neuromorphic [nʊər oʊ môrf ik] architecture: in the words of Dr. Michael Arbib at the 2014 Academy of Neuroscience for Architecture conference: “what happens if architecture incorporates in itself some of the lessons of the brain. If, in a sense, you give a brain to a building.”

Arbib, professor of Computer Science, Neuroscience and Psychology (among others) at USC, first formally proposed the term in a 2012 paper for Intelligent Buildings International: “Brains, machines and buildings: towards a neuromorphic architecture". The abstract for the paper explains the intent behind such neuromorphic architecture as: "exploring ways to incorporate lessons from studying real, biological brains to devise computational systems based on the findings of neuroscience that can be used in intelligent buildings". The paper continues with the argument that, under the premise that future buildings will be "perceiving, acting and adapting entities," neuroscientific research will lend a degree of empirical and "biologically grounded" influence to these designs.

One such instance of this kind of architecture, designed particularly to showcase potential "neuromorphic" building components, is Ada – the intelligent space, named after Ada Lovelace, a pioneer of early computer programming. Designed by ETH Zürich, the pavilion was exhibited at the Swiss National Exhibition of 2002, and displayed a series of responsive and interactive elements that conveyed "emotions" and even a "desire" to interact with visitors. The pavilion has been described as an "inside-out robot".

Welcome to Archinect's Lexicon. Architecture notoriously appropriates and invents new language – sometimes to make appeals, sometimes to fill conceptual gaps, sometimes nonsensically. But once a word is used, it's alive, and part of the conversation. We're here to take notes.