KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Öneri Dergisi / 2024 / Cilt: 20 Sayı: MX Yaratıcı Endüstriler Çalıştayı 2024: Yapay Zeka Çağında Yaratıcı Endüstriler Özel Sayısı Özel Sayı

Yapay Zeka Çağında Endüstriyel Tasarım: Uygulamalar Ve Eğitim Üzerine Etkileri

INDUSTRIAL DESIGN IN THE ERA OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: PRACTICES AND EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS

Enver Tatlisu(MİMAR SİNAN GÜZEL SANATLAR ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-9757-5948
Hatice Hümanur Bağlı(MARMARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-0224-0860
Ahmet Zeki Turan(MİMAR SİNAN GÜZEL SANATLAR ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-3729-145X
Ahmet Hamurcu(MARMARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-4083-8214
Aybike Eser(İSTANBUL TİCARET ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-3044-1830
Serdal Korkut Avcı
Sayfa
154–188
Yayın Tarihi
2025-04-24
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Sonuç olarak, YZ'nın tasarım süreçlerine entegrasyonu, geleceğin tasarımcılarının hem yaratıcı hem de teknolojik becerilerini geliştirmeleri açısından büyük fırsatlar sunmaktadır.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Bu makale, yapay zekanın (YZ) endüstriyel tasarım süreçlerine entegrasyonunu ve bunun tasarım eğitimi üzerindeki potansiyel etkilerini incelemektedir.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Öğrencilerin YZ araçlarını etkili bir şekilde kullanabilmeleri için bilinçli ve eleştirel bir yaklaşım geliştirilerek tasarım eğitimi müfredatında gerekli güncellemelerin yapılması kaçınılmaz görünmektedir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Sonuç olarak, YZ'nın tasarım süreçlerine entegrasyonu, geleceğin tasarımcılarının hem yaratıcı hem de teknolojik becerilerini geliştirmeleri açısından büyük fırsatlar sunmaktadır.
🔬Tür:Derleme
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:endüstriyel tasarım · yapay zeka · tasarım eğitimi

Özet

Bu makale, yapay zekanın (YZ) endüstriyel tasarım süreçlerine entegrasyonunu ve bunun tasarım eğitimi üzerindeki potansiyel etkilerini incelemektedir. Tarihsel olarak tasarım süreçleri, teknolojik ve toplumsal ihtiyaçlar doğrultusunda sürekli olarak evrim geçirmiştir. Günümüzde ise YZ, büyük veri setlerini analiz etme, öğrenme ve karar verme yetenekleri sayesinde tasarım süreçlerinde devrim niteliğinde değişiklikler yapma potansiyeline sahiptir. YZ, tasarım süreçlerine dahil olduğunda tekrarlayan görevlerin otomatikleştirilmesi, kullanıcı davranışlarının daha iyi anlaşılması ve kişiselleştirilmiş tasarım çözümlerinin sunulması gibi birçok avantaj sağlar. Ancak, bu birliktelik tasarımın doğası için riskler barındırdığı için geleceğin tasarımcılarının bu değişime hazırlanmaları gerekmektedir. Öğrencilerin YZ araçlarını etkili bir şekilde kullanabilmeleri için bilinçli ve eleştirel bir yaklaşım geliştirilerek tasarım eğitimi müfredatında gerekli güncellemelerin yapılması kaçınılmaz görünmektedir. YZ'nın bilinçli ve eleştirel kullanımı teşvik edilmedir. Analitik düşünme becerilerinin geliştirilmesi, disiplinler arası öğrenmenin desteklenmesi, insan odaklı yaklaşımların korunması ve etik yaklaşımların değerlendirilmesi gibi temalar bu yeni tasarım paradigmasında giderek önem kazanmaktadır. Öğrencilerin yaşam boyu öğrenme becerilerini kazanmaları ve YZ okuryazarlığı konusunda bilinçlenmeleri bu birlikteliğin sağlıklı bir zeminde inşa edilmesi için son derece önemlidir. Sonuç olarak, YZ'nın tasarım süreçlerine entegrasyonu, geleceğin tasarımcılarının hem yaratıcı hem de teknolojik becerilerini geliştirmeleri açısından büyük fırsatlar sunmaktadır. Bu fırsatları en iyi şekilde değerlendirebilmek için tasarım eğitimi alanında kapsamlı ve bilinçli adımlar atılması gerekmektedir.

