On the pattern of reasoning in innovative design

Simulating the design process of artefacts by computers requires the modelling of design reasoning in a logical formalism. Much of the reasoning in design is plausible reasoning, in particular the reasoning towards tentative solutions for design problems. Many authors see in Peirce's ‘abduction’ the characteristic pattern of reasoning for this crucial step in design. But, Peirce subsumes two different patterns under the name ‘abduction’: explanatory abduction and innovative abduction. What is usually understood by ‘abduction’ in the context of design theory and knowledge-based design systems, appears to be explanatory abduction. However, the reasoning towards new solutions for design problems follows the pattern of Peirce's innovative abduction. So, automating design requires the modelling of innovative abduction. But is that possible?