assemblage behaviors
[1]In the first type components are generated from local conditions that build from information exchange/feedback. This exchange of coded information is causal in the heterogeneous distribution of forms. The information exchange would occur on the level of volume and bounding lines. The assemblage interagency would be a resultant of the causal form making. Meaning that the component forms would generate the interagency structure, the forms and exchange of coded information would be transmitted on a local scale, this then would form the interagency.
*blage1
*blage2

[2]The second type would define the interagency structure and then would assemble the dispersed or separated heterogeneous components. This would take the coded dispersed components and recode them to contort within the interagency structure. This deformation would occur through constraints that would pressure the original form in the (z) axis. So the component volumes now would have mass that would then feedback in accordance to the interagency structure generating a recoded assemblage.
*The operative limits of both are that [type 1] has dominant generated components that design the interagency and [type 2] has dominant interagency structure that recodes the dispersed type 1 components to generate an different assemblage.