Mimari koruma alanında karar destek sistemleri

Decision support systems in architectural conservation

Tez No: 1018801
Yazar: EREN OKAR
Danışmanlar: PROF. DR. YÜKSEL DEMİR
Tez Türü: Doktora
Konular: Mimarlık, Architecture
Anahtar Kelimeler: Belirtilmemiş.
Yıl: 2026
Dil: Türkçe
Üniversite: İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi
Enstitü: Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü
Ana Bilim Dalı: Mimarlık Ana Bilim Dalı
Bilim Dalı: Restorasyon Bilim Dalı
Sayfa Sayısı: Belirtilmemiş.

Özet

Bu çalışma Türkiye'deki kültürel mirasın korunması süreçlerini iyileştirmek amacıyla 660 sayılı ilke kararı çerçevesinde geliştirilecek bir Karar Destek Sistemi (KDS) için yol haritası sunmaktadır. Bu amaçla esaslı onarım kapsamında mevcut proje teslim ve onay süreçleri incelenerek mevcut aksaklıklar tespit edilmiş, devamında ise sürecin dijitalleşmesi ve uzman bilgisinin sisteme entegrasyonu üzerine bir model önerisi geliştirilmiştir. Türkiye UNESCO Dünya Mirası Listesi'nde 22 eserle 170 ülke arasında 15. Sırada yer almaktadır. Daha da önemlisi Türkiye 79 başvuru ile Geçici Liste'de ilk sırada yer almaktadır. Ülke genelinde tescillenmiş yaklaşık 130.000 eski eser ve sit alanı bulunmaktadır. Bu devasa envanterin yönetimi Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı'na bağlı Kültür Varlıklarını Koruma Bölge Kurulu Müdürlükleri (KVKBKM) tarafından yürütülmektedir. Çalışma mevcut proje teslim ve onay süreçlerinde çeşitli problemler tespit etmiştir. Bu problemler arasında; proje müelliflerinin belirli bir uzmanlığa sahip olmadan koruma projesi hazırlayabilmesi ve bundan ötürü kurullara sunulan projeler arasında nitelik farklarının oluşması, farklı kurulların sahip oldukları envantere ve kurula proje sunan müelliflere bağlı olarak farklı kriterlere göre değerlendirme yapması bu nedenle de tüm kurullar için asgari bir teslim içeriği bulunsa da, her kurul için geçerli ideal bir teslim standardının bulunmaması, kurul raportörleri ve uzman üyelerin yoğun gündemi olan kurullarda değerlendirmeleri hızlıca yapmak zorunda kalması, öte yandan gündemi yoğun olmayan kurulların ise raportör ya da uzman eksikliği nedeniyle zaman zaman görevlendirme ile başka kurullardan raportör ve/veya uzman talep etmesi, arşivlere erişimin ise sınırlı olması, kurulların birbirlerinin arşivlerine erişimlerinin olmaması, bunu sağlayacak dijitalleşme çalışmalarının ise ülke genelinde gerek altyapı gerek de iş yükü nedeniyle henüz tamamlanmaması gibi konular ön plana çıkmaktadır. Bu çalışma ile bahsedilen bu aksaklıklara karşı bir çözüm önerisi geliştirilmeye çalışılmış, bu sebeple de çalışmanın pratik olarak da önemli ve gerekli olacağı düşünülmüştür. Çalışmanın araştırma sorusu süreçte karşılaşılan bu problemlerin bütüncül bir çözümü için çok yönlü bir sistem bu süreçleri optimize edip edemeyeceğidir. Bu çok yönlü sistemin de süreçle benzerlikleri açısından bir KDS olmasına karar verilmiştir. Bu araştırma sorusuna cevap aranırken varılması hedeflenen birincil sonlanım noktası bahsi geçen karar destek sistemi altlığı için bir yol haritası oluşturulmasıdır. Bu altlığa ulaşmak için; 660 sayılı ilke kararını bir akış şemasına dönüştürerek süreç modelini belirlemek, paydaşları belirlemek, süreç modelinin eriştiği/erişemediği noktaları belirlemek, ve sonrasında bu konuları paydaşlara yöneltip yapılan planlamada atlanan herhangi bir noktanın olup olmadığını tespit ederek sistemin geliştirilmesini sağlamak hedeflenmiştir.

Özet (Çeviri)

Turkey is serving as a custodian to an immense cultural heritage with approximately one hundred and thirty thousand registered historical monuments and sites. Turkey's commitment to conservation is globally significant. This commitment is reflected in UNESCO World Heritage List's international standings; Turkey ranks fifteenth among hundred and seventy countries on the list and holds the leader position on the UNESCO Tentative List with seventy nine pending applications. This study examines the ongoing bureaucratic approval processes for restoration projects in relevant Turkish public institutions and proposes a multilateral framework for Turkey's conservation and restoration procedures by mapping resolution no. 660“Grouping, Maintenance and Repairs of Immovable Cultural Properties”(1999). Resolution no. 660, by its nature, gives the general outlines of the restoration project submission and evaluation process and is used as guidance support at the Regional Councils for the Conservation of Cultural Property. The Regional Councils are under the High Council for the Conservation of Cultural Property, which is under the Ministry of Culture and Tourism in an organisational hierarchy. The main objective is to address the restoration project submission and evaluation processes and propose an adaptable and sustainable restoration framework based on domain knowledge acquisition in architecture by local authorities in Turkey through digitisation. The expected outcome is an adaptable multilateral framework for restoration project processes in Turkey. As ICOMOS' Declaration of Amsterdam (1975) states;“Local authorities, which whom most of the important planning decisions rest, have a special responsibility for the protection of the architectural heritage and should assist one another by the exchange of ideas and information.”, the main contribution of our research is to suggest a multilateral framework to bring different institutions at different scales from Turkey and stakeholders involved in architectural heritage preservation together with the help of a Decision Support System (DSS) and to create a sustainable method for working, communicating, and transferring documents among these different actors for agile governance However, conservation and restoration procedures in Turkey are often bureaucratic. The conservation and restoration processes involve diverse stakeholders from different departments and organisations resulting in lengthy and complicated executions. The lengthy and complicated way of executing conservation and restoration procedures decelerates the work and creates a comparably unpopular opinion about restoration. The primary research question is;“How can a multilateral framework be proposed to optimise restoration project submission and evaluation processes in Turkey?”. In order to find a way to answer this question first the existing workflows were mapped out for detecting problems that are invisible unless the observer is not involved in the processes. After the detection of the problems, the next step was to offer solutions for the root causes of the problems, and finally digitising the restoration project submission and evaluation processes. This research offers a methodology that can also be adapted and used for any kind of tacit knowledge-based process digitisation involving both written and un-written processes, which can also be useful for digitising intangible heritage examples with similar processes. By translating resolution no. 660 into a flowchart, as in this study, the nodes formed by repetitive actions during the restoration project process until an appropriate outcome is obtained. These nodes are also useful for understanding the nature of the process and making it possible to question whether the cause depends on the resolution, technology, or related stakeholder. The requirements for restoration projects in Turkey were categorised and visually presented as a list. This list was transformed into a mind map, relating items to Information and Communications Technology (ICT) terms. The mind map indicates that a DSS is suitable for digitising the process. The relevant legislation was converted into a flowchart to digitalise the process in a DSS. This identified the main steps and actors. The interviews were conducted based on content analyses of multiple structured stakeholder interviews prepared from the flowchart points. These interviews were conducted after stakeholders clearly declared their consent to be a part of this study, and they were recorded on camera immediately before the interviews began. This was explained to the Ethics board and their approval for this study. The flowchart was evaluated based on stakeholder interviews. Their responses revealed strengths and weaknesses that will inform future studies on the use of DSSs in architectural conservation and restoration field. The methodology used in this study is based on domain knowledge acquisition in architectural conservation and restoration. Domain knowledge acquisition provides a way to understand the bureaucratic processes that are executed tacitly due to the nature of the expertise. To obtain domain knowledge the process followed these steps; first the whole architectural conservation and restoration project submission and evaluation process explained in resolution no. 660 as a flowchart and visualise the process was written, secondly a questionnaire according to the process steps and nodes formed by repetitive actions in the flowchart was prepared, thirdly participants from different positions in the process depending on their contribution to the process were differentiated, fourtly the participants through structured interviews and analysing their answers to detect obvious and hidden problems with the first flowchart were questioned and finally a multilateral and adaptive architectural restoration and conservation framework for councils was suggested. A qualitative and exploratory research approach was used that included structured interviews with eleven experts from three different positions of the restoration project process; the professional architect as the project author, the council corresponder as the project controller for the Regional Councils for the Conservation of Cultural Heritage, and the expert board member, as the decision maker for the Regional Councils for the Conservation of Cultural Heritage. These three expert groups were chosen according to the process structure. The project author's expertise was needed to prepare and submit the drawings so that the process could begin. The project controller's expertise was needed to control submissions to determine their proficiency and lead the process until submissions were ready to be presented to the board. Finally, decision-makers' expertise was needed to