What does ‘zero-shot learning’ mean – can AI analyze cities without training?

Building design
a-city-street-full-of-traffic-next-to-tall-buildings-L7RbsRIG7DQ

Busy street in the urban center with modern high-rise buildings, taken by Bin White

Kann künstliche Intelligenz wirklich ohne Training komplexe Städte analysieren? Zero-Shot Learning verspricht genau das – und stellt damit nicht weniger als die Spielregeln der urbanen Planung, Analyse und Prognose infrage. Wer glaubt, dass Maschinen erst monatelang mit Daten gefüttert werden müssen, um den urbanen Dschungel zu verstehen, wird von den neuesten Entwicklungen in der KI-Forschung eines Besseren belehrt. Zeit also, den Mythos zu entzaubern – und zu fragen: Was kann Zero-Shot Learning, was bedeutet es für Stadtplaner, und wie realistisch ist der Traum von der trainierungsfreien KI im Stadtraum?

  • Definition und Grundlagen: Was Zero-Shot Learning auszeichnet und wie es sich von klassischen KI-Ansätzen unterscheidet.
  • Anwendungsfelder: Wo und wie Zero-Shot Learning bereits heute in der Stadtanalyse eingesetzt wird – von Bilderkennung bis Mobilitätsprognose.
  • Technische Mechanismen: Wie Zero-Shot Learning funktioniert, welche Modelle führend sind und wie urbane Daten integriert werden.
  • Chancen und Herausforderungen: Welche Potenziale Zero-Shot Learning für nachhaltige Stadtentwicklung und Planung bietet – und wo die Grenzen liegen.
  • Praxisbeispiele: Wie Städte und Forschungseinrichtungen in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz mit Zero-Shot-Ansätzen experimentieren.
  • Risiken: Warum algorithmische Verzerrungen, mangelnde Nachvollziehbarkeit und Datenqualität eine besondere Rolle spielen.
  • Ausblick: Wie Zero-Shot Learning klassische Planungsinstrumente erweitern könnte – und was es für die künftige Rolle von Planern bedeutet.

Zero-Shot Learning – KI ohne Training: Definition, Hintergründe und Relevanz für die Stadtplanung

Zero-Shot Learning klingt wie ein Versprechen aus der Science-Fiction: Eine künstliche Intelligenz, die komplexe Aufgaben löst, ohne jemals ein Beispiel aus genau diesem Bereich gesehen zu haben. Während klassische maschinelle Lernverfahren auf riesige Mengen annotierter Trainingsdaten angewiesen sind, verlässt sich Zero-Shot Learning auf allgemeines Wissen, semantische Beziehungen und Kontextverständnis. Das Prinzip: Die KI wird mit Grundwissen ausgestattet, etwa über Objekte, Konzepte oder Prozesse, und kann daraus auf völlig neue Fragestellungen schließen – ganz ohne spezifisches Training auf die jeweilige Aufgabe.

Für die urbane Planung und Analyse ist dieser Ansatz revolutionär. Städte sind unglaublich vielgestaltig, ihre Datenbasis oft fragmentiert, heterogen und dynamisch. Kein Wunder, dass klassische KI-Modelle wie Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) oder Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) schnell an ihre Grenzen stoßen, wenn es darum geht, neue Phänomene zu erkennen, für die keine historischen Trainingsdaten existieren. Zero-Shot Learning verspricht hier Abhilfe: Es erlaubt, beispielsweise aus allgemeinen Beschreibungen von Gebäudetypen, Verkehrsmustern oder Klimazonen auf bislang unbekannte städtische Situationen zu schließen.

Doch was bedeutet das konkret? Im Kern geht es um die Fähigkeit von KI-Modellen, Kontext zu verstehen. Ein Beispiel: Während ein klassischer Algorithmus nur „rote Ampeln“ erkennt, wenn er sie vorher hunderttausendfach gesehen hat, kann ein Zero-Shot-Modell aus der Beschreibung „eine leuchtende Lichtquelle an einer Straßenkreuzung, die Verkehr anhält“ auch in bislang unbekannten Städten rote Ampeln identifizieren – selbst, wenn sie anders aussehen als in den Trainingsdaten. Übertragen auf die Stadtplanung bedeutet das: KI kann etwa neue Gebäudetypologien, innovative Mobilitätslösungen oder untypische Nutzungsmuster erkennen und bewerten, ohne spezifisch darauf trainiert worden zu sein.

Die Relevanz für die Praxis kann kaum überschätzt werden. Zero-Shot Learning senkt die Hürden für den KI-Einsatz dramatisch, weil nicht mehr für jede Aufgabe riesige, oft teure und fehleranfällige Datensätze aufgebaut werden müssen. Gerade für Kommunen in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz, die häufig mit Datenschutzauflagen, knappen Ressourcen und zersplitterten Datenlandschaften kämpfen, eröffnet das völlig neue Möglichkeiten. Statt aufwendiger Trainingsphasen könnten Verfahren direkt eingesetzt werden – agil, flexibel und adaptiv.

