My archive is a collection of images of trash/litter I find around the city. I have archived trash before so this time instead of by type, I want to categorize by location found.

In the first version: At bottom, the status of the score after each round There are no added details aside from descriptions of algorithm Results show intricacies of the calculations and data to justify Start page describes the system and mechanism The actual quiz is extremely simple and rounds don’t seem distinct In the second version: Shuffle between rounds to seem like it isn’t randomizing but trying to adjust to your previous results Processing at the end to seem as if it is truly thinking and processing alot of information Radar observes mouse movement Results aren’t only justified with data, but weigh the meanings of the styles and weigh them in comparison to each other Results seem thoughtfully written with more descriptions and reference results as less objective than first version Results type as the window opens Results include projections

In this assignment I chose the system of falling in love. I was curious to see how something emotional and personal could be broken down into a systematic process. The system conflates an intimate, human process with a pattern of neurochemical fluctuation. The system progresses in stages and while inputs can vary, the path of progress remains. The system requires complex and ever-changing inputs which requires the system to remain intelligent and adaptable.

More visible information or data does not necessarily present as more intelligent. Instead it highlights how machines are limited to processing simple, numeric data. It can also undermine the system, by making the user unnecessarily aware of how their responses are being utilized which can lead to manipulation of results. Hiding the mechanism and adding friction forces the user to trust the system and release control of the results. Translating data into practical information actually presents are more intelligent and complex. Cute little icons that react to and support the user are effective in bonding the user to the system. Personifying the system’s observance of the user reinforces the mechanisms ability to weigh complex inputs. Kept Mouse movement detection Shuffle between rounds Processing results pause ‘Typed’ results Removed Technical descriptions of the algorithm Live results (may impact the user’s decision making) Top traits information during quiz Data-focused results Added Minimal but somewhat functional description of algorithm Little icons that react to user interaction (responses, response time, progression of quiz, etc.) Results that combine the algorithmic process with practical translations

My system of ‘falling in love’ is dynamic and complex, but I decided to focus on the decision-making mechanism that is required to react to inputs. This game asks the player not to be the person falling in love, but the mechanism within the process that processes new inputs and decides how to proceed accordingly.