In the book, The Architecture Machines written in 1969, Nicholas Negroponte proves to be a visionary propagating the school of machinic thought and digitisation in architecture.

The author begins the chapter questioning the credential of division of creative labour when machine is introduced  not only to perform programmed function but also to find solutions in a given circumstance.

The aim is to develop an intelligent device.

A self improvising Evolutionary machine, a highly advanced mutated specie of current generation, that is capable of assimilating the architecture and its learning process. The union of designer and machine is so closely knit that the contribution of each becomes undistinguishable. The aim is to work as equals, thus rendering unique attributes of each towards a common goal.

An intelligent Learning machine that bears the characteristic of

a. A heuristic mechanism, an experience based solution,

b. Rote apparatus, a repetition based memorisation technique,

c. A conditioning device, a habitual method of problem solving,

d. A reward selector, to deduce rational conclusion,

e. A forgetting convenience, a capability of unlearning the obsolete processes in order to adapt to new ones.

The architecture machine is a unit in the whole network connected to each other and the designer through a parent machine. The parent machine is a warehouse of information and functions as a data store.

The analytical Seeing machine, which bears reflection of a designer and is able to assess the problem physically through its sensory organs, analyses its abstract parameters before translating the information into deliverables.

The dialogue between man and machine is very profound in the current scenario but the extent of interaction as envisioned by Negroponte is still remote. When a machine will reach this extent of intelligence as conceived by Negroponte, it shall be a revolution in human achievements.

Other authors have also investigated the machine and architecture under diverse perspectives. Negroponte’s line of thought differs vastly from Schumaker, who elaborates Parametriscism as a new style based on emulating nature or Deluze and De Landa, who extract the essence of their theory of origin and structural growth of the form from analytical and mathematical derivative. Similarly Johnson and Thompson too present their outlook oh emergence and growth of a system as a whole. These are deep seated philosophy that bears different analogy to each individual, and enlivens the design process when implemented. When Negroponte emphasises on machine as designer, he omits the purpose of architecture is not only to generate effective solutions but also to create atmospheres.

The research topic would be oriented towards the Symbiosis of buildings, exchanging the vitals for balanced sustainability, similar to nature, where the being is not contained to itself but gives the productive excess to the surrounding  and vice versa.  A building is not a unit but a part of a network where it imbibes and shares its energy thus increasing the efficiency of the chain as a whole.

There is a popular belief that the foundation of architecture is structured on the harmony of form and function, wherein one factor influences the other to evolve into a built environment.

Phillips Rahm, in his writing, FORM AND FUNCTION FOLLOWS CLIMATE rejects the theory of rigid and programmatic architecture as emphasised on ‘form follows function’ nor does he agree with theory of ‘function follows form’. Instead, he introduces a new domain in architecture that is liberated from the static bounds of form and function.

He propagates a ‘de-programmed’ architecture that is independent of notions of volumetric and programmatic symbiosis but is solely guided by the climate. The focus needs to shift towards evolution of sustainable forms rather than injecting techniques into old ones.

The modern day practice needs to return to basics of vernacular solutions, which is the direct result of building units developed out of climatic problems. It is beyond form and function and harnesses the climate at the same time protects from it.

FORM- architecture, in terms of form generation, should be a function of time (day and night, seasons etc.) that reflects the geographical and physiological extent rather than the era.

FUNCTION- or programme is like as sapling that responds to climate and nature accordingly morphs its position into a given space.

The line of thought of thought of Fujimoto bears resemblance to Rahm’s concept of liberal architecture where functions are not dictated in a space. Also, Toyo Ito advocates the synergy of nature and built environment and compares it to animals’ sense of imbibition of nature as themselves being a part of it. Whereas, Wigly perceives architecture in a poetic way where a habitat needs to seamlessly merge with the surrounding, creating a definite atmosphere.

The concept for research topic still is an infant with clear goal of the architectural spaces holding the potential to define and re-define itself. The scale, proportion and hierarchy of spaces assign a dynamic quotient retaining its identity of abstractness.