Title: The field of human building interaction for convergent research and innovation for intelligent built environments
Abstract
Human-Building Interaction (HBI) is a convergent field that represents the growing complexities of the dynamic interplay between human experience and intelligence within built environments. This paper provides core definitions, research dimensions, and an overall vision for the future of HBI as developed through consensus among 25 interdisciplinary experts in a series of facilitated workshops. Three primary areas contribute to and require attention in HBI research: humans (human experiences, performance, and well-being), buildings (building design and operations), and technologies (sensing, inference, and awareness). Three critical interdisciplinary research domains intersect these areas: control systems and decision making, trust and collaboration, and modeling and simulation. Finally, at the core, it is vital for HBI research to center on and support equity, privacy, and sustainability. Compelling research questions are posed for each primary area, research domain, and core principle. State-of-the-art methods used in HBI studies are discussed, and examples of original research are offered to illustrate opportunities for the advancement of HBI research.
Hazards and disasters arise from interactions between environmental and social processes, so interdisciplinary research is crucial in understanding and effectively managing them. Despite support and encouragement from funding agencies, universities, and journals and growing interest from researchers, interdisciplinary disaster research teams face significant obstacles, such as the difficulty of establishing effective communication and understanding across disciplines. Better understanding of interdisciplinary teamwork can also have important practical benefits for operational disaster planning and response.
Social studies of science distinguish different kinds of expertise and different modes of communication. Understanding these differences can help interdisciplinary research teams communicate more clearly and work together more effectively. The primary role of a researcher is incontributory expertise(the ability to make original contributions to a discipline); butinteractional expertisein other disciplines (the ability to understand their literature and communicate with their practitioners) can play an important role in interdisciplinary collaborations. Developing interactional expertise requires time and effort, which can be challenging for a busy researcher, and also requires a foundation of trust and communication among team members. Three distinct aspects of communication play important roles in effective interdisciplinary communication:dialects,metaphors, andarticulation. There are different ways to develop interactional expertise and effective communication, so researchers can pursue approaches that suit their circumstances. It will be important for future research on interdisciplinary disaster research to identify best practices for building trust, facilitating communication, and developing interactional expertise.
Structural DNA nanotechnology is a pioneering biotechnology that presents the opportunity to engineer DNA-based hardware that will mediate a profound interface to the nanoscale. To date, an enormous library of shaped 3D DNA nanostructures have been designed and assembled. Moreover, recent research has demonstrated DNA nanostructures that are not only static but can exhibit specific dynamic motion. DNA nanostructures have thus garnered significant research interest as a template for pursuing shape and motion-dependent nanoscale phenomena. Potential applications have been explored in many interdisciplinary areas spanning medicine, biosensing, nanofabrication, plasmonics, single-molecule chemistry, and facilitating biophysical studies. In this review, we begin with a brief overview of general and versatile design techniques for 3D DNA nanostructures as well as some techniques and studies that have focused on improving the stability of DNA nanostructures in diverse environments, which is pivotal for its reliable utilization in downstream applications. Our main focus will be to compile a wide body of existing research on applications of 3D DNA nanostructures that demonstrably rely on the versatility of their mechanical design. Furthermore, we frame reviewed applications into three primary categories, namely encapsulation, surface templating, and nanomechanics, that we propose to be archetypal shape- or motion-related functions of DNA nanostructures found in nanoscience applications. Our intent is to identify core concepts that may define and motivate specific directions of progress in this field as we conclude the review with some perspectives on the future.
