# From Electronic Design Automation to Building Design Automation: Challenges
and Opportunities

Yu-Wen Lin  Tsz Ling Elaine Tang  Alberto L. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli  Stefano
Schiavon  Costas J. Spanos

###### Abstract

Design automation, which involves the use of software tools and technologies
to streamline the design process, has been widely adopted in the electronics
industry, resulting in significant advancements in product development and
manufacturing. However, building design, which involves the creation of
complex structures and systems, has traditionally lagged behind in leveraging
design automation technologies. Despite extensive research on design
automation in the building industry, its application in the current design of
buildings is limited. This paper aims to (1) compare the design processes
between electronics and building design, (2) highlight similarities and
differences in their approaches, and (3) examine challenges and opportunities
associated with bringing the concept of design automation from electronics to
building design.

###### keywords:

building design , design automation , cyber-physical systems

###### PACS:

0000 , 1111

###### MSC:

0000 , 1111

††journal: Automation in Construction

[inst1]organization=Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer
Sciences, University of California, Berkeley, city=Berkeley, state=CA,
country=USA

[inst2]organization=Siemens Technology, addressline=755 College Rd East,
city=Princeton, postcode=08540, state=NJ, country=USA

[inst3]organization=Center for Built Environment, University of California,
Berkeley, city=Berkeley, state=CA, country=USA

##  1 Introduction

Design automation refers to the utilization of software tools to aid designers
in creating and delivering products more efficiently by eliminating the need
for manual labor that was required with traditional design methods. It has
gained prominence in several industries, including electronics [1], automotive
[2], aerospace [3], and manufacturing [4], where it has enabled significant
advancements in product development and manufacturing efficiency. However, in
the building industry, design automation has not been adequately utilized and
has yet to become a standard part of the design process.

The building design process involves several parties, including architects,
engineers, building authorities, clients, financial institutions, and
constructors. Traditionally, different development disciplines are siloed from
each other and each section is assembled after the product is set in stone.
However, this separate independent design results in not only personnel
dependencies that increase the time of the critical path from initial design
to complete development but also in objective inefficiencies that result from
a lack of communication during the development process. Stronger communication
between all the stakeholders would be essential to improve the development
process for energy-efficient buildings.

Reed et al. [5] developed an integrative building design framework to guide
involved parties to communicate more efficiently. Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED), a green building rating system, also promotes an
integrative process by providing one point in credit to encourage synergies
between different disciplines during the design process. Though Building
Information Modeling (BIM) and the integrative framework exist for more than a
decade, the current building industry still has yet to adapt to the
integrative design process. Challenges include integration between different
software and tools, building complexity, communication barriers between
different design teams, and limited standardization for building design
practices.

The building design process shares several similarities with the electronic
design process. They both require an initial concept or idea to be developed
and refined through multiple stages of design and prototyping. In both cases,
the design must consider various technical requirements, such as
functionality, safety, and durability. Additionally, both building and
electronic design require collaboration among different professionals,
including engineers and designers. Furthermore, both design processes often
involve the use of specialized software and tools to aid in the creation and
testing of the design. However, while the electronic industry has evolved from
hand-drawn design to Electronic Design Automation (EDA), the building industry
has yet to fully utilize design automation technologies.

Although there has been research on design automation techniques in subsystems
of building design, such as structural form [6], floor plan [7, 8, 9], façade
[10, 11, 12], and Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) [13, 14],
these techniques are rarely applied in the current building industry. One of
the main reasons is the absence of standardized input-output relationships for
each component. This lack of standardization makes it challenging to reuse
components across different designs. Consequently, it becomes difficult to
remove and replace a specific component or technique in another design, as
there is no assurance that the inputs and outputs will align correctly.
Additionally, each building type has its unique requirements, constraints, and
regulations, resulting in a tailored design process for each specific type and
location. However, automation can provide several benefits to the building
design process, such as increased efficiency, improved accuracy, cost
reduction, consistency, flexibility, and innovation.

By leveraging automation, designers can complete tasks more efficiently and
accurately, reduce errors and inconsistencies, reduce or eliminate manual
labor, ensure that design standards and procedures are consistently followed,
enable easy modification and adjustment of designs, and experiment with new
and innovative design ideas. In this paper, we will use EDA as a reference to
identify the areas where building design falls short in realizing automation
and explore the opportunities that can arise if automation is implemented. We
aim to (1) compare and contrast the design process of buildings and
electronics, (2) identify challenges that hinder the automation of building
design, and (3) provide future research directions to realize design
automation in the building industry.

##  2 Building Design

Figure 1: Building design process

Building design has a significant impact on energy consumption and the
worldwide carbon footprint. The following sections discuss the state-of-the-
art building design process, common software tools used in building design,
ongoing automation efforts in research, and the negative consequences of poor
building design.

###  2.1 Design Work Flow

The building work flow is a complex and iterative process that involves
various stages and stakeholders. It is generally split into six different
stages: concept, schematic design, design development, construction documents,
bidding and negotiation, and construction as shown in Figure 1. The absence of
an arrow connecting to each node suggests that the building design process is
not a linear left-to-right process but rather an iterative one. This means
that the design goes through several stages and can backtrack to previous
stages for refinement at any point in the process. For example, during the
construction of a building that may take several years, the building codes or
regulations may change, necessitating design changes in the early design
stages. Therefore, the design process requires a flexible approach to
accommodate changes in requirements and constraints, ensuring that the final
design meets the necessary standards and regulations.

The concept design stage involves gathering information about the project’s
goals, site, budget, and other constraints. It may also include conducting
site analysis and surveys and reviewing zoning regulations. The schematic
design involves developing preliminary design concepts, sketches, and drawings
that capture the client’s requirements and vision. Generally, the building’s
form, size, and general layout are defined at this stage. In the design
development stage, the preliminary design is further developed, refined, and
detailed. It includes more detailed drawings, specifications, and material
selections. During the construction documents stage, all the design documents
are prepared into detailed construction documents that include detailed
drawings, specifications, and instructions for the contractors to follow.
After completing the construction documents, the next step entails soliciting
bids from contractors and engaging in contract negotiations. Lastly, the
construction stage involves overseeing the construction process to ensure that
the project is built according to its design and specifications.

Throughout the process, the building designers will work with various
stakeholders, including the client, engineers, contractors, and government
officials, to ensure that the project meets the client’s requirements,
complies with regulations and standards, and is constructed safely and
efficiently. The process is often iterative, with the designer revising the
design as new information and feedback are received.

###  2.2 Building Design Software Tools

The building design process relies heavily on software tools to aid in the
creation, management, and execution of design projects. Some of the most
common software tools used in building design include Computer-Aided Design
(CAD) software, Building Information Modeling (BIM) software, energy modeling
software, project management software, and other analysis software. CAD
software is used to create detailed 2D and 3D designs of building components.
BIM software is a collaborative tool that allows architects, engineers, and
contractors to work together in an integrated platform. This software provides
a shared space for design and construction data, enabling all parties to view,
edit, and comment on the project in real-time. The most common ones are
Autodesk Revit [15], ArchiCAD [16], and Bently OpenBuildings Designer [17].
There are various data structures used to store information in BIM software.
Luo et al. [18] have summarized 24 different data tools for representing and
managing building data. These data tools help to organize and structure
information in the BIM, enabling more efficient and accurate design,
construction, and maintenance processes. Energy modeling software plays a
crucial role in simulating building energy use and identifying opportunities
for energy optimization and savings. By using these tools, designers can make
informed decisions about building materials, heating and cooling systems, and
lighting to improve energy efficiency and reduce costs. The most common energy
simulation software tools for the building include EnergyPlus [19], IESVE
[20], and eQUEST [21]. Attia et al. [22] also conducted a comparative analysis
of ten common energy simulation tools that are typically used in the early
design stages of buildings. Project management software is used to manage the
building design process from start to finish. This software allows project
managers to create schedules, assign tasks, and track progress, ensuring that
projects are completed on time and within budget. Other analysis software is
also used to assess and optimize various aspects of building design, such as
structural analysis, acoustics, and lighting. However, there are limitations
in existing software tools. One major issue is their complexity, which can
require significant training and expertise to use effectively, making them
inaccessible to small firms or individual designers. Integration issues can
also arise when working with different software tools, leading to errors and
inconsistencies when data is manually transferred between platforms. The
accuracy of simulation software can also be limited by incomplete or
inaccurate data. Despite these challenges, software tools remain essential for
creating high-quality, efficient, and cost-effective building designs. By
leveraging these tools, designers can improve collaboration and communication
among team members, streamline workflows, and ultimately create better
building designs.

###  2.3 Ongoing Design Automation Efforts

Traditional design approaches are often limited by the experiences and
knowledge of human designers. Key design decisions are often already made
before assessment due to budget, time constraints, and project requirements.
In addition, design evaluations primarily serve to meet building codes such as
energy standards, ASHRAE 90.1 [23], and thermal environmental conditions,
ASHRAE 55 [24]. The building design has the potential to be optimized further
to create a more energy-efficient and environmentally-friendly solution.
Advances in computing technologies and machine learning algorithms have
enabled the possibility of exploring a larger design space that may be
overlooked by designers. For example, Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs)
can be used to generate new building designs [25, 26], Genetic algorithms (GA)
can be used to optimize building parameters and configurations with an
objective of energy efficiency and thermal comfort [27, 28], and Natural
Language Processing (NLP) algorithms can analyze building codes and
regulations [29, 30]. Existing BIM software, Autodesk Revit 2021 [31], has the
capacity to implement Generative Design (GD) for building geometry. The
feature allows users to input design goals and constraints and then uses GD to
generate multiple design options to meet those goals and constraints. It can
be used to optimize building designs for structural performance, energy
efficiency, and sustainability. However, limitations exist in the user
interface, data availability, designer bias, complex structures, and
processing speed.

Design automation is primarily present in research and has yet to be applied
in the building design process in the industry. The main challenge is that
most studies are specific and cannot be applied to all building types.
Although complete automation of the entire design process may not be feasible
due to the complexity of buildings, incorporating automation tools can
streamline the design process, reduce errors, and improve efficiency and
reliability. Utilizing advanced computational tools, designers can generate a
set of high-quality solutions that meet design objectives and constraints,
such as energy efficiency, functional performance, and cost-effectiveness.

###  2.4 Negative Impacts of Poor Building Design

Poor building design can have significant negative impacts on the building
occupants, the environment, and the economy. One of the most immediate and
visible consequences of poor building design is the impact on occupants’
health and comfort [32, 33, 34, 35]. Poor ventilation, lighting, acoustics,
and thermal comfort can all contribute to health problems such as allergies,
asthma, headaches, and stress. These problems can lead to decreased
productivity and reduced quality of life for building occupants. Another
negative impact of poor building design is its effect on the environment.
Buildings are responsible for more than 40% of energy consumption worldwide
[36] and 17% of total global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from operations
and the manufacture of building materials [37], and poor design can exacerbate
these problems [38]. For example, buildings that are poorly insulated, have
inefficient heating and cooling systems, or use energy-intensive materials can
contribute to higher energy consumption and carbon emissions. Another example
is that the HVAC system in a building is often oversized due to design safety
factors and a lack of accurate building load calculations [39]. This not only
contributes to global climate change but can also lead to higher energy costs
for building owners and occupants. Lastly, poor building design can have
negative economic impacts [40]. Inefficient buildings can lead to higher
energy bills and maintenance costs, reducing the economic value of the
building. Poor building design can have far-reaching negative impacts on human
health and comfort, the environment, and the economy. It is essential to
prioritize good design practices, including the incorporation of automation
tools, to create buildings that are efficient, sustainable, and safe for their
occupants.

##  3 Electronic Design Automation

While looking at the present status of the design work flow for buildings, it
is instructive to compare it to that of the Electronic Design Automation (EDA)
referring to the use of software tools and algorithms to automate various
aspects of designing and manufacturing complex electronic components,
including today’s state of the art Integrated Circuits (ICs). EDA involves the
use of computer programs that assist designers in creating, verifying, and
testing electronic systems, ranging from individual circuits to complex
integrated circuits and systems. Design automation aims to improve the
efficiency and productivity of the design process by reducing the time and
effort required for manual tasks and by enabling designers to explore more
design options and trade-offs in a shorter amount of time. The following
section describes the design process of electronics, the evolution of the EDA,
and the current state of EDA and its impact.

###  3.1 Electronic Design Work Flow

Figure 2: Electronic Design Process

The process of electronic design can vary depending on the project size and
specifications, but generally, for an IC, it follows a top-down design process
[41] as shown in figure 2. The first step is to define the system
specifications, which include the desired performance, functionality, and
power consumption of the system. Based on these specifications, a high-level
block diagram is created to define the system-level architecture and
interconnections between the functional components. Once the architecture is
defined, the next step is design capture, which involves creating a high-level
design description of the system using a Hardware Description Language (HDL).
This is followed by logic synthesis, where the captured design is transformed
into a gate-level netlist that describes the circuit’s logic in terms of
logical gates, flip-flops, and other standard cells. Next, circuit simulation
and verification are performed to verify the circuit’s functionality. This can
involve some iteration to make sure that the simulated results meet the
desired specifications. The next level of design is the physical design. Floor
planning involves determining the physical location of the various functional
blocks in the design. The placement and routing step follows where the
physical locations of individual gates and components are determined and the
connections between them are established by routing wires. After placement and
routing, the circuit layout is extracted and used for simulation and
verification. This involves ensuring that the physical layout matches the
intended design and verifying the functionality and performance of the
circuit. Any issues found during this step may require adjustments to the
design, placement, or routing before final verification and fabrication.
Lastly, the design is ready for fabrication, where it is physically
manufactured using the digital description of the final design. The above
process emphasizes that electronic design is an iterative, yet highly
streamlined process aimed at ensuring that the functionality meets the desired
specifications. Moreover, each design phase represents a distinct and well-
defined level of abstraction, enabling effective analysis.

As technology continues to advance, electronic design has become more complex,
resulting in the emergence of new design protocols. One such process is the
System-on-a-Chip (SoC) design [42], which involves integrating multiple
components onto a single chip. This process requires specialized design tools
and methodologies, including co-design, Intellectual Property (IP) reuse, and
system-level verification, to ensure that the individual components work
together effectively. Another emerging design process is 3D IC design [43],
which involves stacking multiple layers of chips vertically to increase
performance and reduce size. This process involves several new challenges,
including thermal management, power distribution, and signal integrity.
However, for the purpose of this paper, we will mainly focus on the top-down
approach in electronic design, which is more similar to the current building
design work flow.

###  3.2 Evolution of EDA

Figure 3: Timeline of Key Developments of EDA

EDA has a significant impact on the semiconductor industry by enabling the
faster, more efficient, and more reliable design of electronic systems. EDA
tools provide designers with a range of features and capabilities that
simplify and automate the design process, enabling them to create complex
designs more quickly and accurately. Fig 3 shows the timeline of key
developments of EDA from interactive design support to design automation. The
development of EDA tools began in the 1960s when researchers developed the
first computer-aided design (CAD) tools [44] designed to assist engineers in
analyzing and designing circuits and boards. It transits from a traditional
hand-drawn design to a digital design. Later, SPICE (Simulation Program with
Integrated Circuit Emphasis) emerged in the early 1970s [45] as a student
project, but became an industry standard for IC Design.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, two major technologies emerged: standard
cell design and hardware description language (HDLs) [46]. The concept of
standard cells involves pre-designed circuit blocks that contain a specific
logic function, such as an AND gate or a flip-flop. These standard cells can
be combined to create more complex circuits. The introduction of standard
cells separates the transistor-level design from the logic design. On the
other hand, HDLs, such as VHDL and Verilog, provide a high-level language for
describing digital circuits, enabling designers to specify the behavior of a
circuit without having to worry about the details of the underlying hardware.

In the 1990s, EDA tools continued to evolve, with the introduction of new
tools and methodologies such as field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) [47]
and system-on-chip (SoC) design [42]. FPGAs were programmable devices that
could be used to implement custom logic functions, while SoC design involved
the integration of multiple functions onto a single chip. Furthermore, the
industry developed standard ASCII formats, Library Exchange Format (LEF) and
Design Exchange Format (DEF) [48], for representing library and design data in
order to share and reuse design data across different tools and platforms.

In the 2000s, High-Level Synthesis (HLS) and hardware/software co-design are
introduced. HLS allowed designers to describe hardware using a high-level
programming language, which could then be synthesized into hardware.
Hardware/software co-design involved the simultaneous design of hardware and
software components, enabling the design of more complex systems that
integrated both hardware and software.

###  3.3 Current State of EDA and its Impact

The current state-of-the-art in EDA includes advanced technologies that enable
designers to create complex semiconductor chips with high performance, high
reliability, and low power consumption. High-level synthesis technology [49]
allows designers to specify chip functionality at a higher level of
abstraction, which reduces the time and effort required for manual coding.
Machine Learning methods [50] are also applied in EDA industry to optimize
design parameters to further improve design quality. Furthermore, cloud
computing [51] allows designers to access on-demand computing resources to
perform tasks that required high computational power without having to invest
in expensive hardware and software infrastructure. Advanced verification and
validation techniques [52], such as formal verification, simulation, and
emulation ensured the reliability and correctness of complex designs. Lastly,
as chips become smaller and more complex, the placement and routing of
components on the chip become more challenging for EDA tools. As a result,
placing and routing algorithms [53] are constantly evolving to incorporate new
design methodologies that can help designers to optimize chip layouts for
power, performance, and manufacturability.

Automation is necessary to handle the immense complexity of semiconductor
chips, which can have over a billion circuit elements that can interact in
subtle ways. Manufacturing variations can introduce further complexities and
changes in circuit behavior. Errors in manufactured chips can be disastrous
and often cannot be fixed. Re-designing and Re-manufacturing the entire chip
is time-consuming and expensive, which can lead to project failure. EDA
technology provides the critical automation needed to manage the complexity,
making it possible to design and manufacture modern semiconductor devices with
a high level of accuracy and efficiency.

##  4 Discussion

While the current building industry has yet to reach a high threshold for
design automation, we can learn from the development of electronic design
automation to identify the key aspects needed to make it a reality. Figure 4
outlines the comparison between electronic design and building design. We will
examine three key aspects: design process, design tools, and industry, and
compare the similarities and differences between them in greater detail in the
following sections.

Figure 4: Comparison between electronic design and building design.

###  4.1 Design process

Both electronic design and building design begin with specifying the project
requirements and constraints, which usually include functionality and
performance. Additionally, both processes involve the contribution of multiple
team players to complete the design. In electronic design, this may include
designers, engineers, and other specialists, while building design usually
involves architects, engineers, consultants, contractors, and constructors.
Effective collaboration between stakeholders is essential to achieving an
optimal design. Both processes are iterative, where certain stages are
repeated until the optimal design is achieved. The iterative process allows
designers to refine and optimize the design over time, making adjustments to
accommodate changing requirements or constraints. This also helps identify
potential issues early on, reducing the risk of errors in later stages of the
design. Furthermore, both design processes involve component-based design,
where components are selected and integrated into the design as a whole. In
building design, this includes various building components, such as walls,
windows, doors, and HVAC components, while in electronic design, it involves
components such as sensors and devices depending on the level of abstraction.

However, building design often employs a component-based design approach at
the subsystem level, such as for HVAC or structural component design. This
approach is rarely available at the system level, primarily due to the lack of
a common platform in the building design domain. Design and simulation tools
used in building design are often incompatible with each other, making it
difficult to integrate designs into a single platform. This lack of
integration can lead to errors, duplication of effort, and increased design
time. The current efforts in BIM have helped to address some of these
challenges by providing a platform for integrating various building design
tools and facilitating the exchange of information between stakeholders.
However, there are still limitations in software compatibility and data
management. Furthermore, the lack of clear definitions for different
development objectives and levels of abstractions during different design
stages can further complicate the design process. In contrast, the electronic
industry benefits from clear and standardized input-output requirements.

Table 1: The LoD for BIM [54]. LoD |  Model Descriptions
---|---
LoD 100 |  Approximate graphical representation of the entire building based on spatial requirements
LoD 200 |  Determine approximate floor plans and space boundaries (walls, elevation, and columns)
LoD 300 |  Detailed design for actual construction
LoD 400 |  Precise model for fabrication, structure, electrical, mechanical, and plumbing systems
LoD 500 |  Complete design, which represents the actual building

The existing levels of detail (LoD) framework of BIM developed by the American
Institute of Architects (AIA) [54] is defined in Table 1. LoD defines the
amount and degree of building information that needs to be in the BIM at
different stages. It is developed for construction purposes and is not
directly applicable to all disciplines during the design stages. The broad
definition requires elaboration to fit into design purposes to allow the
development of design automation in the building industry. The building design
is often limited by site-specificity, which can make it difficult to develop a
clear design process. Each building project has unique site requirements, such
as topography, climate, and local regulations. These factors can have a
significant impact on the design decisions and may require adjustments to the
design throughout the process. As a result, the design process in building
design can be more complex and time-consuming than in electronic design, where
products can be developed independently of a specific site

Another difference in the design process between electronics and buildings is
the performance quantification aspect. In electronic design, the performance
metrics can be easily obtained through calculations in timing and energy
performance. However, in the building industry, several aspects need to be
considered, such as energy efficiency, indoor air quality, visual comfort,
thermal comfort, acoustic lighting, and water efficiency. These aspects are
not always straightforward to quantify, resulting in discrepancies among
designers. Additionally, due to various constraints, design tradeoffs become
more complex and harder to make in building design.

Lastly, the level of attention to the occupant experience and the importance
of aesthetics of building design are vastly different from electronic design.
Unlike electronic design, building design has to take into account the
physical environment and how the building will fit into the surrounding
landscape. Designers have to consider the impact of the building on the
environment, the local culture, and the community it will serve. In contrast,
electronic design focuses almost entirely on functionality and efficiency.
While the aesthetic portion of building design is challenging to fit into
design automation applications, other areas such as structural design and
construction planning can benefit greatly from automation.

###  4.2 Design Tools

Simulation tools are commonly used in both electronic design and building
design. These tools can provide interactive support and simulation
capabilities to help designers explore design options, identify potential
problems, and optimize design solutions.

In electronic design, simulation tools are highly standardized, with well-
established input-output relationships that enable designers to quickly and
easily model electronic circuits, test different design scenarios, and verify
design performance. There is also a common platform for simulation tools,
which allows designers to use different simulation tools with similar syntax,
enabling the transfer of simulation models between different software
programs.

In contrast, building design lacks a universal standard for simulation tools,
which can make it challenging for designers to choose the right tool for their
specific design problem. Energy simulation software, for example, may require
different inputs for different programs, making it difficult to have a common
platform for simulation tools. Furthermore, there are limited data standards
that cover all simulation tools, and data conversion between tools often
requires manual adjustment. Building designers or engineers often need to
adapt to different software programs, such as structure, energy, and lighting
simulations, for different design purposes, which results in a fragmented
design process. Interoperability is a widely known issue in the building
industry [55]. Data standards, such as Industry Foundation Class (IFC) [56]
and Green Building XML (gbXML) [57], exist in the building industry. IFC is
used to exchange building data, including geometry, spatial elements, and
sensor information. A subset of IFC, Model View Definition (MVD), has been
developed to apply to specific applications in building [58]. It defines which
IFC entities, attributes, and relationships are required to support a specific
use case or task. The gbXML format is more specifically used in the energy
simulation domain. It facilitates the exchange of data between CAD and energy
analysis tools. Other data tools in the building industry are summarized in
[18]. However, the above-mentioned data standards have yet to be applied to
all building applications. Extensions or adaptations are still required to
apply to specific building applications or regions [59].

On the other hand, electronic data standards, LEF and DEF [48], are well-
established in exchanging data between different software programs. LEF is
used to exchange library data, while DEF is used to exchange design data.
Building data standards need to have broad adoption across the industry and
cover all relevant disciplines. Different from LEF and DEF, it needs to be
designed to be flexible and adaptable to different use cases and applications
in building. Moreover, a library data standard needs to exist to store
different application modules within the building industry. Its primary
purpose is to enable seamless data exchange between different software
applications used in building design, construction, and operation. By doing
so, it enables the industry to create a shared library that allows for
efficient sharing and reusing of data for future design processes.

In addition to the challenges of standardization and interoperability, another
pivotal issue in building design is maintaining up-to-date, high-quality data
throughout the design process and among stakeholders. Failure to keep data
updated can result in miscommunication, additional time required, and
increased costs. Having the data updated is especially important during the
construction process, where delays and errors can have significant impacts on
project time and costs [60]. Therefore, having an efficient and effective data
management system is also vital for building design.

###  4.3 Industry

In building design, it can be challenging to estimate project costs upfront,
which can lead to difficulties in accurately estimating the overall project
cost. The cost is determined through a construction bidding process. As a
result, the cost of sub-systems is usually not publicly available. Several
researchers have explored various methods to improve cost estimation in the
building industry [61], including the use of historical cost data, and cost
modeling techniques. Similarly, in the electronic industry, cost estimation is
also challenging due to the competitive nature of the industry. For in-house
manufacturing products, the cost is generally easier to estimate because the
manufacturing process is more standardized and predictable. On the other hand,
the cost of custom chip designs that are outsourced for manufacturing can be
more challenging to estimate, as it may depend on factors such as the
complexity of the design, the choice of manufacturing partners, and the timing
of the project.

One major difference between the two industries is the nature of the products
produced. Electronic design often involves mass-produced products, while
building design usually involves idiosyncratic designs. In electronic design,
products are typically manufactured in large quantities, with standardized
components and design processes, which can lead to more streamlined production
and lower costs. Building design, on the other hand, is often unique to each
project and requires more customized solutions. As a result, the design
process needs to be flexible to accommodate a wide range of project types and
requirements.

There is also a notable difference in the scale and timeline of outcomes
between electronic design and building design. In electronic design, products
are often smaller in scale and require shorter development cycles due to the
nature of the industry. This allows for rapid prototyping, testing, and
production, which can result in more agile and iterative design processes. On
the other hand, building design projects involve larger-scale outcomes that
often require longer timelines due to the complex nature of the construction
process. This can result in a less agile design process, with greater risks
and costs associated with design changes over time.

Another significant difference is the supply chain. The electronic design
industry often relies on a global supply chain, with components sourced from
all over the world. In contrast, the building design industry often relies on
local suppliers and materials, which can vary depending on the region or
location of the project. This can affect the availability, cost, and quality
of materials, as well as the overall design and construction process.

##  5 Conclusion and Future Work

Buildings are complicated systems that consist of different layers of sub-
systems. In addition, decisions made in the early stages of building projects
have an important impact on material and energy efficiency. It is a
challenging task to frame and solve one multi-objective optimization problem
for finding an optimal design solution for a building. There is a need to
develop a standardized information flow specifically for different
disciplines. This paper provides a comparison between the electronic design
and building design industries, with a focus on exploring the potential for
design automation applications in building design.

Despite ongoing research efforts to streamline the building design process,
the industry has been slow to adopt new technologies and approaches. One of
the key obstacles to widespread adoption is the lack of a universally defined
design workflow in the industry. Building design practices can vary
significantly based on factors such as location, building type, and project
scope, making it challenging for companies to invest in optimization and co-
optimization techniques during the design phase. Many optimization techniques
may not be applicable to all projects, leading to concerns about cost-
effectiveness and return on investment.

To overcome this challenge, the industry may need to focus on developing more
standardized approaches to building design, with greater emphasis on
collaboration and knowledge-sharing among stakeholders. This could include the
development of a platform-based or modular-based approach that is flexible and
adaptable to different project types and scopes. Modularization involves
dividing buildings into assemblies of components that have standardized
interfaces for communication, making it possible to combine and reconfigure
components to meet different design requirements. This allows for a more
flexible design to meet users’ preferences and performance requirements. This
approach offers several benefits, including greater flexibility in design,
more efficient use of resources, and improved cost-effectiveness.

Additionally, to facilitate more efficient and collaborative building design,
it is necessary to create a design backbone that enables single-platform
integration. First, data exchange standards should be revised to ensure they
are applicable to all disciplines involved in building design. This will help
ensure that information can flow smoothly between different software
applications and enable effective collaboration. Next, a Building Information
Modeling (BIM) system, such as Revit, can be used as a common platform for
communication between different software tools. By integrating all existing
software tools into the BIM system through support plug-in application
modules, designers can access all the necessary information in one place,
improving efficiency and reducing errors.

Building design requires a more comprehensive approach that considers several
aspects of performance, including energy efficiency, indoor air quality,
visual comfort, thermal comfort, acoustic lighting, and water efficiency.
There is a need to define and standardize a performance quantification
framework for each aspect of concern in the building industry. While building
codes and standards exist to facilitate better building designs, there is
still a lack of a comprehensive framework in certain areas, such as visual
comfort. Ongoing efforts are made in the research domain. For example,
Cavieres [62] established a framework that allows the functional and
behavioral systems of the building to interact in an interface. This framework
involves mapping the specific systems needed to calculate the relevant
performance measures, which in turn helps designers make more informed design
choices. By quantifying and standardizing various aspects of building
performance, designers can better understand the tradeoffs between different
design options.

Lastly, risk assessment is another important aspect to address in building
design. Although innovative designs can lead to reduced energy consumption and
GHG emissions, there is no guarantee that the desired outcomes will be
achieved during construction. If the design conditions cannot be met,
construction costs can increase significantly, and contractors may be
unwilling to take on the project. A risk assessment module can help mitigate
these risks by simulating various design scenarios and estimating the
uncertainty associated with each design. This will allow stakeholders to make
informed decisions and select designs that are more likely to succeed in the
construction phase.

The implementation of standardization, performance quantification, and risk
assessment modules is necessary to move building design toward automation.
Standardization promotes a more structured approach to building design,
allowing for better data exchange and knowledge-sharing between stakeholders.
By implementing performance quantification frameworks, designers can make more
informed decisions regarding various aspects of building design. Risk
assessment can help mitigate potential issues during the design process,
preventing costly and time-consuming delays during construction. The use of
these tools not only streamlines the design process but also leads to more
sustainable building designs that meet performance and safety standards. The
ultimate goal is partial design automation, where designers and engineers can
leverage technology to optimize building performance and minimize the
environmental impact.

## References

  * [1] D. MacMillen, R. Camposano, D. Hill, T. W. Williams, An industrial view of electronic design automation, IEEE transactions on computer-aided design of integrated circuits and systems 19 (12) (2000) 1428–1448.
  * [2] S. Lan, C. Huang, Z. Wang, H. Liang, W. Su, Q. Zhu, Design automation for intelligent automotive systems, in: 2018 IEEE International Test Conference (ITC), IEEE, 2018, pp. 1–10.
  * [3] T. Shmelova, Y. Sikirda, N. Rizun, D. Kucherov, K. Dergachov, Automated Systems in the Aviation and Aerospace Industries, IGI Global, 2019.
  * [4] Y. Lu, X. Xu, L. Wang, Smart manufacturing process and system automation–a critical review of the standards and envisioned scenarios, Journal of Manufacturing Systems 56 (2020) 312–325.
  * [5] B. Reed, et al., The integrative design guide to green building: Redefining the practice of sustainability, Vol. 43, John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
  * [6] Y. K. Yi, A. M. Malkawi, Optimizing building form for energy performance based on hierarchical geometry relation, Automation in Construction 18 (6) (2009) 825–833.
  * [7] A. de Almeida, B. Taborda, F. Santos, K. Kwiecinski, S. Eloy, A genetic algorithm application for automatic layout design of modular residential homes, in: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), IEEE, 2016, pp. 002774–002778.
  * [8] S. S. Wong, K. C. Chan, Evoarch: An evolutionary algorithm for architectural layout design, Computer-Aided Design 41 (9) (2009) 649–667.
  * [9] T. Feng, L.-F. Yu, S.-K. Yeung, K. Yin, K. Zhou, Crowd-driven mid-scale layout design., ACM Trans. Graph. 35 (4) (2016) 132–1.
  * [10] L. Wang, H. W. Nyuk, S. Li, Facade design optimization for naturally ventilated residential buildings in singapore, Energy and Buildings 39 (8) (2007) 954–961.
  * [11] S. L. Torres, Y. Sakamoto, Facade design optimization for daylight with a simple genetic algorithm, in: Proceedings of Building Simulation, Vol. 2007, 2007, pp. 1162–1167.
  * [12] D. Newton, Generative deep learning in architectural design, Technology— Architecture+ Design 3 (2) (2019) 176–189.
  * [13] C. S. Barnaby, M. Shnitman, W. A. Wright, Hvac system design automation: issues, methods, and ultimate limits, in: Proc. of Building Simulation ‘01, 7th International IBPSA Conference, 2001, pp. 1151–1157.
  * [14] Y. Zhang, Synthesis of optimum hvac system configurations by evolutionary algorithm, Ph.D. thesis, Loughborough University (2005).
  * [15] Autodesk, Revit: Bim software for designers, builders, and doers, https://www.autodesk.com/products/revit (2000).
  * [16] GraphiSoft, Graphisoft archicad, https://graphisoft.com/us (2021).
  * [17] Bently, Openbuildings designer, https://www.bentley.com/en/products/product-line/building-design-software/openbuildings-designer (2022).
  * [18] N. Luo, M. Pritoni, T. Hong, An overview of data tools for representing and managing building information and performance data, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 147 (2021) 111224.
  * [19] D. B. Crawley, L. K. Lawrie, F. C. Winkelmann, W. F. Buhl, Y. J. Huang, C. O. Pedersen, R. K. Strand, R. J. Liesen, D. E. Fisher, M. J. Witte, et al., Energyplus: creating a new-generation building energy simulation program, Energy and buildings 33 (4) (2001) 319–331.
  * [20] I. E. S. Limited, Ies virtual environment 2022, https://www.iesve.com/software/virtual-environment (2022).
  * [21] D. of Energy (DOE), equest version 3.65, https://www.doe2.com/equest/ (2018).
  * [22] S. Attia, A. De Herde, Early design simulation tools for net zero energy buildings: a comparison of ten tools, in: International Building Performance Simulation Association 2011, 2011.
  * [23] M. A. Halverson, M. I. Rosenberg, P. R. Hart, E. E. Richman, R. A. Athalye, D. W. Winiarski, Ansi/ashrae/ies standard 90.1-2013 determination of energy savings: Qualitative analysis, Tech. rep., Pacific Northwest National Lab.(PNNL), Richland, WA (United States) (2014).
  * [24] Ashrae standard 55-thermal environmental conditions for human occupancy, Tech. rep., ASHRAE Inc. (1992).
  * [25] C. Sun, Y. Zhou, Y. Han, Automatic generation of architecture facade for historical urban renovation using generative adversarial network, Building and Environment 212 (2022) 108781.
  * [26] A. N. Wu, R. Stouffs, F. Biljecki, Generative adversarial networks in the built environment: A comprehensive review of the application of gans across data types and scales, Building and Environment (2022) 109477.
  * [27] D. Tuhus-Dubrow, M. Krarti, Genetic-algorithm based approach to optimize building envelope design for residential buildings, Building and environment 45 (7) (2010) 1574–1581.
  * [28] T. Li, G. Shao, W. Zuo, S. Huang, Genetic algorithm for building optimization: State-of-the-art survey, in: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on machine learning and computing, 2017, pp. 205–210.
  * [29] R. Zhang, N. El-Gohary, A deep neural network-based method for deep information extraction using transfer learning strategies to support automated compliance checking, Automation in Construction 132 (2021) 103834.
  * [30] Y. Ding, J. Ma, X. Luo, Applications of natural language processing in construction, Automation in Construction 136 (2022) 104169.
  * [31] Generative design for architecture, engineering & construction, Autodesk (2021).
  * [32] J. Singh, Impact of indoor air pollution on health, comfort and productivity of the occupants, Aerobiologia 12 (1) (1996) 121–127.
  * [33] G. W. Evans, J. M. McCoy, When buildings don’t work: The role of architecture in human health, Journal of Environmental psychology 18 (1) (1998) 85–94.
  * [34] P. R. Boyce, The impact of light in buildings on human health, Indoor and Built environment 19 (1) (2010) 8–20.
  * [35] M. Boubekri, Daylighting, architecture and health: building design strategies, Routledge, 2008.
  * [36] A. Allouhi, Y. E. Fouih, T. Kousksou, A. Jamil, Y. Zeraouli, Y. Mourad, Energy consumption and efficiency in buildings: current status and future trends, Journal of Cleaner Production 109 (2015) 118 – 130, special Issue: Toward a Regenerative Sustainability Paradigm for the Built Environment: from vision to reality.  doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.139.
URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652615007581

