention of the community, and scalable, since through the Ethereum Blockchain
anyone can participate in it. The situation where a minority makes an ’edge’
decision’, as long as it is in line with the consensus, is called by DAOstack :
’Holographic Consensus’ as a reference to holograms where each sliver of the three
dimensional image reflects and contains the information for the whole picture.
5.5. SHAPE GRAMMARS AND SHAPE GRAMMARISTS
A shape grammar consists of a set of initial shapes S1, and a set of rules R1 that
when chosen and applied to the set S1 they produce other shapes on the right-hand
side of the rule. It also includes a shape rule K that is the final shape rule, that once
activated, will halt computation. In essence it is a productive system, a generative
system for design.
A U22 Shape Grammar in algebraic format
S1= a1, b2, c3, …. ,xn / where the shapes are of i=2 dimensions
R1=r1, r2, r3, …., rn / where the rules are of j=2 dimensions
In most of the shape grammar literature authorship remains with the all-seeing
shape grammarist that retains authority and decision making in all aspects of the
grammar. In certain cases, the grammarist attempts to emulate a known style, and
298 T. DOUNAS AND D. LOMBARDI
within that one finds computational innovation, where the grammar produces more,
previously not existing examples of the styles, but still within the same language
[Duarte 2005]. Problems that are relevant to architectural design and authorship
are the selection of the rules, the ad-hoc changing of the rules in the middle of
the application of the grammar, shape recognition and emergence, and much more
importantly shape ambiguity, that runs counter to the initial idea of a specific set of
shapes S1 that the grammarists begins designing with. Figure 2 briefly describes
the example grammar.
Figure 2. Shape grammar application and termination.
Within this application of the grammar there are N possibilities for changing
the rules, in the in between steps. We can define a set Gx of Shape Grammarists
that participate in a DAO with the common goal to create an apartment grammar
that creates the most variations with the most compact apartment layouts possible,
by using a proportion of the global integration number (where integration is
defined as the distance from a space of origin to all other spaces in the system,
run for each space in the system, hence its globalism) to the floor area. The
lowest fraction indicates a more compact apartment. To ensure liveable spaces,
minimum sizes for the shapes in set S1 can be used, to ensure that the apartment
plans produced are both mathematically compact but also provide a minimum of
architectural quality. What are the possibilities that these shape grammarists have
for collaboration over the internet with a record of all steps taken? How does one
negotiate which of the rules is selected for application? Algebraically we have still
the S1, R1 sets with the set of Gx of shape grammarists added, plus the validation
BLOCKCHAIN GRAMMARS - DESIGNING WITH DAOS 299
criteria for the apartment:
S1, R1, Gx, and V= Global Integration /
Floor Area, with S1 constraint with minimum dimensions
Lets suppose that within the set Gx there are 5 experienced shape grammarists,
Duarte, Stiny, Knight, Economou, Stuffs and 883 junior shape grammarists with
the intention of collaboratively creating the apartment grammar that creates the
most variations with the most compact apartment possible? While one needs the
experienced shape grammarists F,E,D, K, S to guide the Set Gx one also needs
innovative ideas from all of the constituents of the set. How does one address the
whole group without creating the need to create a lot of traffic, i.e 888 emails for
each step?
Gx: F,E,D,K,S…,., G883
5.6. COMBINING BLOCKCHAIN WITH SHAPE GRAMMARS: OPERATING
MODEL
Thus we propose the creation of a Blockchain grammar, the first shape grammar
engine run on the DAO. We define the Blockchain grammar as the human-machine
cooperation on the DAO stack, i.e. the collaboration between shape grammarists
using the smart contracts that constitute the computation engine of the Blockchain
grammar. The Blockchain grammar has these functionalities: Tokens distribution,
where tokens get distributed to each of the 888 shape grammarists, Reputation
Assignment, which assigns reputation according to research experience and
impact, collective data curation, which is the creation and application of the
shape grammar, and governance upgrade, where the mechanisms with which
the Blockchain Grammar operates change and get upgraded to the next version.
Within the reputation assignment contingent, there is a halftime calculator
parameter of which can be decided by the Blockchain grammar itself. Indicatively
we mention that the reputation a person has will dissipate over time if the academic
does not publish, or their work does not get a citation or other reference over a
specified amount of time. We propose that the initial set of shape grammarists
all have the same amount of tokens, however their reputation score should be
determined by the number of papers they have authored within the shape grammar
paradigm, and their H-Index as calculated for their papers in the shape grammar
paradigm. The formulae for initial token and reputation distribution are given
below [Stallings], 1 Shape grammarist: T tokens plus N (number of papers) +
H-Index (as calculated for their papers in the shape grammar paradigm) + C-Index
(as calculated for their papers in the shape grammar paradigm). We thus can define
the voting power of each member as
Vt=T+N+Hi+Ci
5.7. RUNNING A GRAMMAR AS A DAPP
The set Gx of 888 shape grammarists belong to the Blockchain Grammar, which
runs the creation of the prototype shape grammar as a dAPP on ‘Alchemy’,
300 T. DOUNAS AND D. LOMBARDI
DAOstack’s layer for DAOs that runs in sequence on the Ethereum network. Table
1
Table 1. DAOstack layers: ARC and Alchemy.
6. The DAO Grammars operations Model
At each step, each shape grammarist, whether experienced or not, reads the state of
the grammar, and has the right to propose the next rule(s) to be applied. Suppose
that 30 proposals are submitted to the DAO. Then each of the grammarists has the
potential to vote which of these rule set will be applied next, and then votes using
GEN and reputation. The expectation is that the 5 senior grammarists will have
their vote carry more reputation, due to their experience. At the same time though
one can see that innovative solutions that have results might get voted through, as
any of the 888 members will be able to propose efficient solutions. An interesting
scenario of course is the voting of a proposal by a minority, say the grammarists K,
S. Mathematically if all GEN tokens are the same for each of the 888 grammarists
a proposal with the backing of only two members should not pass. However if
the reputation of K & S weights above the other 886 members of the DAO the
proposal shall pass, and given their potential high reputation and track record, it
will have a good impact on the application of the grammar.
Figure 3. Voting Process inside the Blockchain Grammar.
BLOCKCHAIN GRAMMARS - DESIGNING WITH DAOS 301
6.1. TURING COMPLETE: SHAPE GRAMMARS AND SMART CONTRACTS
Within the Blockchain Grammar running on DAOstack a smart contract calculates
how compact an apartment is and awards GEN and reputation to the shape
grammarists that proposed the rule that produced it, but also proportionally to
the shape grammarists that voted for the rule. As such internally the DAO
grammar can work algebraically: each shape grammar rule is encapsulated into the
algorithm of a smart contract and as such when the rule is about to be applied the
smart contract get applied. This, of course, raises the question of shape recognition
within the shape grammar. Since we do not yet have a reliable shape recognition
engine, the DAO delegates this task to the human part of the organization, a
shape grammarist who will encode the new shape into a new parameter in a smart
contract.
7. Discussion
We have presented a model for massively scaled collaboration on shape grammars,
presenting a mechanism that harnesses DAOs, Decentralised Autonomous
Organisations on the Ethereum Blockchain. We believe that the mechanism we
describe is viable as a wider collaboration feature of the AEC industry. Our
mechanism has a collaborative content curation mechanism, distributes rights and
decision-making power according to expertise, and due to the immutable nature of
the blockchain accounts for responsibility of decisions on the organisation level.
In particular the reputation allocation mechanism can lead into increasing the
competitiveness of smaller, efficient AEC firms in a supply chain that might lack
the capital to complete but they can compensate by biding via reputation in a public
procurement process. It can lead for examples in more transparent and efficient
collaboration in situations where the yet-undefined BIM level 3 is employed, or
in situations where architects would like to harness the wisdom of non-experts
in participatory design projects, but do not have the resources to collect every
stakeholder’s opinion.
