AI vs. Authentic: Decoding Architectural Imagery

As AI becomes increasingly integrated into design processes, accurately distinguishing AI-generated architectural images from real photographs is crucial for effective communication and decision-making in the field. Aim: This study explored how experienced designers perceive and identify AI-generated images, focusing on the challenges they encounter and the visual cues they rely on to assess authenticity. Method: Employing a mixed methods approach, five designers (1–20 years of experience) from a single firm participated in an hour-long focus group session on the Miro platform. They examined 16 images—8 AI-generated and 8 real—and were asked to identify AI-generated visuals. Annotations and discussions were thematically analyzed to capture participants’ decision-making processes and patterns of observation. Result: Overall, participants correctly classified 65% of exterior images and 70% of interior images. Analysis revealed five recurrent themes: subtle distortions in spatial elements, distorted or “demon-like” human features, warped backgrounds and inconsistent perspectives, over-perfection that lacked real-world imperfections, and reliance on professional domain knowledge. Night shots and images containing people presented consistent difficulties, while architectural expertise bolstered participants’ confidence in detecting anomalies. Limitation: Time constraints, limited zoom functionality on the Miro platform, and occasional confusion with voting mechanics potentially reduced thoroughness and accuracy. Environmental factors, including early-finishers discussing progress, introduced additional distractions that may have biased responses. Conclusion: These findings highlight how architectural expertise, image content, and technological constraints shape the process of identifying AI-generated images. As part of a broader ongoing study also including participants without an architectural background, this research underscores the importance of examining how diverse user groups approach AI-generated visual content.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
AHFE international
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.54941/ahfe1006217
Primary Topic
3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AI vs. Authentic: Decoding Architectural Imagery

Sara Bayramzadeh, Hamid Estejab
AHFE international
3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
article

AI vs. Authentic: Decoding Architectural Imagery

Sara Bayramzadeh, Hamid Estejab
article en

Abstract

As AI becomes increasingly integrated into design processes, accurately distinguishing AI-generated architectural images from real photographs is crucial for effective communication and decision-making in the field. Aim: This study explored how experienced designers perceive and identify AI-generated images, focusing on the challenges they encounter and the visual cues they rely on to assess authenticity. Method: Employing a mixed methods approach, five designers (1–20 years of experience) from a single firm participated in an hour-long focus group session on the Miro platform. They examined 16 images—8 AI-generated and 8 real—and were asked to identify AI-generated visuals. Annotations and discussions were thematically analyzed to capture participants’ decision-making processes and patterns of observation. Result: Overall, participants correctly classified 65% of exterior images and 70% of interior images. Analysis revealed five recurrent themes: subtle distortions in spatial elements, distorted or “demon-like” human features, warped backgrounds and inconsistent perspectives, over-perfection that lacked real-world imperfections, and reliance on professional domain knowledge. Night shots and images containing people presented consistent difficulties, while architectural expertise bolstered participants’ confidence in detecting anomalies. Limitation: Time constraints, limited zoom functionality on the Miro platform, and occasional confusion with voting mechanics potentially reduced thoroughness and accuracy. Environmental factors, including early-finishers discussing progress, introduced additional distractions that may have biased responses. Conclusion: These findings highlight how architectural expertise, image content, and technological constraints shape the process of identifying AI-generated images. As part of a broader ongoing study also including participants without an architectural background, this research underscores the importance of examining how diverse user groups approach AI-generated visual content.

AHFE internationalVol. 163
Openalex Percentile: Top 78%
3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.