  * [37] W. F. Lamb, T. Wiedmann, J. Pongratz, R. Andrew, M. Crippa, J. G. Olivier, D. Wiedenhofer, G. Mattioli, A. Al Khourdajie, J. House, et al., A review of trends and drivers of greenhouse gas emissions by sector from 1990 to 2018, Environmental research letters 16 (7) (2021) 073005.
  * [38] J. Clarke, Energy simulation in building design, Routledge, 2007.
  * [39] E. Djunaedy, K. Van den Wymelenberg, B. Acker, H. Thimmana, Oversizing of hvac system: Signatures and penalties, Energy and Buildings 43 (2-3) (2011) 468–475.
  * [40] N. Wang, H. Adeli, Sustainable building design, Journal of civil engineering and management 20 (1) (2014) 1–10.
  * [41] C. Browy, G. Gullikson, M. Indovina, A top-down approach to ic design (2014).
URL http://www.gnu.org.

  * [42] G. Martin, H. Chang, System-on-chip design, in: ASICON 2001. 2001 4th International Conference on ASIC Proceedings (Cat. No. 01TH8549), IEEE, 2001, pp. 12–17.
  * [43] K. Kondo, M. Kada, K. Takahashi, Three-Dimensional Integration of Semiconductors: Processing, Materials, and Applications, Springer, 2015.
  * [44] I. E. Sutherland, Sketch pad a man-machine graphical communication system, in: Proceedings of the SHARE design automation workshop, 1964, pp. 6–329.
  * [45] A. Vladimirescu, A. R. Newton, D. O. Pederson, SPICE Version 2G. 1 user’s Guide, University of California Berkeley, Ca, 1980.
  * [46] S. G. Shiva, Computer hardware description languages—a tutorial, Proceedings of the IEEE 67 (12) (1979) 1605–1615.
  * [47] I. Kuon, R. Tessier, J. Rose, et al., Fpga architecture: Survey and challenges, Foundations and Trends® in Electronic Design Automation 2 (2) (2008) 135–253.
  * [48] I. Cadence Design Systems, Lef/def 5.8 language reference, http://coriolis.lip6.fr/doc/lefdef/lefdefref/LEFSyntax.html (2017).
  * [49] D. D. Gajski, N. D. Dutt, A. C. Wu, S. Y. Lin, High—Level Synthesis: Introduction to Chip and System Design, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012\.
  * [50] G. Huang, J. Hu, Y. He, J. Liu, M. Ma, Z. Shen, J. Wu, Y. Xu, H. Zhang, K. Zhong, et al., Machine learning for electronic design automation: A survey, ACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems (TODAES) 26 (5) (2021) 1–46.
  * [51] C. Siva, Cadence cloud—the future of electronic design automation.
  * [52] R. Drechsler, et al., Advanced formal verification, Vol. 122, Springer, 2004.
  * [53] N. A. Sherwani, Algorithms for VLSI physical design automation, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.
  * [54] A. I. of Architects, Aia document e202tm-2008 building information modeling protocol exhibit, American Institute of Architects.
  * [55] T. Hong, J. Langevin, K. Sun, Building simulation: Ten challenges, Building Simulation 11 (5) (2018) 871–898.  doi:10.1007/s12273-018-0444-x.
URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-018-0444-x

  * [56] I. ISO, 16739-1: 2018: Industry foundation classes (ifc) for data sharing in the construction and facility management industries—part 1: Data schema, International Organisation for Standardisation: Geneva, Switzerland.
  * [57] gbXML, Green building xml schema, https://www.gbxml.org/ (2000).
  * [58] J. Hietanen, S. Final, Ifc model view definition format, International Alliance for Interoperability (2006) 1–29.
  * [59] T. Froese, Future directions for ifc-based interoperability, Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITcon) 8 (17) (2003) 231–246.
  * [60] J. Zhao, O. Seppänen, A. Peltokorpi, B. Badihi, H. Olivieri, Real-time resource tracking for analyzing value-adding time in construction, Automation in Construction 104 (2019) 52–65.
  * [61] L. Holm, J. E. Schaufelberger, Construction cost estimating, Routledge, 2021.
  * [62] A. Cavieres, A functional modeling framework for interdisciplinary building design, Ph.D. thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology (2018).