Explores AI-assisted urban renewal scheme design in historic districts, highlighting public involvement.
With the expanding application of digital technologies in urban renewal, more effective ways of incorporating dispersed public experience and needs into the renewal process still require further exploration. To address this issue, this research innovatively proposes an AI-assisted renewal method for historic districts driven by urban memory, constructing a continuous methodological chain from the identification of public evaluations to problem translation, to scheme generation and feedback validation. This research integrates the concept of interessement devices from Actor-Network Theory (ANT) with generative AI technologies for case application and validation. Taking Hanzheng Street as a case study, this research extracts the public’s urban memory of the historic district from online comments and identifies renewal demands. These demands were further associated with urban image elements to clarify their spatial carriers and support the subsequent generation of scene-based renewal schemes. On this basis, AI-generated images are further used to present renewed scenarios, and public evaluations of the renewal effects are collected. The results show that urban memory of Hanzheng Street can be summarized into five themes, which were further translated into five obligatory passage points (OPPs), one core issue, and corresponding renewal demands for scene units. The renewal schemes generated through this method achieved a relatively high level of public recognition overall, with mean evaluation scores ranging from 4.10 to 4.27, an overall satisfaction mean of 4.19, and a Top-2 proportion of 82.8%. By incorporating public experience into the formation of renewal schemes, this research provides a people-oriented and effective pathway for participation and feedback in the renewal of historic districts, while also offering methodological reference for the renewal of similar historic districts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zou et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: