Assignment 1: Exploration of Large Language Models (LLMs) – Aryaman Mani A0255260L

Q1: Is it impossible to produce ‘new design, or propose an authentic style’ in the current
climate of architectural design?

I believe that all the LLMs will to some extent agree with the statement and reassert the
idea that authentic new design styles are improbable as contemporary styles defining our
current landscape are all pastiches of past works while still maintaining that new methods
will naturally lead to distinct forms.

Unsurprisingly all three LLMs tread a very cautious line, neither committing or wholly
rejecting the statement made in the question hence agreeing with the prediction I put forth.
Even though the nature of the question is general and has a broad scope ChatGPT and GPT-
4 both offer similar responses with matching factors, them being technological
advancements, societal or immediate environmental changes, sustainability, and cultural
impact. They differ slightly on the last point as both employ pathos but through a varied
lens, ChatGPT mentions spaces that accommodate human needs whereas GPT-4 talks on
personal expression through architecture. Claude-instant opts for a more pessimistic
outlook on potentially new architectural language but does so with detailed reasoning. It
factors in both the constraint and platform culture offers design whilst also listing examples
such as new material and monetary limitations. Claude-instant also takes a broader view on
the question itself as the potency of certain styles are determined by their successors and
not concurrent to its makers.
Q2: Has European architectural language become saturated through time, if so can you
predict the likelihood of a reprisal in classical architecture?

I believe that the LLMs will state that European architectural language has evolved through
the years and is not entirely disconnected from its roots, mentioning examples of various
revivals throughout history. I expect the LLMs to universally predict that a similar but not
identical revival remains a possibility in the future.

GPT-4 and ChatGPT both offer responses without an attempt at a prediction, however they
both acknowledged that resurgences will be seen in contemporary architectural language.
Whereas Claude-instant provides specific reasoning such as the stronghold Greco-Roman
and Renaissance forms have on the contemporary architects’ thinking, it cites Hadid, Piano,
Foster mimicking classical elements in their works, the postmodern ornament discourse and
monumentality and its significance to the general public. Both ChatGPT and GPT-4 don’t
sway away from the notion that architecture is always evolving and classical architecture
bears some influence onto arising works. Hence it is hard to grade their accuracy as its rarely
critical or analytical of the information posed in the question, whilst Claude-instant
undoubtedly functions at a high grade of accuracy with specifc examples, an acceptance
that debates will always exist, economic limitations and lastly public opinion.