Allerdings ist Vorsicht geboten: Zero-Shot Learning ist kein Allheilmittel. Die Modelle sind nur so gut wie ihr Grundverständnis von urbanen Systemen und Konzepten. Wer etwa ein Modell mit unscharfen oder unvollständigen Beschreibungen füttert, riskiert grobe Fehlinterpretationen. Die Kunst besteht darin, Wissen sauber zu kodieren, semantische Beziehungen präzise zu definieren und die Grenzen der Generalisierung zu erkennen. Nur so wird Zero-Shot Learning zu einem Werkzeug, das Planer, Architekten und Entscheider wirklich unterstützt – und nicht in die Irre führt.

Technische Mechanismen: So funktioniert Zero-Shot Learning mit urbanen Daten

Das Herzstück des Zero-Shot Learning sind sogenannte Embeddings und semantische Räume. Mittels Techniken wie Word Embeddings (zum Beispiel Word2Vec, GloVe) oder neueren Modellen wie BERT und GPT werden Begriffe, Beschreibungen und Objekte in hochdimensionale Vektoren übersetzt. Diese Vektoren repräsentieren die semantische Ähnlichkeit zwischen Konzepten – beispielsweise zwischen „Fahrradstraße“, „Shared Space“ und „verkehrsberuhigte Zone“. Der Trick: Auch für bisher unbekannte Begriffe kann das Modell aus dem Kontext und den Beziehungen zu bekannten Begriffen schließen, was gemeint ist.

Im urbanen Kontext bedeutet das, dass eine KI, die nie zuvor einen „Pocket Park“ in einer deutschen Stadt gesehen hat, aus der Beschreibung „eine kleine öffentliche Grünfläche zwischen bestehenden Gebäuden“ erkennen kann, was gemeint ist – und diesen Typus in Luftbildern, Plänen oder Sensordaten identifizieren kann. Für Bild- und Objekterkennung werden dabei oft sogenannte Transformer-Modelle eingesetzt, die Kontextinformationen besonders effektiv verarbeiten können. Ein prominentes Beispiel ist das CLIP-Modell von OpenAI, das Bilder und Textbeschreibungen in einen gemeinsamen semantischen Raum abbildet und so Zero-Shot-Klassifikation ermöglicht.

Ein weiteres technisches Element ist die Nutzung von Ontologien und Wissensgraphen. Hierbei werden Beziehungen zwischen urbanen Objekten, Nutzungen, Prozessen und Akteuren explizit modelliert. Ein Wissensgraph kann etwa beschreiben, dass „Bushaltestellen“ typischerweise an „Straßenkreuzungen“ liegen und mit „Fahrplänen“ assoziiert sind. Wird ein neues, bislang unbekanntes Element entdeckt, kann die KI über die semantische Nachbarschaft erschließen, wie es einzuordnen ist. Das ist besonders wertvoll für die Analyse von Stadtdaten, bei denen klassische Kategorien häufig nicht ausreichen.

Praktisch funktioniert Zero-Shot Learning in der Stadtanalyse zum Beispiel so: Ein Planungsamt möchte wissen, wo in der Stadt informelle Treffpunkte entstehen. Statt monatelang Daten zu annotieren, beschreibt man der KI, was einen solchen Treffpunkt ausmacht – etwa Sitzgelegenheiten, Schatten, Nähe zu Gastronomie, hohe Fußgängerfrequenz. Die KI durchsucht dann verschiedene Datensätze, identifiziert Muster und schlägt potenzielle Orte vor – auch wenn sie diese nie zuvor explizit gesehen hat. Ein ähnliches Vorgehen ist auch bei der Erkennung von Nutzungskonflikten, der Prognose neuer Mobilitätsrouten oder der Identifikation von Mikroklimazonen denkbar.

Die Integration in bestehende urbane Datenplattformen ist technisch anspruchsvoll, aber machbar. Zero-Shot-Modelle können als Analysewerkzeuge in Urban Data Hubs, Geoinformationssysteme oder Digital Twins eingebunden werden. Wichtig ist, dass sie mit gut gepflegten Metadaten, offenen Schnittstellen und klaren semantischen Standards arbeiten. Nur dann entfalten sie ihr volles Potenzial – und werden zu intelligenten, adaptiven Analyseinstrumenten, die auch in heterogenen Datenlandschaften zuverlässige Ergebnisse liefern.

