Game Theory In Architectural Design
Architects from British architecture company Mzo Tarr are applying game theory to the design of buildings. In their recent project Warming Huts, they designed a series of warming structures along Assiniboine River in Canada for ice skaters. To make the project interactive and fun, they applied the famous Prisoner’s Dilemma to the design. By dividing each warming hut into two rooms each with a manual wall mounted wheel that controls ceiling louvres which either warm or cool the hut, Occupants of each room are put into a puzzle, as their decisions on how to control the wheel affect not only the temperature of the room they are in but also the temperature of the other room. The occupants have the option to turn the wheel to the right to cooperate, or left to defect. Their motion pivots the louvres to either funnel or block prevailing winds into the zones. However, the final result is also dependent upon the decision made by the player in the other zone. Below are charts illustrating the “four different strategies and four payoffs” for “Warming Hut Dilemma”.
According to what we have learnt from class, the dominant strategy for both occupants in Zone A and Zone B is to turn the wheel left, which results both parties to suffer from wind —— the Nash Equilibrium of this “game”. However, because Nash Equilibrium is based on the assumption that both parties in the game are entirely selfish and not cooperative at all. In the real world, if people are told how the mechanism can work, they might make a different decision by turning the wheel to left because of peer pressure. social norm and moral expectation from the society.
Another Project done by the same company is called Nash Pursuit Tower, whose design plays with Public Goods Game. The each tenant of the building is allowed to trade their private space with public space shared with other four tenants in a 1:2 ratio. 2 square meter of communal garden would be created for every 1 square meter of private space given up. The biggest challenge of a game like this is free riders, people who sacrifices no private space but end up enjoying the same amount of benefits as the ones who sacrifice the most do. From my perspective this game is not as straightforward as it appears, because not sacrificing any space also has potential tradeoffs, because the selfish people very likely will receive judgements from their neighbors, which can lead to mental stress. In the real world, it is almost impossible to be entirely selfish, unless you really don’t care about how other people think about you.
