computational artistic creativity and its evaluation david c brown computer science department wpi,...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation
DAVID C BROWNComputer Science Department
WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA<[email protected]>
![Page 2: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Motivation
“What are the appropriate methods and measures to objectively verify and validate creative behavior in artificial systems?”
• Evaluation by people• Evaluation by computational system
• Evaluation of artifact• Evaluation of process
![Page 3: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Your Research Goals?
1. Producing creative artifacts using computational means.
2. Study what knowledge and reasoning might be part of process that produces creative artifacts.
3. Study the criteria that a person or a system might use to judge whether an item is creative or not.
![Page 4: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Your Research Goals? (continued)
4. Produce a formal theory of creativity.
5. Produce new “computational means”.
![Page 5: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Creativity Evaluation
• How to judge impact of decision or quality of partial solution during synthesis?– E.g., using constraint to reduce search space
• How to judge artifact (or its description)?
![Page 6: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Necessary or Helpful?
• Is it necessary for system to evaluate during synthesis and/or evaluate the resulting artifact?
• If not, is it helpful?
![Page 7: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Criteria?
What factors are used
to evaluate creativity?
![Page 8: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Examples
• Besemer has 3 factors in the Creative Product Analysis Model.
• Abrams has 4 ways of considering the analysis, criticism or evaluation of art.
![Page 9: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Besemer’s CPAM:Creative Product Analysis Model
• Factors: Novelty, Resolution & Style • Novelty: newness
– Surprising, Original
• Resolution: meets needs– Logical, Useful, Valuable, Understandable
• Style: refined, developed, coherent whole– Organic, Well-Crafted, Elegant
![Page 10: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Abrams• Mimetic - imitating aspects of the observable
universe, but not artifact, artist or audience.• Pragmatic - the relationship between the
artifact and audience, including teaching & producing emotional reactions.
• Expressive - externalizing artist’s inner life. • Objective - viewing artifact in isolation.
• Combinations are possible.
![Page 11: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Some Computational Challenges
• Surprising: what is “normal” art?
• Useful: what is purpose of the artifact?
• Valuable: knowledge of art market?
• Understandable: user friendly art?
• Pragmatic: does it provoke emotion?
• Expressive: artist’s “inner life”?
![Page 12: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Overall Challenge
A Computational Artistic Creativity system must be able to evaluate its own output for creativity, and be able to evaluate its decisions and partial solutions for creative potential.
![Page 13: Computational Artistic Creativity and its Evaluation DAVID C BROWN Computer Science Department WPI, Worcester, MA 01609, USA](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022072006/56649cfb5503460f949cceef/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Conclusions
• For Computational Design Creativity systems that design products I thinkthis is possible.
• For Computational Artistic Creativity systems I have very grave doubts.
8 July 2009