Labyrinth Typology
Labyrinth Typology
Embedded Files
Over the past several decades, the typology and classification of non-maze labyrinths has developed from descriptive and historical cataloguing toward increasingly structural and topological approaches. Expanded documentation and comparative research have revealed a wider range of labyrinth forms and relationships, while topological analysis has provided ways to distinguish invariant path structure from variable style and expression.
At the same time, labyrinth typology continues to face persistent problems: common names may refer to different structures, the same structure may be known by multiple names, type and style are often conflated, and existing classification systems may use inconsistent or opaque criteria. This website presents ongoing research into the structure, classification, comparison, and representation of non-maze labyrinths, including the development of the Pattern Analysis, Typology, and Holarchy (PATH) framework.
Current Research: PATH
Current Research: PATH
Pattern Analysis, Typology, and Holarchy (PATH) provides a framework for analyzing, classifying, comparing, and representing non-maze labyrinths. It brings together complementary structural approaches while addressing persistent problems of terminology, type and style conflation, and inconsistent or unclear classification criteria.
Conceptual Model
Conceptual Model
The PATH conceptual model distinguishes underlying structure, topological type, and labyrinth expression. Complementary analytical and generative processes connect these concepts and help clarify the distinction between invariant path topology and variable form or realization, including recognizable styles, specific designs, materials, and other details of instantiation.
Classification
Classification
PATH classifies viable non-maze labyrinths through an explicit hierarchy of structural criteria, from broad distinctions to individual topological types. This provides a consistent basis for identifying and comparing labyrinth structures independently of common names, visual style, or historical category.
Pattern Analysis
Pattern Analysis
Pattern analysis examines structural relationships within and among labyrinth types and provides methods for identifying recurring patterns and underlying organization. Approaches include circuit permutations, axis configurations, symmetry transformations, component composition, recurring subpatterns, series, and related structural characteristics.
Explore Labyrinth Typology
Explore Labyrinth Typology
This site includes topic pages, diagrams, datasets, videos, and other resources examining labyrinth typology, terminology, classification, topological structure, pattern relationships, and methods of representation.
Labyrinth Typology Research Group
Labyrinth Typology Research Group
The Labyrinth Typology Research Group brings together people with an active interest in labyrinth patterns, classification and typology, pattern analysis, mathematical topology, and related research. The international group provides opportunities to share work and connect through email and Zoom.
Open Meanders and Symmetry Groups
Open Meanders and Symmetry Groups
The Open Meanders and Symmetry Groups dataset provides a complete enumeration of Simple Alternating Transit (SAT) circuit sequences through 11 circuits together with their symmetry groups. That's 2,781 topological types in 892 BDTC or BD groups!
Standardized numbering and structural analysis of these permutations support comparison of recurring patterns, series, components, and relationships found in simple and more complex labyrinths.
Labyrinth Typology: A Century of Fascination (Caerdroia 54, 2025)
Labyrinth Typology: A Century of Fascination (Caerdroia 54, 2025)
Yadina Clark and Jeff Saward trace a century of labyrinth typology from early terminology and historical cataloguing through the development of topological and mathematical approaches. The article examines persistent problems of naming, type and style conflation, and classification, and considers the need for a more systematic structural framework.
Google Sites
Report abuse