Frady, K.; Hughes, C.; High, K.(
, Annual American Society for Engineering Education Conference)
The purpose of the Research in the Formation of Engineers National Science Foundation funded project, Developing Engineering Experiences and Pathways in Engineering Technology Career Formation (D.E.E.P. Engineering Technology Career Formation), is to develop a greater understanding of the professional identity, institutional culture, and formation of engineer technicians and technologists (ET) who are prepared at two-year colleges. ET professionals are important hands-on members of engineering teams who have specialized knowledge of components and engineering systems. Little research on career development and the role of ET in the workforce has previously been conducted prompting national organizations such as NSF and the National Academy of Sciences to prompt more research in this area [1]. The primary objectives of this project are to: (a) identify dimensions of career orientations and anchors at various stages of professional preparation and map to ET career pathways, (b) develop an empirical framework, incorporating individual career anchors and effect of institutional culture, for understanding ET professional formation, and (c) develop and pilot interventions aimed at transforming engineering formation systems in ET contexts. The three interdisciplinary theoretical frameworks integrated to guide design and analysis of this research study are social cognitive career theory (SCCT) [2], Schein’s career anchors which focuses on individual career orientation [3], and the Hughes value framework focused on the organization [4]. SCCT which links self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and personal goals to educational and career decisions and outcomes ties the individual career anchors to the institutional context of the Hughes framework [2]. To date, the project has collected and analyzed quantitative data from over 330 participants who are two-year college ET students, two-year college transfer students, and early career ET professionals. Qualitative data from historical institutional documents has also been collected and analyzed. Initial analyses have revealed gaps and needed areas of support for ET students in the area of professional formation. Thus far, the identified gaps are in institutional policy (i.e. lack of articulation agreements), needed faculty professional development (i.e. two-year faculty on specific career development and professional ET formation needs and four-year faculty on unique needs of transfer students), missing curriculum and resources supporting career development and professional formation of ET students, and integration of transfer student services focusing on connecting faculty and advisors across both institutional levels and types of programs. Significant gaps in the research promoting understanding of the role of ET and unique professional formation needs of these students were also confirmed. This project has been successful at helping to broaden participation in ET engineering education through integrating new participants into activities (new four-year institutional stakeholders, new industry partners, new faculty and staff directly and indirectly working with ET students) and through promoting disciplinary (engineering education and ET) and cross disciplinary collaborations (human resource development, higher education leadership, and student affairs). With one year remaining before completion of this project, this project has promoted a better understanding of student and faculty barriers supporting career development for ET students and identified need for career development resources and curriculum in ET.
Words: 498 References [1] National Academy of Engineering. (2016). Engineering technology education in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. [2] Lent, R.W., & Brown, S.B. (1996). Social cognitive approach to career development: An overivew. Career Development Quarterly, 44, 310-321. [3] Schein, E. (1996). Career anchors revisited: Implications for career development in the 21st century. Academy of Management Executive, 10(4), 80-88. [4] Hughes, C. (2014, Spring). Conceptualizing the five values of people and technology development: Implications for human resource managmeent and development. Workforce Education Forum, 37(1), 23-44.
There is a growing understanding that cross‐sector risks faced by critical infrastructure assets in natural disasters require a collaborative foresight from multiple disciplines. However, current contributions to infrastructure interdependency analysis remain centered in discipline‐specific methodologies often constrained by underlying theories and assumptions. This perspective article contributes to ongoing discussions about the uses, challenges, and opportunities provided by interdisciplinary research in critical infrastructure interdependency analysis. In doing so, several modes of integration of computational modeling with contributions from the social sciences and other disciplines are explored to advance knowledge that can improve the infrastructure system resilience under extreme events. Three basic modes of method integration are identified and discussed: (a) integrating engineering models and social science research, (b) engaging communities in participative and collaborative forms of social learning and problem solving using simulation models to facilitate synthesis, exploration, and evaluation of scenarios, and (c) developing interactive simulations where IT systems and humans act as “peers” leveraging the capacity of distributed networked platforms and human‐in‐the‐loop architectures for improving situational awareness, real‐time decision making, and response capabilities in natural disasters. Depending on the conceptualization of the issues under investigation, these broadly defined modes of integration can coalesce to address key issues in promoting interdisciplinary research by outlining potential areas of future inquiry that would be most beneficial to the critical infrastructure protection communities.
Building an interdisciplinary team is critical to disaster response research as it often deals with acute onset events, short decision horizons, constrained resources, and uncertainties related to rapidly unfolding response environments. This article examines three teaming mechanisms for interdisciplinary disaster response research, includingad hocand/or grant proposal driven teams, research center or institute based teams, and teams oriented by matching expertise toward long‐term collaborations. Using hurricanes as the response context, it further examines several types of critical data that require interdisciplinary collaboration on collection, integration, and analysis. Last, suggesting a data‐driven approach to engaging multiple disciplines, the article advocates building interdisciplinary teams for disaster response research with a long‐term goal and an integrated research protocol.
