The application of AI technology in urban planning covers multiple levels, such as data analysis, decision support, and automated planning. Urban research relies on AI technology to understand and summarize the law of urban growth and improve the analysis of the evolution trend of urban space. Planning and design use AI technology to explore the relevant factors affecting urban development and their weights and discuss the critical role of green building technology in the sustainable development of the construction industry. With the increase in global energy consumption and carbon emissions, traditional building methods can no longer meet environmental protection requirements and efficient use of resources. As a sustainable development solution, green building technology has been paid more and more attention to and adopted by people. These technologies focus not only on the energy efficiency and environmental impact of buildings but also on the resource utilization and environmental load of green buildings over their entire life cycle driven by machine learning. This paper details the basic principles and applications of green building technologies, including AI-driven reduction of negative environmental impacts, improvement of occupant health, efficient use of resources, and optimization of indoor environmental quality. This paper focuses on the critical role of the LEED assessment system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council in advancing green building practices. In addition, the paper analyzes vital points such as water use in green building design, machine learning-driven wind environment optimization, solar technology application, and practical application cases of these technologies on a global scale.

Today, buildings are increasingly designed with transparent materials, with glass paneling being especially popular as an installation material for its architectural allure. However, its major drawback is admitting impractical amounts of sunlight to interior spaces. Office buildings with excessive sunlight in indoor areas result in worker inefficiency. This article studied kinetic façades as means to providing suitable sunlight for interior spaces integrated with a triple identity of DNA structure, photosynthetic behavior, and the twist used, which was divided into generation and evaluation. The generating phase first used an evolutionary engine to produce potential strip patterns. The kinetic façade was subsequently evaluated by Climate Studio software to validate daylight admission in an indoor space with Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) version 4.1 criteria. To analyze the kinetic façade system, the building envelope was divided into four types: glass panels, static façades, kinetic façade (version 1, rotating movement), and kinetic façades (version 2, twisting movement). In addition, for kinetic façades, degrees of simulation for versions 1 and 2 were 20, 50, 80, and 100 degrees, in order to ascertain potential for both façades to the same degree. Comparing all façades receiving the daylight factor (DF) into the space from more or less sunlight resulted in the decreasing order of potential as follows: entirely glass façade, kinetic façade version 2, kinetic façade version 1, and static façade. By receiving daylight factor (DF), the façade filtered appropriate amounts of daylight into the working space moderately and beneficially. Daylight simulation results indicated that the newly designed kinetic façade (version 2) had more potential than other building envelope types in terms of filtering beneficial daylight in indoor areas. This article also experimented with the kinetic façade prototype in an actual situation to test conditional environmental potential. The kinetic façade (version 2) was explored in the building envelope with varied adaptability in order to provide sunlight and for private-to-public, public-to-private, or semi-public working areas.

Buildings use 30-40 % of all energy resources and are thus their main consumers in modern society. Moreover, buildings require a vast amount of different raw materials. During the last two decades, several green building certifications have been created in order to consider social, economic and environmental aspects of sustainability of buildings. One of the most famous and widely used of these certifications is Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). So far, the use of LEED has concentrated in the US and other developed countries. One reason that restricts the use of this point-based system certification in developing countries is the limited data about its costs. In this study, the extra cost of the certification process will be evaluated besides the changes needed in the design of the building to reach the points required by LEED. At the first stage, the number of points the case study earns in its current format (Scenario 1) were found out, then the cost difference of getting either the Certified (Scenario 2) or Silver (Scenario 3) level LEED certification for the building was studied. It was found that besides some technical considerations, filling the criteria of the Certified and Silver level increases the total costs of construction by 3.4% and 5.9%. Further improvement of the building’s energy efficiency would enable the attainment of a higher-level certification. The results of the study could help to promote the use of green building certifications in Western Asia.

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the built environment (i.e., walk, transit, and bike scores) on the location and transportation or “alternative transportation” credit (LTc1) in Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for Existing Buildings version 4 (LEED-EB-v4) Platinum (n1 = 24), Gold (n2 = 112), Silver (n3 = 46), and Certified (n4 = 34) office buildings in the USA. Spearman’s test was used to estimate the correlation between built environment scores and LTc1 scores for each certification level. The Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test was used to estimate pairwise comparison between unpaired Platinum, Gold, Silver, and Certified groups. The Platinum, Gold, and Silver certification levels showed positive and significant correlations between the built environment and LTc1 (0.44 ≤ r ≤ 0.74, p ≤ 0.0312). By contrast, Certified certification levels showed a non-significant correlation (0.18 ≤ r ≤ 0.33, p ≥ 0.0579). Pairwise comparison showed that Platinum and Gold groups outperformed Certified groups in terms of built environment and LTc1 scores (Cliff’s δ ≥ 0.37, p ≤ 0.0099). Thus, for LEED-EBv4-certified projects located in downtown areas, LTc1 can be seen as a significant lever to achieve high levels of LEED certification.