In object-oriented historical research the need to combine hypotheses and textual arguments with the critical analysis based on sources – such as floor plans, sections, perspectives, and photographs – has considerably benefited from the developments in Digital Humanities (Münster, 2022). The use of digital 3D models has overcome many limitations inherent to two-dimensional records. Since the early 1990s hypothetical 3D reconstructions have therefore increasingly become routine research tools and essential means of representation capable of offering new methods of investigation, enabling new insights into the object-related research. In terms of a holistic approach to the analysis and case studies, i.e. the enhanced ability to examine and explore (Favro, 2012) serious challenges remain regarding documentation, interoperability and long-term access to 3D-based research outputs.In this context, numerous initiatives and research projects have emerged with the common objective of systematising and rationalising the various problems identified by scholars. Such projects still tend to remain isolated, lacking a significant impact on the community of potential users. 3D research outputs are not widely applicable, due to the complex prototypes of the software architecture, difficult to apply in a broad sense. Furthermore, the ‘old’ problems still exist, i.e. the traditional approaches - which do not consider a 3D model as a scholarly result, but only an investigative tool - and the reluctance to share these results and the associated procedures. Therefore, an attempt is being made to define the development and evaluation of an applicable methodology for the hypothetical 3D historical reconstruction, based on a shared theoretical approach.The working method presented here reflects many years of engagement with source-based hypothetical 3D reconstruction of no longer extant or unrealised architecture for teaching and research. Our focus is therefore on a low-threshold, application-oriented method of the Scientific Reference Model (SRM) as a documented and published basic model. The structured SRM represents an important working and knowledge state, which clarifies the essential information about the object, its components, its credibility or extent of hypothesis and copyright. Such SRM is made available for further research, edits and refinement, as well as further derivatives (special applications). Thus SRM represents a findable referential result of a scholarly investigation of a material object that physically no longer exists.

This paper presents preliminary findings from the ongoing Erasmus+ European project CoVHer, which focuses on the hypothetical virtual reconstructions of lost or unbuilt architecture. This contribution provides a critical assessment of the terminology specific to this field. A significant challenge lies in the absence of standardised terminology for many foundational aspects, which can lead to misconceptions and misunderstandings. The research begins with a comprehensive review of the relevant literature in the field, aiming to identify which terms are most widely accepted and appropriate to use and which are ambiguous or should be avoided. For concepts that lack a clear definition, new terminology is proposed. This paper analyses six key terms: reconstruction, uncertainty, raw model, informative model, digital representation methods, and 3D modelling techniques.

Scientific practice relies on the rigorous documentation of procedures, methods, and outcomes, governed by principles like method verification, objectivity, and source disclosure. In the computer-based hypothetical 3D reconstruction of destroyed or never realised art and architecture, adhering to these principles faces challenges due to evolving software, methods, and data types, leading to a lack of standardised documentation and publication practices for 3D models. Consequently, the traceability, accessibility, and sustainability of research outcomes are compromised. Decades after the advent of computer-aided 3D visualisation in cultural heritage, there is a critical need to define applicable methodology and comprehensive documentation standards. Web-based platforms necessitate technical infrastructures and clear scientific methodologies to ensure understandable model creation and sustainable accessibility to 3D research data. The Scientific Reference Model proposes an accessible academic framework for this kind of 3D reconstruction, aiming to facilitate broad adoption. Developed and tested in research projects and educational contexts, this model aims to establish clear, accessible 3D models on the web, serving as foundational references for future research and knowledge dissemination.

Set in the context of semiotics of (artefact) design, this contribution suggests a new frame to examine the “eidetic categories” used in the analysis of the “plastic level” of (visual) artefacts, starting from Gilbert Simondon's thesis. Simondon traces the most essential evolutionary path in relation to the design of “inorganic” artefacts: these products tend to become increasingly “organic”, made of integrated parts and bound to their environment. This evolution is not only technical, but also aesthetical, and it leads to consider the matter as something that tends to find the most metastable arrangement. Thus, there is even an evolution in the “eidetic categories” adopted to describe an object: this is explained through the case of Turing's morphogenetic model (1952) and some examples of its recent applications to different fields, from urban studies to decoration and morphogenetic design.

The contribution supports the following thesis: the use of semiotic methods of the structural school in applications of Artificial Intelligence allows to deal with aesthetic and historical-critical issues with greater documentation capability. In particular, the contribution concerns an actualisation of the axiology of spatial enhancement built by Jean Marie Floch assuming it as a fundamental semantic framework to construct an interior morphology valid in the various areas of interior design.Floch’s semiotic analysis allows us to better specify the notion of “environmental affordance” developed in James Gibson’s phenomenology of ecological perception. Following Gibson, the authors indicate an ‘environmental’ specification of the “affordances” and pose the question of their objectification and measurement.For the purpose of this objectification and measurement of environmental affordances, the contribution advances the hypothesis of using some Artificial Intelligence applications usually employed, nowadays, in the processing of large data sets of digital documents, to achieve creative, critical, historical-archival aims.In conclusion, the contribution outlines some fundamental conditions of possibility of such an objective measurement by describing some initial characteristics of an artificial system of recognition of morphological categories of interior spaces starting from huge data sets of documents.