Becerik-Gerber, Burcin, Lucas, Gale, Aryal, Ashrant, Awada, Mohamad, Bergés, Mario, Billington, Sarah, Boric-Lubecke, Olga, Ghahramani, Ali, Heydarian, Arsalan, Höelscher, Christoph, Jazizadeh, Farrokh, Khan, Azam, Langevin, Jared, Liu, Ruying, Marks, Frederick, Mauriello, Matthew Louis, Murnane, Elizabeth, Noh, Haeyoung, Pritoni, Marco, Roll, Shawn, Schaumann, Davide, Seyedrezaei, Mirmahdi, Taylor, John E., Zhao, Jie, and Zhu, Runhe. The field of human building interaction for convergent research and innovation for intelligent built environments. Scientific Reports 12.1 Web. doi:10.1038/s41598-022-25047-y.
Becerik-Gerber, Burcin, Lucas, Gale, Aryal, Ashrant, Awada, Mohamad, Bergés, Mario, Billington, Sarah, Boric-Lubecke, Olga, Ghahramani, Ali, Heydarian, Arsalan, Höelscher, Christoph, Jazizadeh, Farrokh, Khan, Azam, Langevin, Jared, Liu, Ruying, Marks, Frederick, Mauriello, Matthew Louis, Murnane, Elizabeth, Noh, Haeyoung, Pritoni, Marco, Roll, Shawn, Schaumann, Davide, Seyedrezaei, Mirmahdi, Taylor, John E., Zhao, Jie, and Zhu, Runhe.
"The field of human building interaction for convergent research and innovation for intelligent built environments". Scientific Reports 12 (1). Country unknown/Code not available: Nature Publishing Group. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-25047-y.https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10386888.
@article{osti_10386888,
place = {Country unknown/Code not available},
title = {The field of human building interaction for convergent research and innovation for intelligent built environments},
url = {https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10386888},
DOI = {10.1038/s41598-022-25047-y},
abstractNote = {Abstract Human-Building Interaction (HBI) is a convergent field that represents the growing complexities of the dynamic interplay between human experience and intelligence within built environments. This paper provides core definitions, research dimensions, and an overall vision for the future of HBI as developed through consensus among 25 interdisciplinary experts in a series of facilitated workshops. Three primary areas contribute to and require attention in HBI research: humans (human experiences, performance, and well-being), buildings (building design and operations), and technologies (sensing, inference, and awareness). Three critical interdisciplinary research domains intersect these areas: control systems and decision making, trust and collaboration, and modeling and simulation. Finally, at the core, it is vital for HBI research to center on and support equity, privacy, and sustainability. Compelling research questions are posed for each primary area, research domain, and core principle. State-of-the-art methods used in HBI studies are discussed, and examples of original research are offered to illustrate opportunities for the advancement of HBI research.},
journal = {Scientific Reports},
volume = {12},
number = {1},
publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},
author = {Becerik-Gerber, Burcin and Lucas, Gale and Aryal, Ashrant and Awada, Mohamad and Bergés, Mario and Billington, Sarah and Boric-Lubecke, Olga and Ghahramani, Ali and Heydarian, Arsalan and Höelscher, Christoph and Jazizadeh, Farrokh and Khan, Azam and Langevin, Jared and Liu, Ruying and Marks, Frederick and Mauriello, Matthew Louis and Murnane, Elizabeth and Noh, Haeyoung and Pritoni, Marco and Roll, Shawn and Schaumann, Davide and Seyedrezaei, Mirmahdi and Taylor, John E. and Zhao, Jie and Zhu, Runhe},
}
Warning: Leaving National Science Foundation Website
You are now leaving the National Science Foundation website to go to a non-government website.
Website:
NSF takes no responsibility for and exercises no control over the views expressed or the accuracy of
the information contained on this site. Also be aware that NSF's privacy policy does not apply to this site.