evaluate the submission and conclude the process. According to this setup, the selection criteria for these eleven experts were their working and project preparing, controlling and evaluating locations in Turkey. The selection was attempted to be made as the expertise covers as many as different locations possible. One of the results was a marked difference between the definition of the process as written in the resolution and practice. The infrastructure and facilities required to prepare a substantial restoration project have changed significantly in the last twenty years. The new available mediums have created new alternatives in terms of the content and presentation techniques of the projects. Another change is that the techniques applied in the field of analysis and conservation can be customised to finer details by the use of advanced technology. This allows for case-specific and problem-specific solutions to be developed, rather than generalisations of intervention decisions and techniques. Another finding was the bare minimum requirements for the project submission are not enough anymore. Extra requirements mentioned in the resolution became a part of the standard submission. In addition to this change, some regional councils have begun to demand a“credibility sheet”from the project authors to add to their submissions. Resolution no. 660 set the format and described the requirements for project submissions to councils in 1999. Today, as the cases become more detailed and multilayered, the regional councils try to fill the void palliatively, as resolution no. 660 lacks the answers to newly emerged needs. To standardise all the process formats among regional councils, a multilateral medium is needed to bring all stakeholders together within a DSS. Some other results were obtained although they were not expected. The pace of the project's progress also changed under urgent conditions. Abandoning the idea of protecting cultural heritage for rent and profit or the risk for the loss of cultural heritage due to disasters, such as earthquakes and fires, is the reason for urgent actions. Another obtained point was that in cases such as the cultural heritage has vital importance, such as hospitals, that also requires restoration; fast progress is only possible if board members, as the decision-makers, are experienced. This situation affects the pace of progress. The regional councils with such experienced board members can evaluate cases rapidly, whereas councils lacking this expertise need more time to evaluate such cases. The graph on the right shows the reason for the change in the pace of progress of undefined areas in the process by adding the complexity axis for undefined and/ or emergent cases. This also shows that the process timeline is not linear but rather planar. Therefore, a flowchart with multiple dimensions would be more useful than a linear flowchart. According to the findings of this study, the need is to create a system so the process can be adaptable among different councils. Creating a digital archive that can be accessible by different stakeholders at different levels can be very useful. This database can be stored on the servers of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism and executive authorisation of the Regional Councils for the Conservation of Cultural Heritage would be provided by the High Council for the Conservation of Cultural Heritage within the organisational hierarchy. This flowchart for the DSS also allows the digitisation of the process at various scales and contents, with the possibility of describing the work of the stakeholders involved in the process in the flowchart. The digitisation of the system allows the process to be less bureaucratic and accessible to different stakeholders at a faster and wider scale. Another advantage of this system is that in cases where councils need to assign employees for certain files due to the insufficient number of staff they have, employees access through the system that allows the process to be examined through an inter council system. Although all this system formation, standardisation, and digitisation has the potential to enable the process to work with more agility, it does not mean that the entire system should completely be digitised. Especially when the technological development process of the last twenty years is considered, the problems of accessing the data within the media such as floppy disks, or lately with CD/DVDs where all the data in a large period was stored is also a problem. The probability of not having an access or having troubles accessing the data today should not be ignored. Cloud services can be useful in preventing this problem, but copyright and privacy can become an issue between institutions and service providers. This problem can be avoided if public institutions develop servers to store and share their data with authorised stakeholders. In addition, some neutral stakeholders like universities and NGOs should keep independent archives for backup and control of digitally stored data in case it is needed so that the whole process can be transparent and trackable at any point. This study can be further elaborated in future studies in several different areas, such as computer science, software engineering, information and document management, information and communication technologies, architectural conservation, and digital heritage. The objective of this study was to create a methodological framework with an exploratory approach by using domain knowledge acquisition. Incorporating existing knowledge into a visual workflow by the validation of the domain knowledge and digitising an existing process is also aimed at transforming empirical experience into DSSs that can be adapted into similar organisations in need of any digitisation process. It can also be elaborated and used for intangible heritage-related topics and can help to form a framework for them in terms of transferring domain knowledge into a digital medium and being more accessible for interdisciplinary research. This digital medium provides another important point: When archiving becomes digital, it will be easier to store domain knowledge from various experts. The DSS creates the software and the network among these experts, making it possible to gather the big data from different interventions within this network using the DSS. After collecting an appropriate amount of data, it will be possible to train artificial intelligence (AI) agents and use them as assistants during similar evaluation processes. This possibility has the potential to be very useful by tracking down all the gathered data and suggesting AI-developed intervention alternatives from the patterns of existing data, even for cases without any useful data to evaluate for intervention.

