**4. Conclusions**

Finally, the usefulness of such an application lies in the consideration that complex variables can hardly be simplified and assumed uniquely in a model; instead of them we prefer an indicator (factorial axis) composed of different fractions of several variables and therefore more consistent with reality and more representative of the single variables. The profiles that can be outlined starting from the proposed model show the positions (coordinates) of the territories considered (small agglomerated, municipalities or parts of larger and more widespread

urbanizations) and the variables, with respect to the factorial axes about these results, a *soft* hierarchical classification of the area is obtained (that is, non-rigorous nuanced and sharp outlines). You can therefore obtain spatial morphologies classes that are formed with the passage of territorial units considered from one to another cluster. Such shifts are caused perhaps by the simulation of interventions made on the territory or from variation (oscillation) of some input in the initial models.

The urban context, therefore, as a complex system, cannot be simply broken down into its constitutive dimensions (spatial, temporal, environmental, social, and economic), being the sum of the same, something more than the simple superimposition of the single dimensions, in a Gestalt vision which cannot be ignored. It becomes, therefore, the subject of analysis through the definition of the object "relationship between the size", taking into account that the social characterizes the very existence of the city (of the territory), since there are no cities without human presence.
