METHODOLOGICAL REGIMES FOR THE APPLICATION OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND IMMERSIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN CULTUREAND CONTEXT-SENSITIVE RESEARCH ON THE ARCHITECTURAL ENVIRONMENT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/naoma-bulletin-2026-6-4Keywords:
artificial intelligence, immersive technologies, architectural environment, methodological regime, cultural context, architectural research, professional interpre tationAbstract
The aim of the study is to provide a theoretical foundation for and develop a structured typology of methodological regimes for the application of artificial intelligence and immersive technologies in culture- and context-sensitive research on the architectural environment. The research methods comprise logical argumentation, purposive conceptual synthesis, and comparative analysis of scholarly and institutional sources addressing architectural research methodology, digital heritage, geospatial analysis, urban digital twins, participatory practices, and immersive studies of spatial perception. The sources were compared according to the dominant research question, type of source material, research strategies, functions of digital technologies, procedures of professional interpretation, form of the result, and limits of its substantiation. Research Results. The results of the study provide a conceptual foundation for the methodological regime as an intermediate-level configuration situated between general architectural methodology and specific research procedures. Four basic regimes were identified: historical-interpretative, spatial-analytical, sociocultural-communicative, and simulation-perceptual. A level for integrating and consolidating heterogeneous results was proposed to identify mutual confirmation, complementarity, or contradiction among different types of evidence. The study establishes that identical functions of artificial intelligence and immersive technologies may acquire different methodological and evidentiary statuses depending on the research question, source materials, and verification procedure. Conclusions. The proposed typology shifts the analysis of digital technologies from the description of tools towards the identification of ways in which architectural knowledge is produced. It can be used to structure research, select appropriate procedures, distinguish between types of evidence, and document the limits of substantiated conclusions. At the same time, determining cultural significance, priorities, and acceptable compromises remains within the domain of professional architect ural judgement.
References
Castro Pena M. L., Carballal A., Rodríguez-Fernández N., Santos I., Romero J. Artificial intelligence applied to conceptual design: A review of its use in architecture.A utomation in Construction. 2021. Vol. 124. Article 103550. DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103550
Bekele M. K., Pierdicca R., Frontoni E., Malinverni E. S., Gain J. A survey of augmented, virtual, and mixed reality for cultural heritage. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage. 2018. Vol. 11, No. 2. Article 7. P. 1–36. DOI: 10.1145/3145534
Jiang L., Li J., Wider W., Tanucan J. C. M., Lobo J., Fauzi M. A., Hidayat H., Zou R. A bibliometric insight into immersive technologies for cultural heritage preservation. npj Heritage Science. 2025. Vol. 13. Article 126. DOI: 10.1038/s40494-025-01704-z
Dembski F., Wössner U., Letzgus M., Ruddat M., Yamu C. Urban digital twins for smart cities and citizens: The case study of Herrenberg, Germany. Sustainability. 2020. Vol. 12, No. 6. Article 2307. DOI: 10.3390/su12062307
Kuliga S. F., Thrash T., Dalton R. C., Hölscher C. Virtual reality as an empirical research tool: Exploring user experience in a real building and a corresponding virtual model. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems. 2015.Vol. 54. P. 363–375. DOI: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2015.09.006
UNESCO. Culture|2030 Indicators. Paris : UNESCO, 2019. URL: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000371562 (дата звернення: 19.07.2026).
UNESCO, World Bank. Cities, Culture, Creativity: Leveraging Culture and Creativity for Sustainable Urban Development and Inclusive Growth. Paris : UNESCO ; Washington, DC : World Bank, 2021. DOI: 10.1596/978-92-3-100452-0
Groat L. N., Wang D. Architectural Research Methods. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ : Wiley, 2013. 468 p.