Abstract

This paper explores the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into industrial design processes and its potential impact on design education. Historically, design processes have continuously evolved in line with technological and societal needs. Today, AI has the potential to revolutionize design processes through its ability to analyze large data sets, learn and make decisions. When AI is incorporated into design processes, it provides many advantages such as automating repetitive tasks, better understanding user behavior, and providing personalized design solutions. However, this integration carries risks for the nature of design and future designers need to prepared for this change. For students to use AI tools effectively, it seems inevitable to make necessary updates in the design education curriculum by developing a conscious and critical approach. Conscious and critical use of AI should be encouraged. Themes such as developing analytical thinking skills, supporting interdisciplinary learning, protecting human-centered approaches and evaluating ethical approaches are becoming increasingly important in this new design paradigm. It is of utmost importance for students to acquire lifelong learning skills and become aware of AI literacy in order to build this relationship on a healthy ground. In conclusion, the integration of AI into design processes offers great opportunities for future designers to develop both their creative and technological skills. In order to make the most of these opportunities, comprehensive and conscious steps should be taken in the field of design education.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Tatlisu, E., Bağlı, H. H., Turan, A. Z., Hamurcu, A., Eser, A., Avcı, S. K. (2025). Yapay Zeka Çağında Endüstriyel Tasarım: Uygulamalar Ve Eğitim Üzerine Etkileri. Öneri Dergisi, Cilt: 20 Sayı: MX Yaratıcı Endüstriler Çalıştayı 2024: Yapay Zeka Çağında Yaratıcı Endüstriler Özel Sayısı Özel Sayı, 154–188. https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.1500081

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (100)

  1. Arda, D. (2024). Investigation Of Artificial Intelligence Tools In Design Process And Creativity, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, ODTÜ, yüksek lisans tezi
  2. Akın, Ö. & Akın, C. (1996). Frames of reference in architectural design: analyzing the hyperacclamination (A-h-a ). Design Studies, (4), 341 -36’l (Baker & Yacef, 2009),
  3. Baker, Ryan & Yacef, Kalina. (2009). The State of Educational Data Mining in 2009: A Review and Future Visions. Journal of Educational Data Mining. 1. 3-17.
  4. Berisha, E., Cotella, G., Janin Rivolin, U., & Solly, A. (2021). Spatial governance and planning systems in the public control of spatial development: a European typology. European planning studies, 29(1), 181-200.
  5. Binns, R. (2018). Fairness in machine learning: Lessons from political philosophy. Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287594
  6. Boland, R. J., & Collopy, F. (2004). Managing as designing. Stanford University Press. Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking creates new alternatives for business and society. HarperBusiness.
  7. Calabretta, G., & Kleinsmann, M. (2017). Design thinking in the wild: A study of how design thinking is used in practice. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 3(2), 98-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.06.002
  8. Camburn, B., He, Y., Raviselvam, S., Luo, J., & Wood, K., (2020). “Machine Learning-Based Design Concept Evaluation,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 142(3), p. 031113.
  9. Chen, X. (2019). Design synthesis: A critical reflection on design synthesis. International Journal of Design, 13(1), 15-28. http://www.ijdesign.org/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/3263
  10. Clark, K.B. and Fujimoto, T. (1991) Product development performance: Strategy, organization, and management in the world auto industry. HBS Press, Boston.
  11. Cross, N. (1992). Design as a discipline. Design Studies, 3(3), 121-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(92)90025-B
  12. Cross, N. (1997). Descriptive models of creative design: application to an example, Design Studies, 18(4), 329-344.
  13. Cross, N. (2006). Understanding Design Cognition. In: Designerly Ways of Knowing. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-301-9_6
  14. Copeland, Jack (1993). Artificial Intelligence: A Philosophical Introduction. Wiley-Blackwell.
  15. Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. Berg Publishers.
  16. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives (pp. 325-339). Cambridge University Press.
  17. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Halton, E. (1981). The meaning of things: Domestic symbols and the self. Cambridge university press.
  18. Czarniawska, B. (2006). A theory of organizing. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  19. Daugherty, P. R., & Wilson, H. J. (2018). Human + machine: Reimagining work in the age of AI. Harvard Business Review Press.
  20. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
  21. Dell’Era, C., Magistretti, S., & Verganti, R. (2020). Design-driven innovation: From strategy to practice. Springer.
  22. Dering, M. L., Tucker, C. S., & Kumara, S., (2017). “An Unsupervised Machine Learning Approach to Assessing Designer Performance During Physical Prototyping,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 18(1), p. 011002.
  23. Domingos, P. (2012). A few useful things to know about machine learning. Communications of the ACM, 55(10), 78-87. https://doi.org/10.1145/2347736.2347755
  24. Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521-532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006
  25. Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem–solution. Design Studies, 22(5), 425-437.
  26. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
  27. Fan, P.; Jiang, Q. Exploring the Factors Influencing Continuance Intention to Use AI Drawing Tools: Insights from Designers. Systems 2024, 12,68. https://doi.org/10.3390/ systems12030068
  28. Fezari, M., Al-Dahoud, A., & Al-Dahoud, A. (2023). Augmanting Reality: The Power of Generative AI. University Badji Mokhtar Annaba: Annaba, Algeria.
  29. Finney, N. (2023). The impact of AI on design. Dezeen Dergisi. https://www.dezeen.com/
  30. Fu, K., Chan, J., Cagan, J., Kotovsky, K., Schunn, C. & Wood, K., (2012). “The Meaning of ‘Near’ and ‘Far’: The Impact of Structuring Design Databases and the Effect of Distance of Analogy on Design Output,” Proceedings of the ASME 2012 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Chicago, IL, Aug. 12–15, pp. 877–888.
  31. Galle, P. (2002). Design epistemology. Design Studies, 23(2), 123-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00029-1
  32. Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting, and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology (pp. 67-82). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  33. Gregory, S. A. (1966). The design method. Design Studies, 7(2), 67-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(66)90026-2
  34. Grinin, L. (2022). Revolutions and Historical Process. In: Goldstone, J.A., Grinin, L., Korotayev, A. (eds) Handbook of Revolutions in the 21st Century. Societies and Political Orders in Transition. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86468-2_5
  35. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.