Anwendungsfelder und Praxisbeispiele: Wo Zero-Shot Learning heute schon die Stadtanalyse verändert

Die Liste der potenziellen Anwendungsfelder für Zero-Shot Learning in der Stadtplanung und Stadtforschung ist lang – und wächst rasant. Besonders dynamisch entwickelt sich der Bereich der Bild- und Satellitendatenauswertung. Forscher an der Technischen Universität München experimentieren mit Zero-Shot-Modellen, um aus Luftbildern unterschiedliche Gebäudetypen, Grünflächen oder Verkehrsführungen zu erkennen, ohne dass für jede Kategorie ein eigener Trainingsdatensatz aufgebaut werden muss. Das beschleunigt die Kartierung neuer Stadtteile und erlaubt schnelle Analysen bei Veränderungen durch Bauprojekte oder Katastrophen.

Auch in der Mobilitätsforschung eröffnen sich neue Horizonte. So arbeitet das DLR in Braunschweig an Zero-Shot-Ansätzen, um bislang unbekannte Verkehrsströme in Echtzeit zu analysieren. Die Modelle verstehen semantisch, was etwa eine „Verkehrsberuhigung“ oder ein „Shared-Mobility-Hub“ ist, und können daraus auf neue Mobilitätsmuster schließen. Kommunen in Österreich nutzen ähnliche Verfahren, um ad hoc auf ungewöhnliche Ereignisse wie Großveranstaltungen, Unfälle oder kurzfristige Baustellen zu reagieren – und Verkehrsströme ohne explizites Training neu zu steuern.

Im Bereich des Umweltmonitorings sind Zero-Shot-Technologien besonders wertvoll, wenn es um die Erkennung neuer Phänomene geht. Ein Beispiel: Die Stadt Zürich setzt im Rahmen ihres Smart City Programms auf KI-gestützte Analysen von Hitzeinseln. Zero-Shot-Modelle helfen dabei, neue, bislang unbekannte Mikroklimazonen zu identifizieren und zu bewerten, wie sich kleine Veränderungen – etwa die Anlage von Pocket Parks oder das Aufstellen temporärer Schattenspender – auswirken könnten. Auch für die Detektion von Starkregenereignissen oder Luftverschmutzung in bisher nicht überwachten Stadtbereichen sind solche Ansätze im Pilotbetrieb.

Die Quartiersentwicklung profitiert ebenfalls. In Wien unterstützen Zero-Shot-Algorithmen die Szenarioentwicklung für neue Stadtteile, indem sie aus Beschreibungen innovativer Gebäudetypologien oder Mobilitätskonzepte Prognosen ableiten – ohne dass reale Vergleichsdaten vorliegen. Das beschleunigt die Planung und erlaubt es, Visionen und Experimente frühzeitig auf ihre Machbarkeit und Auswirkungen zu prüfen. Selbst in der Bürgerbeteiligung zeigen sich erste Anwendungen: KI-Systeme, die aus offenen Kommentaren und Vorschlägen semantische Muster erkennen und daraus neue Anforderungen oder Konflikte ableiten, können die Qualität der Partizipation deutlich steigern.

Freilich bleibt vieles noch im experimentellen Stadium. Die meisten deutschen Kommunen stehen erst am Anfang, wenn es um den produktiven Einsatz von Zero-Shot Learning geht. Doch die Zahl der Pilotprojekte steigt – und die Erfahrungen zeigen: Gerade dort, wo klassische Datenlücken klaffen, sind die neuen KI-Verfahren besonders hilfreich. Sie machen die Stadtanalyse adaptiver, schneller und oft auch gerechter, weil sie weniger auf bestehende Vorurteile oder historische Verzerrungen angewiesen sind. Wer jetzt investiert, verschafft sich einen Vorsprung – nicht nur technologisch, sondern auch methodisch und kulturell.

Chancen, Grenzen und Risiken: Was Zero-Shot Learning für die Zukunft der Stadtplanung bedeutet

Die Potenziale von Zero-Shot Learning in der Stadtplanung sind enorm. Die Verfahren ermöglichen es, neue Phänomene zu erkennen, schnelle Analysen bei unvorhergesehenen Ereignissen durchzuführen und auch mit fragmentierten oder unvollständigen Datensätzen zu arbeiten. Gerade für die nachhaltige Stadtentwicklung kann das ein Gamechanger sein: Wer etwa neue Grünflächen, Mobilitätskonzepte oder Nutzungsmischungen schnell und zuverlässig bewerten will, muss nicht mehr jahrelang auf Datenaufbau und Modelltraining warten. Zero-Shot Learning bringt Agilität, Flexibilität und Innovationskraft in die Planungslandschaft.

Doch die Technik hat auch ihre Schattenseiten. Die semantische Generalisierung ist nur so gut wie die zugrunde liegenden Beschreibungen. Wo Begriffe unscharf, missverständlich oder kulturell unterschiedlich geprägt sind, entstehen schnell Fehler und Verzerrungen. Ein scheinbar neutraler Begriff wie „öffentlicher Raum“ kann in München, Zürich und Wien völlig unterschiedlich konnotiert sein. Zero-Shot-Modelle riskieren, solche Unterschiede zu nivellieren – und damit relevante Unterschiede in der Planungspraxis zu übersehen.