Jabareen Y. Building a conceptual framework: Philosophy, definitions, and procedure. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 2009. Vol. 8, No. 4. P. 49–62. DOI: 10.1177/160940690900800406
Shneiderman B. Human-centered artificial intelligence: Reliable, safe & trustworthy. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction. 2020. Vol. 36, No. 6. P. 495–504. DOI: 10.1080/10447318.2020.1741118
Campo-Ruiz I. Artificial intelligence may affect diversity: Architecture and cultural context reflected through ChatGPT, Midjourney, and Google Maps. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 2025. Vol. 12. Article 24. DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-03968-5
Sakai M., Sakurai A., Lu S., Olano J., Albrecht C. M., Hamann H. F., Freitag M. AI-accelerated Nazca survey nearly doubles the number of known figurative geoglyphs and sheds light on their purpose. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2024. Vol. 121, No. 40. Article e2407652121. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2407652121
Mazzetto S. A review of urban digital twins integration, challenges, and future directions in smart city development. Sustainability. 2024. Vol. 16, No. 19. Article 8337. DOI: 10.3390/su16198337
Ketzler B., Naserentin V., Latino F., Zangelidis C., Thuvander L., Logg A. Digital twins for cities: A state of the art review. Built Environment. 2020. Vol. 46, No. 4. P. 547–573. DOI: 10.2148/benv.46.4.547
Luo J., Liu P., Xu W., Zhao T., Biljecki F. A perception-powered urban digital twin to support human-centered urban planning and sustainable city development. Cities. 2025. Vol. 156. Article 105473. DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2024.105473
Moroni S. Insurmountable limitations of city-scale digital twins? On urban knowledge and planning. Computational Urban Science. 2025. Vol. 5. Article 17. DOI: 10.1007/s43762-025-00174-0
Ataman C., Tunçer B., Perrault S. Digital participation in urban design and planning: Addressing data translation challenges in urban policy- and decision-making through visualization techniques. Accelerated Design: Proceedings of the 29th International Conference of the Association for Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia (CAADRIA 2024) / eds. N. Gardner, C. M. Herr, L. Wang, H. Toshiki, S. A. Khan. Vol. 2. Singapore : CAADRIA, 2024. P. 201–210. DOI: 10.52842/conf.caadria.2024.2.201
Marshall S., Farndon D., Hudson-Smith A., Kourniotis A., Karadimitriou N. Urban design and planning participation in the digital age: Lessons from an experimental online platform. Smart Cities. 2024. Vol. 7, No. 1. P. 615–632. DOI: 10.3390/smartcities7010025
Simonofski A., Johannessen M. R., Stendal K. Extended reality for citizen participation: A conceptual framework, systematic review and research agenda. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2024. Vol. 113. Article 105692. DOI: 10.1016/j.scs.2024.105692
Crolla K., Song J., Bunica A., Sheikh A. T. Integrating extended reality in architectural design studio teaching and reviews: Implementing a participatory action research framework. Buildings. 2024. Vol. 14, No. 6. Article 1865.DOI: 10.3390/buildings14061865
Ng P., Zhu S., Li Y., van Ameijde J. Intergenerational cooperation and co-creation in public space design assisted by virtual reality environments. Architectural Intelligence. 2025. Vol. 4. Article 1. DOI: 10.1007/s44223-024-00080-1
Portman M. E., Natapov A., Fisher-Gewirtzman D. To go where no man has gone before: Virtual reality in architecture, landscape architecture and environmental planning. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems. 2015. Vol. 54. P. 376–384. DOI: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2015.05.001
Liu Y., Castronovo F., Messner J., Leicht R. Evaluating the impact of virtual reality on design review meetings. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering. 2020. Vol. 34, No. 1. Article 04019045. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE) CP.1943-5487.0000856
Zhang Y., Huang X. Integrating extended reality in architectural design education: A systematic review and case study at Southeast University, China. Buildings. 2024. Vol. 14, No. 12. Article 3954. DOI: 10.3390/buildings14123954
Parsons T. D. Virtual reality for enhanced ecological validity and experimental control in the clinical, affective and social neurosciences. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2015. Vol. 9. Article 660. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00660
