The most direct example of architecture as an outcome of networked & distributed organization is Diller & Scofidio's temporary Blur structure. However, it begs the question whether it is necessay to conceive of clever, extraneous mechanisms, as they did, to render architecture as coexistent with the processes of the body & mind. Is it not enough for architecture to simply be inhabited to "activate" its inhabitants, in an "ongoing, unpredicatable process...with an interesting outcome"?

i think jmac is right. personally, i'd search for another topic, you will have a tough time with that one. there were plenty of kids in my school that took on this subject and no one did very well with it.

although not impossible, the key to working on this sort of project is to not rely on the activation to the create the project, but incorporate the activation as effect, similar to light, form, etc.
this is definitely a difficult line to trad, as it can quickly become gimmicky or trite. marcos novak did an interesting installation project several years ago. he used occupancy sensors to create an invisible form that revealed itself through the manipulation of the inhabitants environments. this sort of work definitely has not found very many successful realizations in the world of architecture. media art has been much more successful with it. the work of john klima is inspiring, as well as tim hawkinson's self portrait (incredible).

Actually i think the best way to learn and evolve is to give yourself difficult tasks... its the only way to get off the beaten track. I belive you can learn a lot from failing, by doing things the "wrong" way... Anyway, at least as long as you are a student.