Prospects of Intuitive Interaction Modeling in Automated Shape Generation

1. Hurtienne, J., Klöckner, K., Diefenbach, S., Nass, C., Maier, A. Designing with image schemas: resolving the tension between innovation, inclusion and intuitive use. Interacting with Computers, vol. 27, no. 3, 2015, pp. 235–255. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwu04910.1093/iwc/iwu049 Search in Google Scholar

2. O’Brien, M., Rogers, W., Fisk, A. Developing an Organizational Model for Intuitive Design. Technical report HFA-TR-1001. Atlanta, GA: Georgia Institute of Technology, 2010. 133 p. Search in Google Scholar

3. Crilly, N., Maier, A. M., Clarkson, P. J. Representing artefacts as media: Modelling the relationship between designer intent and consumer experience. International Journal of Design, vol. 2, no. 3, 2008, pp. 15–27. Search in Google Scholar

4. Blackler, A., Hurtienne, J. Towards a unified view of intuitive interaction: definitions, models and tools across the world. MMI Interaktiv, vol. 13, 2007, pp. 36–54. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/19116/ Search in Google Scholar

5. Muehlbauer, M., Burry, J., Song, A. Automated shape design by grammatical evolution. International Conference on Evolutionary and Biologically Inspired Music and Art, EvoMUSART 2017: Computational Intelligence in Music, Sound, Art and Design, 2017, pp. 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55750-2_1510.1007/978-3-319-55750-2_15 Search in Google Scholar

6. Liu, K., Zeng, X., Wang, J., Tao, X., Xu, J., Jiang, X., Ren, J., Kamalha, E., Agrawal, T. K., Bruniaux, P. Parametric design of garment flat based on body dimension. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, vol. 65, 2018, pp. 46–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2018.01.01310.1016/j.ergon.2018.01.013 Search in Google Scholar

7. Alcaide-Marzal, J., Diego-Mas, J.A., Acosta-Zazueta, G. A 3D shape generative method for aesthetic product design. Design Studies, vol. 66, 2020, pp. 144–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.11.00310.1016/j.destud.2019.11.003 Search in Google Scholar

8. Preiser, W. F. E., Smith, K. H. Universal design at the urban scale. In W. F. E. Preiser and K. H. Smith eds., Universal Design Handbook, New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2010, pp. 20.1–20.8. Search in Google Scholar

9. Cartiere, C., Willis, S. The Practice of Public Art. London: Routledge, 2008. 288 p.10.4324/9780203926673 Search in Google Scholar

10. Humphries, T. Considering Intuition in the Context of Design, and of Psychology. WIRAD’s 2nd Emerging Researchers Symposium May 2012, Cardiff School of Art and Design, Cardiff Metropolitan University, Wales, 2012. 10 p. Search in Google Scholar

11. Hodgkinson, G., Langan-Fox, J., Sadler-Smith, E. Intuition: A fundamental bridging construct in the behavioural sciences. British Journal of Psychology, vol. 99, no. 1, 2008, pp. 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712607X21666610.1348/000712607X216666 Search in Google Scholar

12. Mortensen, D. How to Create an Intuitive Design, 2017 [online]. The interaction Design Foundation [cited 07.07.2021]. https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/how-to-create-an-intuitive-design. Search in Google Scholar

13. Harte, R., Glynn, L., Rodríguez-Molinero, A., Baker, P. M., Scharf, T., Quinlan, L. R., ÓLaighin, G. A Human-Centered Design Methodology to Enhance the Usability, Human Factors, and User Experience of Connected Health Systems: A Three-Phase Methodology. JMIR Human Factors, vol. 4, no. 1, 2017, pp. E8. https://doi.org/10.2196/humanfactors.544310.2196/humanfactors.5443 Search in Google Scholar

14. Klein, G. Sources of power: How people make decisions. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998. 352 p. Search in Google Scholar

15. Le Doux, J. E. The emotional brain: The mysterious underpinnings of emotional life. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996. 384 p. Search in Google Scholar

16. Damasio, A. R. The feeling of what happens: Body, emotion and the making of consciousness. London: Vintage, 1999. 400 p. Search in Google Scholar

17. Baker, C. L., Saxe, R., Tenenbaum, J. B. Action understanding as inverse planning. Cognition, vol. 113, no. 3, 2009, pp. 329–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.07.00510.1016/j.cognition.2009.07.005 Search in Google Scholar

18. Wellman, H. M. The Child’s Theory of Mind. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1992. 358 p. Search in Google Scholar

19. Glenberg, A., Havas, D., Becker, R. Rinck, M. Grounding Language in Bodily States: The Case for Emotion. In D. Pecher and R. A. Zwaan eds., Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking, Cambridge: Cambridge University press, 2010, pp. 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511499968.00610.1017/CBO9780511499968.006 Search in Google Scholar

20. Gibson, J. J. The perception of the visual world. Cambridge: The Riverside press, 1950. Search in Google Scholar

21. Chalmers, D. The Conscious Mind. In Search of a Fundamental Theory. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996. 433 p. Search in Google Scholar