Benzer Tezler

Tez No
682090
Yeniden kullanılan endüstri tesislerinde yeni işlev ile yapı alt sistemlerinde görülen müdahaleler arasındaki ilişkinin Türkiye'deki örnekler üzerinden incelenmesi
Examining the relationship between new function in reused industrial facilities and interventions in building sub-systems on the case of Turkey
HATİCE YASEMİN ÇAKIR
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
2021
Mimarlık İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi
Mimarlık Ana Bilim Dalı
DOÇ. DR. FETHİYE ECEM EDİS
Tez No
990257
Promptshıeld: polıcy-aware data loss preventıon framework for generatıve AI prompts
Promptshıeld: Politika farkındalıklı üretken yapay zekâ istemleri için veri kaybı önleme çerçevesi
EZGİ KELEŞ
Yüksek Lisans
İngilizce
2026
Bilgisayar Mühendisliği Bilimleri-Bilgisayar ve Kontrol İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi
Bilgisayar Mühendisliği Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. ŞERİF BAHTİYAR
Tez No
871447
Geleneksel kent dokusunun veri madenciliği yöntemiyle analizi ve yeni yapı tasarımları için yapay zekaya dayalı bir model önerisi
Analysis of traditional urban texture using data mining method and a model proposal based on artificial intelligence for new building desings
CEYHAN TAZEFİDAN
Doktora
Türkçe
2024
Mimarlık Konya Teknik Üniversitesi
Mimarlık Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. MEHMET EMİN BAŞAR
DR. ÖĞR. ÜYESİ ENGİN EŞME
Tez No
1020813
HBIM ile CBS entegrasyonu ve görsel veri toplama yöntemleri
HBIM integration with GIS and visual data acquisition methods
EMRE YAĞIZ YAMAN
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
2026
Mimarlık Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi
Enformatik Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. ÜMİT IŞIKDAĞ
Tez No
847490
Reducing in-vehicle communication overload and enhancing efficiency in autonomous and electrical vehicles
Otonom ve elektrikli araçlarda araç içi iletişim yükünü azaltma ve etkinliğini artırma
YUNUS KAĞAN ÖZDEMİR
Yüksek Lisans
İngilizce
2024
Otomotiv Mühendisliği İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi
Elektrik Mühendisliği Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. AHMET CANSIZ

Geri Dön