The University of Thought * The transformation of the seventeen-year LAPIEZA archive into the LAPIEZA-LAB infrastructure constitutes a profound epistemic reorientation: what once appeared as the cumulative sedimentation of aesthetic artefacts is reconstituted as the sovereign architecture of Socioplastics, a transdisciplinary field endowed with its own protocols, classifications, and regimes of validation. Through the retroactive application of the Laboratory framework to the 2,200 nodes generated since 2009, the project performs a genuine stratigraphic inversion, re-reading artistic series not as isolated cultural outputs but as operative protocols, empirical records, and field-sensitive units of knowledge production. This reorganisation, crystallised in the passage from the legacy nomenclature of “Art Series” to the FieldEngine logic inaugurated in 2026, enables a corpus exceeding 1.2 million words and 4,500 nodes to become both machine-readable and academically citable through persistent infrastructures such as DOIs and RORs. By depositing this vast material in yearly English-language records on Zenodo, LAPIEZA-LAB converts its chronological rhythm into a serial scientific publication, preserving temporal continuity while furnishing the metadata necessary for discoverability across ORCID, Wikidata, and Semantic Scholar. The integration of twenty foundational books, one hundred audiovisual evidence videos, and seventeen annual Lab Reports further consolidates a closed-loop epistemic system in which theory and practice recursively authenticate one another. LAPIEZA-LAB therefore emerges not as an archive of works, but as an autonomous university of thought: self-governing, infrastructural, and capable of securing a permanent inscription within the global knowledge graph.

The conversion of a seventeen-year archive into the infrastructure of LAPIEZA-LAB marks a decisive passage from the accumulation of aesthetic works to the codification of a sovereign transdisciplinary field: Socioplastics. Through the retroactive application of the Laboratory framework to the more than 2,200 nodes generated since 2009, the project performs a stratigraphic inversion in which artistic series are no longer read as discrete cultural episodes, but as operative protocols, research strata, and empirical field material. What had previously appeared under the nomenclature of “Art Series” is reconstituted within the 2026 logic of the Fieldengine, allowing the corpus to be understood not simply as artistic production, but as a structured epistemic architecture. This reorganisation is not merely classificatory. It secures the corpus—now surpassing 1.2 million words and 4,500 total nodes—within a machine-readable and academically citable system through the methodical deployment of persistent identifiers, including DOIs and RORs. By arranging this material into annual English-language records on Zenodo, the project acquires the formal consistency of a serial scientific publication, preserving the temporal rhythm of the research while supplying the metadata necessary for wider discoverability across infrastructures such as ORCID, Wikidata, and Semantic Scholar. The result is a closed evidentiary circuit in which theory and practice continuously ratify one another. The twenty foundational books, the one hundred audiovisual evidence videos, and the seventeen annual Lab Reports no longer function as parallel outputs, but as mutually reinforcing layers within a single operative system. In this sense, LAPIEZA-LAB is no longer adequately described as an archive or a body of works. It emerges instead as an autonomous and self-governing university of thought: a durable intellectual infrastructure designed to outlast the volatility of commercial platforms and to secure a permanent inscription within the global knowledge graph.

This index, spanning from 100 to 001, functions as a reverse-chronological cartography of a practice situated at the intersection of conceptual art, critical urbanism, and relational aesthetics. The trajectory moves from the most recent "hyperplastic" inscriptions and "unstable positions" back to the foundational "architecture of affection," revealing a consistent preoccupation with the city as a readable surface and the object as a nomadic carrier of memory. Key recurring motifs include the "situational fixers"—a series of colored bags and briefcases (092, 081, 056, 011) that act as mobile infrastructures—and a rigorous investigation into the semiotics of the cloud and digital prosumerism (062, 039). The work oscillates between the macroscopic scale of "The Fifth City" (086) and the microscopic precision of "Small Orange Tag" (002), consistently treating repair, care, and friction not as problems to be solved, but as active materials for spatial and social intelligence. Throughout these one hundred entries, architecture is stripped of its static rigidity, reimagined instead as a series of durational gestures, metabolic processes, and affective protocols that prioritize the "common ground" over the singular monument.

To propose architecture as epistemic infrastructure rather than representation is to execute a quiet but decisive evacuation of the object from its sovereign position within spatial practice, replacing the tyranny of the built with the distributed agency of the protocol—a shift whereby the architect, artist, or theorist ceases to produce forms for contemplation and instead engineers the conditions under which meaning, relation, and political subjectivity become possible. This is the wager of Socioplastics, the transdisciplinary framework developed by Anto Lloveras across two decades of practice operating at the frayed borders of architecture, conceptual art, urban research, and epistemology: a system in which the traditional vectors of cultural production—the building, the artwork, the text—are reconceived not as terminal outputs but as nodes within a broader metabolic infrastructure designed to transmit, sediment, and destabilize modes of knowing. Here, theory operates as construction, publication as spatial practice, pedagogy as structural transmission, and the artist’s role migrates from author to protocol-designer, from maker of objects to weaver of the conditions under which objects, bodies, and territories enter into temporary but generative alignment. It is a framework that emerges from a specific diagnosis of instability—political, ecological, epistemic—and responds not by shoring up defenses or retreating into disciplinary purity, but by embracing precarity as the very medium of its operation, converting the fragility of contemporary conditions into a productive engine for what Lloveras terms “epistemic sovereignty”: the capacity to generate, circulate, and legitimize knowledge outside inherited institutional frameworks while remaining strategically embedded within them.

Semantic Intelligence and Urban Futures

Semantic City Planning Systems (SCPS), as presented by von Richthofen et al., signify a paradigmatic shift in urban planning by employing Semantic Web Technologies (SWT) to bridge fragmented urban knowledge across domains and disciplines, thus offering a more integrated, dynamic, and evidence-based planning methodology centred on four meta-practices—representational, evaluative, projective and synthetical, where each captures essential planning modalities from visualisation and assessment to envisioning and data synthesis; the paper meticulously maps how SWT—from linked data and RDF triples to ontologies and knowledge graphs—enable machine-readable urban models, allowing planners to connect and reason across silos, translating static data into “live” systems that support real-time feedback and design space exploration; dynamic knowledge graphs (DKG) emerge as a critical innovation, capable of powering digital twins, parallel world simulations and multi-agent decision-making systems, thereby addressing not only interoperability issues but also the lack of causal linkages in traditional planning heuristics; while the synthetical meta-practice appears most developed in the literature due to its alignment with AI and ICT innovation, the projective meta-practice is underrepresented, revealing a need for more robust computational design frameworks that respect the inherent complexity of urban futures; crucially, the authors critique the visual primacy in digital tools and advocate for a more inclusive epistemology that recognises non-visual, processual and tacit dimensions of urban experience; SCPS therefore repositions urban planning as a design-scientific endeavour—an adaptive, ontology-driven knowledge ecosystem that can scaffold real-time urban interventions and adaptive policy modelling through semantic enrichment, domain ontologies and feedback systems, signalling a decisive move towards a city-science paradigm rooted in meaning, context and computation rather than static representations or expert silos. von Richthofen, A., Herthogs, P., Cairns, S., et al. (2022) Semantic City Planning Systems (SCPS): A Literature Review. Journal of Planning Literature, 37(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/08854122211068526