  36. Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology. In D. F. Krell (Ed.), Basic writings (pp. 311-341). Harper & Row.
  37. Holtzblatt, K., & Beyer, H. (1998). Contextual design: Defining customer-centered systems. Elsevier.
  38. Hoque, F. (2024). Does Artificial Intelligence have the Possibility of Taking Over Designers' Jobs in the Future? International Journal of Science and Business, 31(1), 26-35. https://doi.org/10.58970/IJSB.2273
  39. Iansiti, M., & Lakhani, K. R. (2020a). Competing in the age of AI: Strategy and leadership when algorithms and networks run the world. Harvard Business Review Press.
  40. Iansiti, M., & Lakhani, K. R. (2020b). Digital ubiquity: How connections, sensors, and data are revolutionizing business. Harvard Business Review, 92(5), 91-99
  41. Iqbal, U., & Campbell, D. (2021). ChatGPT: The AI revolution in conversation. Journal of AI Research, 45(3), 156-162. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.12240
  42. Jones, J. C. (1970). Design methods: Seeds of human futures. Wiley.
  43. Kolko, J. (2010). Abductive thinking and sensemaking: The drivers of design synthesis. Design Issues, 26(1), 15-28. https://doi.org/10.1162/desi.2010.26.1.15
  44. Kolko, J. (2011). Exposing the magic of design: A practitioner's guide to the methods and theory of synthesis. Oxford University Press.
  45. Krippendorff, K. (2006), The Semantic Turn: a new foundation of design, Taylor&Francis,United States of America.
  46. Krishnan, V., Eppinger, S. D., & Whitney, D. E. (1997). A model-based framework to overlap product development activities. Management Science, 43(4), 437-451. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.43.4.437
  47. Lambert, F. (2018). Tesla's "neural net" approach for Autopilot is starting to pay off, says Elon Musk. Electrek. https://electrek.co/2018/06/10/tesla-autopilot-neural-net-pay-off-elon-musk/
  48. Lawson, B. (1980). How designers think: The design process demystified. Architectural Press.
  49. Liedtka, J. (2015). Perspective: Linking design thinking with innovation outcomes through cognitive bias reduction. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(6), 925-938. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12163
  50. Lindberg, T., Nielsen, L. M., & Rasmussen, J. (2018). Applying design thinking in innovative business development. Design Studies, 55(3), 263-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2017.11.006
  51. Love, T. (2000). Philosophy of design: A meta-theoretical structure for design theory. Design Studies, 21(3), 293-313. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(99)00012-2
  52. Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson Education.Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2014). Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2014.873177
  53. Magistretti, S., Dell'Era, C., & Verganti, R. (2020). How AI is reshaping design thinking. Journal of Design Studies, 45(3), 123-145.
  54. March, L. (1976). The logic of design and the question of value. In L. March (Ed.), The architecture of form (pp. 1-40). Cambridge University Press.
  55. Margolin, V. (1989). Design discourse: History, theory, criticism. University of Chicago Press.
  56. Margolin, V., & Buchanan, R. (Eds.). (1996). The idea of design. MIT Press.
  57. Maher, M. L., & Poon, J. (1996). Co-evolution of design objects and design processes. Artificial Intelligence in Design '96 (pp. 307-326). Springer.
  58. Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2014). Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57-125.
  59. Mumford, L. (1978). The transformations of man. Harper & Row
  60. Ong, B., Danhaive, R. & Mueller, C., (2021). “Machine Learning for Human Design: Sketch Interface for Structural Morphology Ideation Using Neural Networks,” Proceedings of the International Association for Shell and Spatial Structures (IASS) Symposium 2020/2021.
  61. Peirce, C. S. (1998). The essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings (Vol. 2). Indiana University Press.
  62. Primo, T., Calabrese, M., Del Prete A. & Anglani, A. (2017). “Additive Manufacturing Integration With Topology Optimization Methodology for Innovative Product Design,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 93(1), pp. 467–479.
  63. Putnam, L. L., & Holmer, M. (1992). Framing, reframing, and issue development in negotiations. Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 4(3), 128-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(92)80014-6
  64. Radford, Alec; Wu, Jeffrey; Child, Rewon; Luan, David; Amodei, Dario; Sutskever, Ilya (2019). "Language Models are Unsupervised Multitask Learners" (PDF). OpenAI. We demonstrate language models can perform down-stream tasks in a zero-shot setting – without any parameter or architecture modification)
  65. Ratti, C., & Claudel, M. (2015). The city of tomorrow: Sensors, networks, hackers, and the future of urban life. Yale University Press.
  66. Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155-169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730
  67. Rodriguez-Ferradas, M. I., Cantós, C., Viñeta, L., & Morer, P. (2024). How Will The Emergence Of Ai In The World Of Industrial Design Change The Training Needs Of Our Students︖. In DS 131: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (E&PDE 2024) (pp. 473-478).
  68. Saadi, J.I. & Yang, M.C. (2023a): Generative Design: Reframing the Role of the Designer in Early-Stage Design Process”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 145 No. 4, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4056799.