Ein weiteres Risiko ist die Transparenz. Zero-Shot Learning arbeitet oft mit hochkomplexen, schwer nachvollziehbaren Modellen. Für Planer, Entscheider und die Öffentlichkeit ist es nicht immer ersichtlich, wie eine bestimmte Empfehlung zustande kommt. Das erschwert die Nachvollziehbarkeit und kann das Vertrauen in KI-basierte Planungsinstrumente untergraben. Hier sind klare Dokumentation, nachvollziehbare Entscheidungswege und offene Schnittstellen gefragt – sonst droht die Black Box.

Datenschutz und Datensouveränität bleiben zentrale Herausforderungen. Zero-Shot Learning benötigt zwar weniger spezifische Trainingsdaten, ist aber auf gut strukturierte, sauber annotierte Metadaten angewiesen. In der Praxis sind urbane Daten jedoch oft brüchig, uneinheitlich und verteilt. Wer sicherstellen will, dass Zero-Shot-Modelle wirklich zum Wohle der Stadtgesellschaft arbeiten, muss in Datenqualität, Governance und offene Standards investieren. Sonst besteht die Gefahr, dass KI-Systeme von wenigen Anbietern dominiert und zum Spielball privater Interessen werden.

Schließlich stellt sich die Frage nach der Rolle des Menschen. Zero-Shot Learning ist kein Ersatz für planerische Erfahrung, Kontextwissen und kreatives Denken – sondern ein Werkzeug, das diese Fähigkeiten ergänzen und erweitern kann. Die besten Ergebnisse entstehen dort, wo KI und Mensch im Dialog stehen: Die Maschine liefert Hypothesen, der Planer prüft, interpretiert und entscheidet. Wer KI als Partner auf Augenhöhe begreift, kann von Zero-Shot Learning enorm profitieren – wer sich blind auf Algorithmen verlässt, riskiert böse Überraschungen.

Fazit: Zero-Shot Learning als Werkzeug für die urbane Zukunft – Chancen nutzen, Risiken meistern

Zero-Shot Learning markiert einen Wendepunkt für die urbane Analyse und Planung. Die Fähigkeit, ohne aufwendiges Training neue Phänomene zu erkennen, macht KI flexibler, adaptiver und zugänglicher – gerade für Städte, die mit fragmentierten Daten und knappen Ressourcen arbeiten. Ob in der Verkehrssteuerung, der Quartiersentwicklung, dem Umweltmonitoring oder der Bürgerbeteiligung: Zero-Shot Learning eröffnet neue Horizonte, beschleunigt Prozesse und ermöglicht Innovationen, die mit klassischen Methoden kaum denkbar wären.

Doch wie bei allen technologischen Umbrüchen gilt: Die Chancen sind nur so groß wie die Bereitschaft, Risiken aktiv zu gestalten. Semantische Präzision, Transparenz, Datenqualität und eine enge Verzahnung von KI und menschlicher Expertise sind entscheidend, damit Zero-Shot Learning nicht zur Black Box wird, sondern zum demokratischen Werkzeug für bessere Städte. Die Zukunft gehört denen, die Technologie kritisch, kreativ und mutig einsetzen – und dabei nie vergessen, dass Städte mehr sind als Daten und Modelle. Sie sind Lebensräume, Möglichkeitsräume und Orte des Austauschs. Zero-Shot Learning ist ein mächtiges Werkzeug, um diese Räume zu verstehen und zu gestalten. Doch der beste Algorithmus bleibt am Ende nur so klug wie die Menschen, die ihn verantwortungsvoll nutzen.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Holography as a design medium: the end of the screen?

Building design
white-concrete-building-under-blue-sky-day-uber-JjDQeWWCbpI

Modern architectural design of a white concrete building under a blue sky, photographed by Foad Roshan

Holography as a design medium – the end of the screen? Anyone who still believes that the future of architecture will be played out in 2D on monitors and tablets has either read too little science fiction or simply missed out on the innovation spurts of recent years. Holography is preparing to dethrone the screen as the central design tool. Why this is more than just a technical gimmick and what revolution is actually rolling towards us – we explain here with a sharp pen, a cool head and plenty of insider knowledge.

  • Holography offers a radical new dimension to the architectural design process – beyond the mouse and display.
  • Germany, Austria and Switzerland are at the forefront of technology, but are hesitant to use it across the board.
  • Digital planning, AI and holography are increasingly merging to create new working methods.
  • Sustainability benefits from more immersive, less error-prone design processes – at least in theory.
  • Technical expertise is changing rapidly – from CAD operator to spatial designer.
  • The architectural profession is facing fundamental changes in training and practice.
  • Debates about costs, accessibility, data security and the sense or nonsense of holography are dividing the industry.
  • Global trends are putting pressure on the DACH region – Asia, North America and parts of Scandinavia are setting the pace.