Both Shape Grammars and Solidity, the Ethereum language are Turing
complete, which means that they can simulate any other Turing machine. In our
case we have outlined the development of a shape grammar, with the addition
of collective decision making as a model of organisation and content curation,
within a smart agency, the DAOstack, which runs on smart contracts on the
Ethereum Blockchain. The governing smart contract of the DAO runs essentially
on ARC & Alchemy, the two libraries that make DAOstack possible. The
possibility of running a collaborative shape grammar process on a ‘Universal
computer’ such as the Ethereum blockchain claims to be, creates in certain aspects
a contrast in the possible blockchain applications in the built environment. On
one hand the Blockchain grammar will allow for the lifting of restrictions that
shape grammars might have faced in the past in terms of Turing-completeness,
where a human was able to compute with them in a much more thoughtful manner
compared to a machine. At the same time for Blockchain grammar presents as a
cybernetic intelligent organism, where there is a reciprocal reliance of humans and
computing machines to execute the design. In contrast thought, the lack of absolute
302 T. DOUNAS AND D. LOMBARDI
predictability of Turing-complete systems might wreck havoc in other aspects of
the AEC industry with a particular reliance in reliability and predictability, for
example supply chains. Still that would be an aspect to consider in our future
work.
8. Further work
The mechanism we have developed will need to be tested with a vast amount of
shape grammarists so that we can validate its responsiveness, transparency and
computational efficiency as an operating model. Please contact us via email or
fill in this form [https:goo.gl/forms/6eEbzcO5tzASEuVL2] to participate in the
Blockchain grammar project.
References
“Backfeed Technical summary” : 2018. Available from <http://backfeed.cc/assets/docs/Techni
calSummary.pdf> (accessed 1st December 2018).
“DAOstack whitepaper” : 2018. Available from <https://daostack.io/wp/DAOstack-White-Pap
er-en.pdf> (accessed 1st December 2018).
Belle, I.: 2017, Blockchain framework The architecture, engineering and construction industry
and Blockchain technology, Conference: DADA 2017 International Conference on Digital
Architecture, Nanjing, China.
Chase, S. and Ahmad, S.: 2005, Grammar Transformations�: Using Composite Grammars to
Understand Hybridity in Design, CAAD Futures 2005, Vienna, Austria, 89-98.
Dhillon, V., Metcalf, D. and Hooper, M.: 2017, Blockchain enabled applications, Apress,
Orlando, Florida, USA.
Dounas, T.: 2013, Some notes on the incompleteness theorem and shape grammars,
Communications in Computer and Information Science,369, 368-375.
Dounas, T. and Lombardi, D.: 2018, A CAD-Blockchain Integration Strategy for Distributed
Validated Digital Design - Connecting the Blockchain, eCAADe2018, Lodz, Polland.
Duarte, J.: 2005, Towards the Mass Customization of Housing: The Grammar of Siza’s Houses
at Malagueira, Environment and Planning B:Planning and Design,32, 347-80.
Economou, A.: 2001, Four Algebraic Structures in Design, ACADIA 2001, 192-201.
Grasl, T.: 2012, Transformational Palladians, Environment and Planning B:Planning and
Design,39, 83-95.
Knight, T.: 2003, Computing with emergence, Environment and Planning B:Planning and
Design,30, 125-155.
Knight, T.: 2003a, Computing with Ambiguity, Environment and Planning B:Planning and
Design,30, 165-180.
Li, J., Greenwood, D. and Kassem, M.: 2018, Blockchain in the Construction Sector: A
Socio-technical Systems Framework for the Construction Industry, Advances in Informatics
and Computing in Civil and Construction Engineering,Proceedings of the 35th CIB W78
2018 Conference: IT in Design, Construction, and Management, 51-57.
Stallings, J. e.t. a.l.: 2013, Determining scientific impact using a collaboration index,
Proceedings of the National academy of Science of the United States of America,110(24),
9680-9685.
Stiny, G. and March, L.: 1981, Design Machines, Environment and Planning B:Planning and
Design,8, 245-55.
Wortmann, T. and Stuffs, R.: 2018, Algorithmic complexity of shape grammar implementation,
Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing,32, special
issue 2, 138-146.