  69. Saadi, J.I. & Yang, M.C. (2023b) ‘Observations on the Implications of Generative Design Tools on Design Process and Designer Behaviour’, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED23), Bordeaux, France, 24-28 July 2023. DOI:10.1017/pds.2023.281
  70. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
  71. Schön, D. A. (1984). Problems, frames, and perspectives on designing. Design Studies, 5(3), 132-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(84)90004-4
  72. Schön, D. A. (1992). The reflective turn: Case studies in and on educational practice. Teachers College Press.
  73. Schrage, M. (1999). Serious play: How the world's best companies simulate to innovate. Harvard Business Review Press.
  74. Scharmer, C. O. (2007). Theory U: Leading from the future as it emerges. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
  75. Schwab, K. (2016). The fourth industrial revolution. World Economic Forum.
  76. Seidel, V., & Fixson, S. (2013). Adopting design thinking in novice multidisciplinary teams: The application and limits of design methods and reflexive practices. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(1), 19-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12061
  77. Selwyn, N. (2016). Minding our language: Why education and technology is full of bullshit…and what might be done about it. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(3), 437-443. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1097092
  78. Sharma, R. (2023). The impact of artificial intelligence on industrial design processes. Design Studies, 34(2), 221-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2022.12.001
  79. Shedroff, N. (2000). Experience design 1. New Riders Publishing.
  80. Simon, H. A. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press.
  81. Simon, H. A. (1988). Creativity and motivation: A response to Csikszentmihalyi. New Ideas in Psychology, 6(2), 177-181. https://doi.org/10.1016/0732-118X(88)90023-8
  82. Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2013). Learning analytics: Ethical issues and dilemmas. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510-1529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479366
  83. Storm, S., & Maanen, P. (2019). The role of frame-switching in design thinking. Design Studies, 65(2), 65-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.001
  84. Srinivasan, M. K., & Takayama, L. (2016). Help me please: Robot politeness strategies for soliciting help from humans. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 4999-5003. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858117
  85. Sökmen, M. (2022). Ürün tasarımının geleceği: Yapay zekâ oyunu nasıl değiştiriyor. DesignWanted. https://designwanted.com/ai-product-design/
  86. Taura, T. & Nagai, Y. (2017). Creativity in Innovation Design: the roles of intuition, synthesis, and hypothesis. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation. 5. 1-18. 10.1080/21650349.2017.1313132.
  87. Tovey, M. (2012). Designing in a design context. Springer.
  88. Ulrich, K. T., & Eppinger, S. D. (1995). Product design and development. McGraw-Hill. URL1: Vizcom https://www.vizcom.ai/overview. Erişim: 19.09.2024
  89. Valkenburg, R. (1998). Shared understanding as a condition for team design. Automation in Construction, 7(3), 279-290.
  90. Verganti, R., Vendraminelli, L., & Iansiti, M. (2020). Innovation and design in the age of artificial intelligence. Harvard Business Review, 98(4), 62-71. https://hbr.org/2020/07/innovation-and-design-in-the-age-of-artificial-intelligence
  91. Vincent, J. (2022). OpenAI’s ChatGPT: The AI revolution in conversation. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/
  92. Westphal, E. & Seitz, H. (2024) Generative Artificial Intelligence: Analyzing Its Future Applications in Additive Manufacturing. Big Data Cogn. Comput. 8(74). https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc8070074
  93. Windl M., Sebastian S Feger, Lara Zijlstra, Albrecht Schmidt, and Pawel W Wozniak. (2022). ‘It Is Not Always Discovery Time’: Four Pragmatic Approaches in Designing AI Systems. In CHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12.
  94. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. SAGE Publications.
  95. Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409-421. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0133
  96. Wooldridge, M. (2022). A brief history of AI: Artificial intelligence from John McCarthy to ChatGPT. Cambridge University Press.
  97. Yin, H.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, Y. (2023). The Exploration of Integrating the Midjourney Artificial Intelligence Generated Content Tool into Design Systems to Direct Designers towards Future-Oriented Innovation. Systems, 11, 566. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11120566
  98. Wrigley, T. (2011). Opening Pandora’s box: A new look at the Industrial Revolution. VoxEU. Retrieved from https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/opening-pandoras-box-new-look-industrial-revolution
  99. Zahedi, M. (2016). Design thinking in the wild: A study of how design thinking is used in practice. International Journal of Design, 10(2), 67-83. http://www.ijdesign.org/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/2173
  100. Zurlo, F. (2020). Design driven innovation. Politecnico di Milano.