22. Levine, J. Materialism and Qualia: the Explanatory Gap. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, vol. 64, 1983, pp. 354–361.10.1111/j.1468-0114.1983.tb00207.x Search in Google Scholar

23. Metzinger, T. Being No One. The Self-Model Theory of Subjectivity. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2003. 714 p.10.7551/mitpress/1551.001.0001 Search in Google Scholar

24. Chatterjee, A. The neuropsychology of visual artists. Neuropsychologia, vol. 42, no. 11, 2004, pp. 1568-1583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2004.03.01110.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2004.03.011 Search in Google Scholar

25. Silver, D., Hubert, T., Schrittwieser, J., Antonoglou, I., Lai, M., Guez, A., Lanctot, M., Sifre, L., Kumaran, D., Graepel, T., Lillicrap, T. Mastering chess and shogi by self-play with a general reinforcement learning algorithm, 2017 [online]. Cornell University [cited 07.07.2021]. https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.01815 Search in Google Scholar

26. Metzinger, T. The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind and the Myth of the Self. New York: Basic Books, 2009. 291 p. Search in Google Scholar

27. Lacoff, G., Johnson, M. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980. 333 p. Search in Google Scholar

28. Ehrsson, H. H. The experimental induction of out-of-body experiences. Science, vol. 317, no. 5841, 2007, pp.1048–1048. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.114217510.1126/science.1142175 Search in Google Scholar

29. Gerstenberg, T., Tenenbaum, J. Intuitive Theories. In M. R. Waldman ed., The Oxford Handbook of Causal Reasoning, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017, pp. 515–548. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199399550.013.2810.1093/oxfordhb/9780199399550.013.28 Search in Google Scholar

30. Battaglia, P. W., Hamrick, J. B., Tenenbaum, J. B. Simulation as an engine of physical scene understanding. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 110, no. 45, 2013, pp. 18327–18332. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.130657211010.1073/pnas.1306572110 Search in Google Scholar

31. Žukas, J. Harmonisation of an aesthetic shape from the perspective of intuitive cognition. Dissertation, Vilnius tech, 2021. https://doi.org/10.20334/2021-031-M10.20334/2021-031-M Search in Google Scholar

32. Harman, G. On the Horror of Phenomenology: Lovecraft and Husserl. In R. Mackay ed., Collapse IV: Philosophical research and development, 2008, pp. 333–364. Search in Google Scholar

33. Silver, D., Schrittwieser, J., Simonyan, K., Antonoglou, I., Huang, A., Guez, A., Hubert, T., Baker, L., Lai, M., Bolton, A., Chen, Y. Mastering the game of go without human knowledge. Nature, vol. 550, 2017, pp. 354–359. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature2427010.1038/nature24270 Search in Google Scholar

34. McGinn, C. Basic Structures of Reality: Essays in Meta-Physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. 256 p. Search in Google Scholar

35. Shepherd, S. Perception: Exploring Cognition and Consciousness Through Visual Art. Mahurin Honors College Capstone Experience / Thesis Projects, paper 819, 2019 [cited 07.07.2021]. https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses/819 Search in Google Scholar

36. Žukas, J. Experimental harmonization of shape intuitive interaction. Architecture and Urban Planning, vol. 16, no. 1, 2020, pp. 72–77. https://doi.org/10.2478/aup-2020-001110.2478/aup-2020-0011 Search in Google Scholar

37. Dotson, J. P., Beltramo, M. A., Feit, E. M., Smith, R. C. Modeling the Effect of Images on Product Choices, 2019. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.228257010.2139/ssrn.2282570 Search in Google Scholar

38. Kang, N., Ren, Y. Feinberg, F.M., Papalambros, P. Form+Function: Optimizing Aesthetic Product Design via Adaptive, Geometrized Preference Elicitation. Michigan: University of Michigan, 2016. 71 p. Search in Google Scholar

39. Kreuzbauer, R., Malter, A. J. Embodied cognition and new product design: Changing product form to influence brand categorization. Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol. 22, no. 2, 2005, pp. 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0737-6782.2005.00112.x10.1111/j.0737-6782.2005.00112.x Search in Google Scholar

40. Ranscombe, C., Hicks, B., Mullineux, G., Singh, B. Visually decomposing vehicle images: Exploring the influence of different aesthetic features on consumer perception of brand. Design Studies, vol. 33, no. 4, 2012, pp. 319–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.06.00610.1016/j.destud.2011.06.006 Search in Google Scholar

41. Barsalou, L. W. Perceptual Symbol Systems. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, vol. 22, no. 4, 1999, pp. 577–609. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X9900214910.1017/S0140525X99002149 Search in Google Scholar

42. Frensch, P. A., Schwarzer, R. Cognition and Neuropsychology: International Perspectives on Psychological Science (Vol. 1). London: Psychology Press, 2010. 304 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/978020384582010.4324/9780203845820 Search in Google Scholar