9a8852a82b
Owner's ruling: "there should be no cap on the proportion of a corridor, especially for big buildings, the crinkliness rule is there to prevent these becoming unpleasant spaces." proportion_circulation was [1.5, 0.5], failing a corridor above aspect 2.57 -- at the 1.97 m minimum width the width factor allows, a corridor 5.1 m long; at the 2.4 m target width, 6.2 m. The corpus shows the consequence: median circulation leaf 14.3 m2 at aspect 1.67, a stubby room rather than a corridor. The justification checks out arithmetically. The unpleasant space the cap was standing in for is a long BURIED corridor -- and crinkliness already sends that to zero, since a buried leaf has crink == 0. A long corridor along a facade scores 0.90. Aspect cannot tell those two apart; crinkliness can, so the cap was duplicating a rule that already exists and does the job better. Shipped: proportion_circulation = None (no aspect requirement). quality_proportion returns 1.0 for circulation, and shapecurve.leaf_constraints yields rmax = inf so the DP agrees with the fitness instead of pruning topologies the objective would accept. A habitable room's aspect target is untouched. The narrow side still holds -- width_circulation keeps a corridor >= 1.97 m, and "edge too long" still caps a single wall at 8 m. Unlike 39.14/39.18/39.19 this DOES change the fail set, which is the point. Across the twelve baseline artefacts it removes exactly 7 corridor proportion fails and adds none: harbor 33/43/42 -> 33/42/40, maple 54/73/55 -> 54/71/54, health-centre 4/9/5 -> 3/9/5, programme-house unchanged. Also recorded in 39.22, and a retraction: hxi was titled "search is rewarded for deleting the circulation spine", which 39.8 had already measured and refuted -- 0 of the 7 connectivity-breaking deletions sampled were rewarded. My own earlier comment on the bead restated that retracted claim; corrected, and the bead retitled. What binds next: removing the cap roughly doubles a corridor leaf's reach, from proportion at ~6.2 m to size_circulation at 12.5 m (2.4 m wide hits the 30 m2 fail edge there). size_circulation's target area is ZERO, the other half of the double-charge -- circulation priced as overhead once in value_circulation = 50 and again in a size factor whose optimum is non-existence. Not changed: it is a distinct parameter with its own rationale, unruled, and 39.16 is a standing reminder about inherited constants. 415 passed. Refs homemaker-py-hxi. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01MJ84Feep79Hhm3E4zZJmnB |
||
|---|---|---|
| .beads | ||
| .claude | ||
| examples | ||
| experiments | ||
| src/homemaker_layout | ||
| tests | ||
| .gitignore | ||
| AGENTS.md | ||
| CLAUDE.md | ||
| DESIGN.md | ||
| pyproject.toml | ||
| README.md | ||
homemaker-layout
Programme-driven building-layout search over slicing trees. A clean-room Python successor to the Perl Urb project, intended to eventually be 100% Python.
Why a rewrite
Urb represents a building as a binary slicing tree where room sizes are derived top-down from division ratios. That makes room area an emergent property of every cut above it, which:
- gives the genome low locality (a cut near the root rescales every descendant),
- makes target room sizes nearly impossible to hit, so the gaussian size penalty dominates fitness, and
- defeats crossover (transplanted subtrees lose their proportions).
homemaker inverts this: leaves carry target dimensions from the programme and division ratios are solved bottom-up for a fixed topology. The evolutionary search then only explores topology + types + adjacency.
Phase plan
Solver experiment: port Urb's geometry, re-solve ratios from programme targets, score the result against the original via the Perl oracle.✓Native Python fitness (retire the Perl oracle).✓Memetic search: canonical slicing genome + high-locality operators + Nelder-Mead inner loop.✓Penalty reshaping: lexicographic✓(-n_fails, fitness)outer-search comparison.Representation upgrade: canonical slicing encoding + bottom-up shape feasibility, scaled to larger programmes.✓- Search-quality experiments (current): a long running series of
opt-in levers tried against the
harbor-house,health-centre, andprogramme-houseexample corpora — leaf-sharing, finish-time cell→room collapse, ruin-and-recreate LNS, 2-opt polish, multi-use/co-located leaves, adjacency-graph and bubble-diagram fitness signals, and more. Most of these are negative/null results kept as opt-in flags or reference code rather than defaults. SeeDESIGN.md§11 onward for the full, numbered experiment log with methodology and results for each.
Layout
src/homemaker_layout/dom.py— read/write Urb.domYAML into aNodetree.src/homemaker_layout/geometry.py— faithful port of Urb's top-down geometry.src/homemaker_layout/programme.py— parsepatterns.configspace requirements.src/homemaker_layout/solver.py— bottom-up ratio solve (scipy).src/homemaker_layout/fitness.py— native Python fitness evaluator.src/homemaker_layout/fitness_cmd.py—homemaker-fitnessCLI (drop-in forurb-fitness.pl).src/homemaker_layout/collapse_cmd.py—homemaker-collapseCLI: finish-time global cell→room relabel of a.dom.src/homemaker_layout/graph.py— leaf-adjacency graph for programme-driven checks.src/homemaker_layout/genome.py— topology genome: base-floor tree + per-storey deltas.src/homemaker_layout/operators.py— high-locality mutation and subtree crossover.src/homemaker_layout/innerloop.py— ratio optimisation inner loop (Nelder-Mead / CMA-ES).src/homemaker_layout/driver.py— memetic search outer loop.src/homemaker_layout/evolve.py—homemaker-evolveCLI entry point.src/homemaker_layout/oracle.py— legacy Perl shim, kept for cross-validation only.src/homemaker_layout/bubble.py— 3D bubble-diagram adjacency fitness-signal prototype (DESIGN.md §27); validated null, not wired intofitness.py— reference only.
Room codes and reserved names
Leaf types live in three namespaces that share a first character. Only the first is enforced; the other two are conventions the fitness function reads, so a room's spelling can change how it is scored.
1. Generic structural types — C, O, S (reserved). The leaves the
search itself creates: C circulation, O outside, S sahn (an outside court
that also serves as circulation). Always uppercase. A programme code spelled
exactly C, O or S is rejected at load.
2. Programme room codes — anything else, lowercase. k1, b1, cr1,
of, and single-character codes like r or t. These may start with any
letter: since DESIGN.md §39.4 the generic tests match C/O/S exactly, so
naming a room cr1 no longer makes it circulation. (Before that fix it did —
and silently dropped it from the required-space check entirely.)
3. Access requirements — the usage: attribute. Every space declares one
of living, kitchen, bedroom, toilet, utility, none. Mandatory, no
fallback, and a missing or unknown value is a load error. It replaced a
first-character convention (b/t/l/k) under which a room silently
inherited another room's connectivity rules from its spelling — la1 "Laundry
Room" was trimmed as a living room (DESIGN.md §39.7).
spaces:
la1:
usage: utility # controlled, drives engine behaviour
name: Laundry Room # free text, building-specific
A usage value exists only where the engine treats it differently, so the vocabulary is closed: a new access class means new code, not new config. Check a programme with:
python experiments/audit_programme_config.py
which reports reserved-name collisions, the usage class each code picks up, and whether each room's size/width/proportion/crinkliness targets are mutually satisfiable at all.