Holography: from trade fair toy to design medium with explosive power

Holography has had an amazing career in architecture – from a dusty gimmick at technology trade fairs to a serious design medium. The screen, for decades the gateway to the digital world, is now facing stiff competition. Where renderings and 3D models used to be presented in flat format, today the building floats in the middle of the room as a holographic image. What sounds like a marketing gimmick has established itself as a real tool in research institutes, large planning offices and increasingly also in local authority building departments. The advantages are obvious: immersion, spatial perception and interactivity achieve a quality that a monitor simply cannot offer. Suddenly the design becomes accessible, construction errors can literally be walked around, and even laypeople can intuitively grasp complex relationships. It is no longer a secret that holography has disruptive potential in this area. But the industry is skeptical. The investment costs are high, the training requirements should not be underestimated and many companies lack the necessary infrastructure. However, the first to take the plunge are reporting considerable efficiency gains – not to mention the wow effect for customers. Those still clinging to the screen today may be museum-ready tomorrow.

In Germany, Austria and Switzerland in particular, technology is viewed with typical Central European reserve. The innovative spirit of tech start-ups meets the reservations of the planning bureaucracy. While entire districts have long been developed holographically in Singapore, here in Germany it is usually only enough for pilot projects and innovation labs. But the pressure is growing. The requirements for flexibility, precision and comprehensibility of designs are increasing rapidly – not least because developers and investors have long been accustomed to different standards internationally. If you don’t keep up, you lose.

The technology itself is also no longer what it was five years ago. Advances in projection, tracking and cloud-based data processing make holography suitable for everyday use. Integration with BIM and GIS systems is within reach, and AI-supported algorithms are helping to generate meaningful, visualizable models from mountains of data. What remains is the question of mindset: are architects and engineers ready to rethink their craft? The screen has long been the lowest common denominator – holography calls for more courage, more openness and, yes, more experimentation.

The vision: collaborative design processes in which teams in different cities, even on different continents, work on the same hologram. Misunderstandings and communication breakdowns, which are unavoidable in traditional meetings, could be a thing of the past. Holography sets new standards for participation, transparency and efficiency. However, as is so often the case in the construction industry, there is an ocean of regulations, fear of losing control and quite banal budget constraints between vision and everyday life.

Anyone wondering why the breakthrough is just around the corner will find the answer in the technological leaps of recent years. Hardware is cheaper, software is more powerful and user skepticism is fading – at least slowly. The screen has had its day, say some. The screen is here to stay, counter the others. As is so often the case, the truth lies somewhere in between. One thing is certain: Those who don’t move will be overrun by the hologram wave.

Digitalization, AI and holography – the new triumvirate of design planning

If digitalization and artificial intelligence have already shaken up architecture, then holography is the next logical step. It is not an isolated gadget, but the link between data and perception. Its great strength lies in the fusion of digital precision and spatial experience. While classic visualizations still end at the edge of the screen, the hologram opens up a new space for ideas and decisions. AI ensures that relevant, comprehensible models are created from billions of data records, while holography makes these models tangible for everyone involved. This not only changes the workflow, but also the roles in the design process. The planner becomes a curator who no longer just designs, but orchestrates – between algorithms, material reality and human intuition.

In practice, it looks like this: A BIM model is evaluated by AI, errors and optimization potential are automatically marked, and the result appears as a holographic image in the meeting room. Changes can be made in real time and immediately checked spatially. This not only saves time and money, but also minimizes the risk of planning errors, which traditionally only become apparent on the construction site – with all the familiar consequences. Holography is not an end in itself, but a response to the increasing complexity of construction tasks. It makes the invisible visible and the complex understandable.

Collaboration also benefits enormously. Multidisciplinary teams, which previously often planned at cross purposes, find a common denominator in the hologram. The model becomes a communication platform – intuitive, interactive and unambiguous. The digital transformation of the construction industry is thus reaching a new level. It is forcing everyone involved to leave their comfort zones and embrace new processes. Those who fail to do so will soon only be working for the rearguard of the industry – the future will be elsewhere.

However, as always, so much euphoria should be treated with caution. The flip side of the coin: if you lose control of the data, you also lose control of the design. Dependence on software providers, cloud services and proprietary formats is growing. Data protection, data sovereignty and cybersecurity are becoming key challenges. Open, collaborative planning in the hologram is not a sure-fire success – it must be actively designed and protected. Otherwise, the beautiful appearance could quickly become a trap.

The debate about the sense and nonsense of holography divides the industry. Some see it as a tool for vanity and showmanship, while others see it as the key to urgently needed modernization. Both sides are right – at least a little. The decisive factor is how the technology is used: as a show effect for render porn or as a serious working tool. The answer lies in practice. Those who create real added value will prevail. Those who merely dazzle will fall by the wayside.

Sustainability and holography – hope or hot air?

A popular myth: holography makes planning more sustainable because errors are detected earlier and resources are used more efficiently. Sounds convincing, but is only half the truth. Yes, immersive access to designs helps to uncover planning weaknesses before they mutate into expensive building damage. Simulations of daylight, energy flows or material cycles can be presented clearly and comprehensibly in the hologram. This leads to better decisions and ideally reduces the ecological footprint of a project. But the reality is more complex. The technology itself is resource-intensive – from hardware production to the power consumption of the server farms that calculate the data for the holograms.

In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, the issue of sustainability is viewed particularly critically. Subsidies are only granted if the ecological added value can be proven. This forces providers and users to take a closer look: How much energy does a hologram consume compared to a classic monitor? How can holography systems be integrated into sustainable planning processes? Anyone who cannot answer these questions will have a difficult time in German-speaking countries. At the same time, however, new opportunities are opening up: Participatory planning, transparent decision-making processes and the early involvement of stakeholders can help to find more sustainable solutions – provided that holography is used wisely.

So the big sustainability question remains: how can we manage the balancing act between technological progress and environmental compatibility? The answer is anything but trivial. New standards, clear guidelines and, above all, an awareness of the side effects of digitalization are needed. The industry must learn to think not only in terms of effects, but also in terms of life cycles. Holography is not a panacea, but it can become a building block for more sustainable planning – if it is part of a holistic concept.

Another aspect is that the democratization of planning through holography could lead to greater acceptance of sustainable projects. Those who understand what is being built and why are more willing to make compromises. Holography makes complex relationships visible and understandable – an opportunity that traditional presentations rarely offer. But here too, without transparency and open communication, the technology remains a toy for experts.

Ultimately, practice is the deciding factor. Anyone using holography to plan more sustainably must be prepared to question old ways of thinking and break new ground. This is uncomfortable, but necessary. The future of sustainable architecture will not be decided on the screen – but in the hologram, which asks more questions than it answers. Those who rise to this challenge can win. Those who focus on the quick effect will quickly end up on the digital sidelines again.

Technical know-how and new professions: Who understands the hologram?

Holography not only turns technology and processes on their head, but also the demands placed on professionals. The classic CAD draughtsman has had its day. What is needed today are specialists who can think and work in three-dimensional, dynamic environments. Spatial designers, data engineers and VR architects are no longer exotic, but key players in the design process. However, training is lagging behind. Universities and universities of applied sciences are experimenting with holographic laboratories, but integration into regular operations remains slow. Most architects and engineers are still learning for the screen, not for the hologram.

Technical know-how is shifting rapidly. Anyone who wants to design successfully today needs knowledge of data management, interface programming and interactive visualization. The ability not only to create BIM models but also to optimize them for holographic presentations is becoming a competitive advantage. At the same time, the importance of soft skills is growing: communication, the ability to work in a team and the willingness to constantly learn new things are more in demand than ever. Holography is not a sure-fire success – it requires a new mindset and a willingness to throw old routines overboard.

The question of accessibility remains central. Not everyone can afford a high-end holography system, and not every office has the human resources to keep up with the technology. The risk of a digital divide is growing. Those who are at the forefront set the standards – those who lag behind become service providers for the big players. This is neither new nor surprising, but it is particularly explosive in times of skills shortages. The industry is faced with a choice: continue to muddle along as before – or invest in training, infrastructure and innovation.

The interfaces with other disciplines are also changing. Urban planners, building physicists and landscape architects must learn to deal with holographic models. The traditional distribution of roles is becoming blurred. Anyone who still believes they can get by as a generalist today will quickly become an extra in the hologram. The future belongs to those who specialize – and at the same time remain open to interdisciplinary collaboration.

The big challenge: how can knowledge be transferred across the board? There are enough pilot projects and lighthouse buildings. What is missing is the nationwide anchoring of holography in training and everyday working life. This is where politics, chambers and associations are needed – and of course the companies themselves. Anyone who remains fixated on the screen will miss out on the next stage of evolution. Those who understand the hologram are shaping the future of architecture.

Global trends, regional realities and the future of design

A look beyond the horizon shows: Holography has long been part of the global architectural discourse. In Asia and North America, immersive design processes are standard in many major projects. Scandinavian countries are investing specifically in research and training in order not to lose touch. Germany, Austria and Switzerland, on the other hand, are still hesitant – the fear of bad investments is too great and the legal framework too unclear. But international competition never sleeps. If you don’t invest today, you will lose out tomorrow – and with it orders, talent and innovative strength.

The debates in the industry are diverse. Some warn against the commercialization of design processes, which loses sight of the added value for users. Others see the danger of algorithms and holograms restricting the creativity of architects. Still others fear a loss of control over data and processes. But the truth is: holography is here to stay. It will not replace the design process, but it will fundamentally change it. Those who ignore this will soon be playing second fiddle.

The role of AI and digitalization should not be underestimated. They are the prerequisite for holography to be used sensibly at all. Only those who structure data properly, link models intelligently and design processes flexibly will be able to exploit the technology’s full potential. The challenges are enormous: interoperability, data security and standardization are unresolved issues. But the pressure is increasing – from clients, investors and not least from the users themselves.

The impact on the architectural profession is massive. Traditional skills are no longer enough. If you want to work seriously with holography, you have to keep learning, master new tools and be prepared to take responsibility for complex, networked processes. This is uncomfortable, but unavoidable. The architecture of the future is digital, collaborative and immersive – and the hologram is becoming the new gold standard.

The question of the sense and nonsense of holography will occupy the industry for a long time to come. But one thing is clear: the freedom to ignore the new technology will soon no longer exist. Those who experiment, learn and invest now have the chance to set the standards of tomorrow. Those who wait will be overrun by the next wave of innovation. Welcome to the world after the screen.

Conclusion: the hologram is coming – and the screen is going

Holography is more than just a fancy gimmick. It is the design medium of the future – and it poses huge challenges for the industry. Those who continue to stare at the screen are missing the opportunity to revolutionize the design process. The technology is there, practice is slowly catching up. What is needed now is courage, openness and the willingness to cut off old habits. The screen was yesterday. The hologram is the new reality of design. Anyone who misses out on this will soon be nostalgic for the days when renderings were the measure of all things. The future is spatial, immersive and – finally – tangible.

Germany’s tallest buildings – Top 10

Building design

Since its completion in 1999, the MAIN TOWER has been a central eye-catcher on Frankfurt's Zeil shopping mile. Photo: Helaba

We present the ten tallest buildings in Germany, tell you which new buildings have been added in the past year and explain their special features.

We present the ten tallest buildings in Germany, tell you which new buildings have been added in the past year and explain their special features.

Things are happening in the highest spheres: In the last few months, Germany’s top ten tallest buildings have seen two new additions. The Omniturm by Danish architecture firm BIG and the Grand Tower by Magnus Kaminiarz & Cie have entered high society. And something else is new: whereas German skyscrapers were previously used exclusively as offices, apartments are now also moving into Germany’s tallest towers. The almost 190-metre-high Omniturm is designed as a mixed-use tower and aims to combine different types of use.

In addition to offices and apartments, the building also houses restaurants and service providers. The Grand Tower, on the other hand, is by far Germany’s tallest residential high-rise. It is a remarkable development that real estate developers in this country now also see the possibility of financing a 180-metre-high skyscraper with luxury apartments. However, the location of the two new buildings is hardly surprising. Like the other eight tallest buildings in Germany, they are located in Frankfurt am Main.

The Opera Tower and Taunus Tower, which currently share tenth place, are expected to have to say goodbye to the top ten next year. Then the “One” with its 190 meters will be completed and move up to sixth place in the ranking. And with the tallest of the four high-rises in the “Four Frankfurt” project, designed by UNStudio, Germany’s future number three with a height of 228 meters is already in the making. Everything that is being built outside the Main metropolis is significantly lower.

The tallest building outside Frankfurt is the Post Tower in Bonn, currently number 13 in the country at 162.5 meters. The Alexanderhochhaus, an apartment tower designed by Ortner & Ortner, which was started in 2019, will be the tallest building in Berlin at 150 meters when it is completed in 2023, but will probably not even be in the national top 20 by then.

A reminder of better times for the crisis-ridden finance house: when Normen Foster completed the high-rise building with its triangular floor plan and floor-spanning conservatories in 1997, it was considered a pioneering example of green technology and progressive workplace design. In contrast, the building’s lack of progress meant that it was almost completely isolated from its surroundings in Frankfurt’s city center, making it appear as a foreign body in the urban space to this day. Like the whole of Frankfurt, the Tower has become a beneficiary of Brexit: Since the British left the EU, the building is once again the tallest within the territory of the community of states.

Probably the most visible legacy of postmodernism in Frankfurt: Helmut Jahn’s skyscraper brought a piece of the USA to the Main in 1990. The silhouette of the Messeturm is reminiscent of the classic New York skyscrapers of the 1920s and 1930s. On closer inspection, one recognizes Jahn’s play with basic geometric shapes: A cylinder grows out of a cube and is crowned by a pyramid. The red granite with which the building is clad picks up on the color of the red sandstone from which large parts of Frankfurt’s old town were built.

The American architecture firm Kohn Pedersen Fox, which has been building skyscrapers like an assembly line since the 1980s, is responsible for the design of the Westendstrasse 1 high-rise in Frankfurt. The most striking feature of the semi-cylindrical building, which was completed in 1993, is its projection at the top. Ostensibly a reference to Frankfurt’s former position as the coronation site of the German emperors, the tower is more reminiscent of the aureole of the Statue of Liberty, making it look a little like the ambassador of New York’s business spirit in the city skyline.

