A proper understanding of precedents in architectural design as a common practice, suffers from the taboo of “ imitation” , on the one hand, and, is also accused of “ heresy” , on the other hand. In this regard, three issues have been studied until now: “ Extracting the backgrounds of applied knowledge” , “ Defining the proper understanding of precedents” and “ Clarifying the difference between an educational or a research-based case study” . What still requires further research for defining the “ proper understanding of landscape architecture precedents” is the inevitability of interpretation due to the role of humans as a “ subject” in landscape architecture. So the question here is what effect does the inevitability of interpretation have on the meaning and method of proper understanding of landscape architectural background knowledge? This study aims to reduce the theoretical difficulties that could impair the ability of knowledge production in this field of study. To do this, the concept of “ knowledge production” is first thoroughly examined, then, “ the conditions of precedents as a source of knowledge” together with the “ researcher`s conditions as an intervening subject” are determined as the main components of “ understanding” in a theoretical framework. Finally, the standing point of landscape architecture is explained in comparison with this framework. The results show that to produce knowledge in landscape architecture, in addition to four common forms of understanding/perception in the field of architecture including “ Irregular” , “ Superficial” , “ Deep” and “ Structural” , which have already been determined in previous architectural research, another level should also be considered that is generally known as “ Continuous” understanding. By focusing on this level of understanding and using the two techniques of “ Triangulation” and “ Crystallization” , it can open up new horizons in landscape architecture to address issues with multiple interpretations of subjectivity and to validate the findings.

Landscape architects use different sources of inspiration for generating design ideas, among them previous works. Since this is the most frequent method used by design students, the question posed is how can landscape architecture students be guided through the correct ways of mapping from built examples. This paper first reviews the works of scholars on the approaches to generating design ideas as internal/external sources of inspiration, locating the place of built examples as sources of inspiration.Next, by employing the structure-mapping theoretical framework, various mapping strategies are introduced as structural mapping, superficial mapping, literal mapping, and metaphor. The suggestions of other scholars regarding the guidance through the correct ways of mapping in landscape architecture design education are presented, among them, the selection of a good example, knowledge of and training for correct mapping in students. The results of this research show that promoting landscape architecture students in this regard has a difficult track ahead, involving students’ training efforts and educators’ expected awareness.

Among Imamiyya scholars there have been persons known as Tabresi/Tabarsi. Some researcher believes that this word must be pronounced Tabarsi; for it refers to Tabres, arabized word of Tafresh, a town between kashan an Isfahan, not to Tabarestan, attributed to it is known as Tabari or Tabaretani. In Contrast to this view, others, based on historical and geographical sources and morphology rules, have shown that this word must be pronounced Tabarsi; for it refers to Tabarestan, and that is true attribution.

In this paper we specify the class of integral circulant graphs ICG(n; D), which can be characterized by their order n and the set D of positive divisors of n in such a way that they have the vertex set Zn and the edge set (Formola). This group of graphs is called BMM graphs because of the form of its set of edges. A bipartite G graph is a graph whose vertex set can be divided into two subsets X, and Y such that no two vertices in X and no two vertices in Y are adjacent. The duplicate graph is called complete if each vertex in X is connected to all vertices in Y. This graph is represented by K_ (m, n), if | X | = m and | Y | = n. Multipartite graphs are also defined as bipartite graphs.