Such a problem, in standard form, presents an objective function Z=f(x), of n variables x, to be minimized and a system of linear equations and/or inequalities, on the same variables, which represent the constraints and which define an admissible area for the solution.

The architectural organism is modelled as an assembly of parallelepiped shaped space entities or units, provided with a certain number of "holes" that permit functional corresponding connection. The pursued intent being optimal assembly.

The model, in its mathematical form, fits a standard Non-Linear M.P. (N.L.P.) problem, since the objective function Z is non-linear and the constraints are represented by inequalities. In its graphic form it reproduces an image of all the space units constituting the organism; moreover it is able to represent these units, in their logical and physical individuality, and their mutual relationship, as well as the ones with the external environment.

The principal item of a full-scale lab preferably features a court-like facility where the 1:1 simulations are performed. Such lab facilities can be found at various architecture education centers throughout Europe. In the early eighties the European Full-scale Modeling Association (abrev. EFA, full-scale standing for 1:1 or simulation in full-scale) was founded acting as the patron of a conference every two years. In line with the conference title "Full-scale Modeling in the Age of Virtual Reality" the participants were particularly concerned with the relationship of physical 1:1 simulations and VR. The assumption that those creating architecture provide of a higher degree of affinity to physical than to virtual models and prototypes was subject of vivid discussions.

Furthermore, the participants devoted some time to issues such as the integration of model-like ideas and built reality thus uncovering any such synergy-effects. Thus some major considerations had to be given to the question of how the architectís model-like ideas and built reality would correspond, also dealing with user-suitability as such: what the building artist might be thrilled with might not turn out to be the residentsí and usersí everyday delight. Aspects of this nature were considered at the îArchitectural Psychology Meeting” together with specialists on environment and aesthetics. As individual space perception as well as its evaluation differ amongst various architects, and these being from various countries furnishing cultural differences, lively discussions were bound to arise.

In times characterized by the growing “architectural criticism” to the same extent as by the helplessness of the anonymous user the communication process between contractors, planer and users gains in importance. If communication is successful will not only depend on the quality of the project but also on the means of conveyance, e.g. visualizing or model representation. Can planning evaluation be effectively supported by virtual reality (VR)?