The MAIN TOWER is very popular with Frankfurters and tourists alike. It houses a publicly accessible viewing platform, as well as a viewing restaurant and a sky bar. Since its completion in 1999, the skyscraper designed by architects Schweger + Partner has been a central eye-catcher on Frankfurt’s Zeil shopping street, in the direct extension of which it is located.


MT_DA_TT_hoch__001_DSC1769-Pano
Since its completion in 1999, the MAIN TOWER has been a central eye-catcher on Frankfurt’s Zeil shopping mile. Photo: Helaba

MT_BO_SP_hoch_007_DSC1690
The skyscraper is popular with Frankfurters and tourists alike thanks to its viewing platform, viewing restaurant and Skybar. Photo: Helaba

The MAIN TOWER shares fourth place with Tower 185, which was completed in 2011. In his design, architect Christoph Mäckler took up a central design element of his Opera Tower, which is two years older: He divided the volume of the high-rise vertically with a striking setback, thereby taking away much of its massiveness. However, he arranged the two “wings” of his building at a slight angle to each other. Unlike the Opera Tower, Tower 185 does not have a natural stone façade. Instead, the building is clad with a bronze-coloured aluminum façade, which is broken up by black details.

The concept of the Omni Tower is that of the high-rise building as a vertical city, as described by Rem Koolhaas in his classic “Delirious New York”. The Omni Tower not only houses offices, but also floors with apartments inserted in between. Where the apartments are located, the architects from the Danish firm BIG shift the floors towards each other so that they protrude from the cube of the tower. Balconies belonging to the apartments are located on these “protrusions”. The base of the tower houses restaurants, a fitness studio and a co-working space, among other things, which provide services for the residents of the building. BIG sees this as an opportunity to compensate for small living spaces. At the same time, the aim is to liven up Frankfurt’s banking district in the evenings and at weekends. It remains to be seen whether this will work; the first tenants have recently moved in.

Despite its height, the Trianon is one of the gray mice among Frankfurt’s office towers. Today, Deka-Bank has its headquarters in the building, which was completed in 1993 and designed by a consortium of architects comprising Novotny Mähner Assoziierte, HPP and Albert Speer & Partner. The building, which consists of a triangular core with three equally triangular towers at the top and is crowned by an inverted triangular pyramid, has since been sold several times from one real estate fund to the next.

Quite a few people were disappointed when the building by Coop Himmelb(l)au, whose design had won the top-class international competition, was given its glass façade. While the two towers leaning against each other and the atrium in between were still recognizable as three independent components, they now looked like one huge, twisted volume despite the different glass colors. Thanks to its stand-alone position to the east of Frankfurt’s old town, the tower, which was completed in 2014 after some difficulties, at least has enough space around it to make an impact. It remains to be seen whether the historic fabric of Martin Elsaesser’s Grossmarkhalle really needed to be so heavily interfered with in order to use it as the foyer of the high-rise.

Germany’s tallest residential high-rise, which is about to be occupied and will house over 400 luxury apartments, is just a stone’s throw away from Frankfurt’s Bahnhofsviertel. This may have seen worse times, but it is still unmistakably a center of European standing in terms of drug consumption and trafficking. So perhaps the concierge in the foyer of the Grand Tower is not a bad decision. If residents are not drawn to the station district, they can alternatively run their errands in the Skyline Plaza, the ECE mall with the usual mix of retail chains, which is located right next to the building. It remains to be seen whether this will be enough to persuade the targeted buyers from Asia, Russia or the USA to buy property for over 30,000 euros per square meter in some cases.

Undoubtedly one of the most beautiful high-rise buildings in Frankfurt in recent decades: Christoph Mäckler’s design not only impresses with its elegant division into two sections, its base structure also ensures that Frankfurt’s Opernplatz has a clear urban structure again. This makes up for the loss of the Zurich Tower, one of the city’s first high-rise buildings, which previously stood on this site. In return for the demolition and the right to build higher, the investor undertook to extend the adjacent Rothschild Park on his land. The light-colored natural stone used to clad the tower and base building creates a link to Opernplatz and the Alte Oper.

The Taunus Towers are actually Taunus Towers. This is because the project, which was completed in 2014, consists of a 170-metre office tower and a 68-metre residential tower block. More precisely, the Taunusturm office tower is not a monofunctional building, as it is also an art museum. The Frankfurt Museum of Modern Art MMK occupies a 1,500 square meter exhibition hall on the first floor of the building as a branch of its main building in Frankfurt’s old town. The architectural firm Gruber + Kleine-Kraneburg provided the design for both the residential and office tower. They divided the office tower into two interconnected cuboids, one of which ends with an eye-catching pitched roof.

Do you know the tallest building in the world? Our colleagues from G+L present it to you here: Tallest buildings in the world.