Parametric Analysis as a Tool for Hypothesis Generation: A Case Study of the Federal Archive Building in New York City

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Using Suárez’s inferential conception of scientific representation, this paper examined the epistemological potentials of parametric analysis as an approach to studying spatial and morphological aspects of ordinary existing buildings. The article is well written but require some level of improvement in the following areas:

1. There is a need to state the nature of the study in the title of the paper. Indicating just a case study without any further information is not sufficient.
2. The authors need to consider that the manuscript is a paper or article and not an essay. There is a need to therefore rephrase and change the use of essay in the paper.
3. From the statement "The second aim is to illustrate the alignment of this......", there is a need to note that a paper can only have just an aim but various objectives. The authors should rework this and improve accordingly.
4. What is the difference between section 1.1 and 2.1? It may be better to have section 2 as literature review to accommodate all of these.
5. There is a need to discuss existing theories and similar studies as well as their findings and recommendations. This will help to identify the gap and justify the aim of the study.
6. The study adopted "Suárez’s inferential conception" but there is no justification for this. Are there other methods and what distinguish this from others?
7. There is also a need to justify and explain some of the statements and decisions in the methodology. For example, why was Grasshopper in "Following the decision to construct a model on the basis of a variable polygon, Grasshopper was introduced into the project workflow"
8. There is a need to improve on the discussion of findings. It is necessary to include citations and make adequate reference to previous publications while also explaining the implications of the findings of the study.
9. In the recommendations, there is a need for policy recommendations directed at stakeholders that would benefit directly and indirectly from the study.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English could be improved to more clearly express the research.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Title: A case study in parametric analysis and architectural epistemology

This study presents an insightful contribution to architectural epistemology and parametric modeling. However, revisions are necessary to improve clarity, strengthen the theoretical foundation, refine methodology details, and better organize the structure of the paper.

Abstract

The author should follow a structured abstract format that clearly presents the key elements of the study as a single paragraph:

• State the purpose of the study: Clearly articulate the research problem, its significance, and the gap it intends to fill in architectural epistemology and parametric analysis.
• Methodology: Provide a concise summary of the research approach, including data sources, modeling techniques, and analytical framework.
• Findings: Highlight the main results, particularly how parametric analysis contributes to architectural knowledge and hypothesis generation.
• Theoretical and Practical Contributions: Clearly explain how the study advances theoretical discourse in architectural representation and its potential practical applications. These components should be integrated into a single, cohesive paragraph rather than fragmented sentences.

 

Introduction

This section requires better organization and emphasis on the core focus of the study. Consider the following refinements:

• The first and second paragraphs should directly introduce the research problem and contextual relevance of parametric analysis in architecture.
• The research aims and objectives should follow logically after setting up the background and significance of the study.
• Scientific terminology and precise language should be used to enhance clarity and academic rigor.
• Subsections in the introduction should be collapsed into a single flowing narrative using well-structured paragraphs instead of patchy subheadings.
• Broader conceptions of scientific representation should be introduced before narrowing the discussion to Suárez’s inferential conception. This will provide a balanced theoretical foundation and position the study within a broader epistemological discourse.
• After discussing the case study overview, the author should clearly state the specific aims and objectives of the research, ensuring they are distinct and well-articulated.

 

Methodology

The methodological approach lacks clarity and should be revised for transparency and reproducibility.

• Explicitly define the research design and process: Clarify the key theoretical framework, tools used, and how the case study is analyzed.
• A visual representation (flowchart or diagram) should be included to illustrate the methodology, making the workflow easier to understand.
• Data sources: Clearly specify where the data for the Federal Archive Building came from and how it was processed.
• Rationale for modeling choices: Explain why direct and parametric modeling were compared and how the parameters were selected.
• Evaluation criteria: Indicate how the results were analyzed and what measures were used to assess the effectiveness of parametric analysis.

 

Conclusion

• Figure 11 should be moved to a more relevant section, possibly the discussion or findings section, where it can be contextualized and analyzed in detail.
• The future directions section should be strengthened by explicitly addressing the limitations of the study. The author should outline:
• Challenges faced in using parametric analysis for architectural inquiry.
• Potential biases introduced by the inferential model.
• Gaps that future research should address, particularly in integrating material, historical, or cultural dimensions into parametric modeling.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The author should improve the readability and technical soundness of the manuscript

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Abstract

“This study explores the epistemological potential of parametric analysis for digitally modeling ordinary buildings… digital models in architectural knowledge production beyond mere documentation.” This statement is too long and does not clearly state the problem. That is, why is the study important to be conducted, what are the problem or gap it intended to fill. The author should make this as concise and simple as possible within a few lines.

 

Methodology

Author should provide relevant reference to support this method: ‘The method described here aims to create and compare two digital models representing the Federal Archive Building: a direct model and a parametric model.”

 

General
Author should proofread the entire manuscript and also follow the journal template adequately.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Acceptable

Author Response

The author gratefully acknowledges the review comments. Responses are noted below.

1. The author has revised the abstract, in an effort to concisely and simply say why the study is important, and what is the problem it intends to address. See Lines 7-14.

2. The author has provided relevant references to support the method as described. See Lines 171-175.

3. The author has proofread the entire manuscript and corrected minor errors throughout. The author has followed the journal template to their best ability.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf