Artificial Intelligence and Aesthetic Judgment

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2309.12338v1
• Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 17:40:54 GMT
• Title: Artificial Intelligence and Aesthetic Judgment
• Authors: Jessica Hullman, Ari Holtzman, Andrew Gelman
• Abstract summary: Generative AIs produce creative outputs in the style of human expression. We argue that encounters with the outputs of modern generative AI models are mediated by the same kinds of aesthetic judgments.
• Score: 29.71278672770529
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Generative AIs produce creative outputs in the style of human expression. We argue that encounters with the outputs of modern generative AI models are mediated by the same kinds of aesthetic judgments that organize our interactions with artwork. The interpretation procedure we use on art we find in museums is not an innate human faculty, but one developed over history by disciplines such as art history and art criticism to fulfill certain social functions. This gives us pause when considering our reactions to generative AI, how we should approach this new medium, and why generative AI seems to incite so much fear about the future. We naturally inherit a conundrum of causal inference from the history of art: a work can be read as a symptom of the cultural conditions that influenced its creation while simultaneously being framed as a timeless, seemingly acausal distillation of an eternal human condition. In this essay, we focus on an unresolved tension when we bring this dilemma to bear in the context of generative AI: are we looking for proof that generated media reflects something about the conditions that created it or some eternal human essence? Are current modes of interpretation sufficient for this task? Historically, new forms of art have changed how art is interpreted, with such influence used as evidence that a work of art has touched some essential human truth. As generative AI influences contemporary aesthetic judgment we outline some of the pitfalls and traps in attempting to scrutinize what AI generated media means.

Related papers

• Human Bias in the Face of AI: The Role of Human Judgement in AI Generated Text Evaluation [48.70176791365903]
  This study explores how bias shapes the perception of AI versus human generated content. We investigated how human raters respond to labeled and unlabeled content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-29T04:31:45Z)
• Laypeople's Egocentric Perceptions of Copyright for AI-Generated Art [3.072340427031969]
  This research investigates perceptions of AI-generated art concerning factors associated with copyright protection. We find that participants are most likely to attribute authorship and copyright over AI-generated images to the users who prompted the system to generate the image. Our results suggest that people judge their own AI-generated art more favorably with respect to some factors (creativity and effort) but not others (skills)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-15T08:53:43Z)
• AI Art Neural Constellation: Revealing the Collective and Contrastive State of AI-Generated and Human Art [36.21731898719347]
  We conduct a comprehensive analysis to position AI-generated art within the context of human art heritage. Our comparative analysis is based on an extensive dataset, dubbed ArtConstellation'' Key finding is that AI-generated artworks are visually related to the principle concepts for modern period art made in 1800-2000.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-04T11:49:51Z)
• Can AI Be as Creative as Humans? [84.43873277557852]
  We prove in theory that AI can be as creative as humans under the condition that it can properly fit the data generated by human creators. The debate on AI's creativity is reduced into the question of its ability to fit a sufficient amount of data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-03T08:49:12Z)
• The Good, The Bad, and Why: Unveiling Emotions in Generative AI [73.94035652867618]
  We show that EmotionPrompt can boost the performance of AI models while EmotionAttack can hinder it. EmotionDecode reveals that AI models can comprehend emotional stimuli akin to the mechanism of dopamine in the human brain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-18T11:19:45Z)
• The Generative AI Paradox: "What It Can Create, It May Not Understand" [81.89252713236746]
  Recent wave of generative AI has sparked excitement and concern over potentially superhuman levels of artificial intelligence. At the same time, models still show basic errors in understanding that would not be expected even in non-expert humans. This presents us with an apparent paradox: how do we reconcile seemingly superhuman capabilities with the persistence of errors that few humans would make?
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-31T18:07:07Z)
• AIxArtist: A First-Person Tale of Interacting with Artificial Intelligence to Escape Creative Block [20.96181205379132]
  The future of the arts and artificial intelligence (AI) is promising as technology advances. This workshop pictorial puts forward first-person research that shares interactions between an HCI researcher and AI. The paper explores two questions: How can AI support artists' creativity, and what does it mean to be explainable in this context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-22T13:15:29Z)
• Pathway to Future Symbiotic Creativity [76.20798455931603]
  We propose a classification of the creative system with a hierarchy of 5 classes, showing the pathway of creativity evolving from a mimic-human artist to a Machine artist in its own right. In art creation, it is necessary for machines to understand humans' mental states, including desires, appreciation, and emotions, humans also need to understand machines' creative capabilities and limitations. We propose a novel framework for building future Machine artists, which comes with the philosophy that a human-compatible AI system should be based on the "human-in-the-loop" principle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-18T15:12:02Z)
• The Work of Art in an Age of Mechanical Generation [0.0]
  Can we define what it means to be "creative," and if so, can our definition drive artificial intelligence systems to feats of creativity indistinguishable from human efforts? This article considers the ability of AI to detect forgeries of renowned paintings and, in so doing, somehow reveal the quiddity of a work of art.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-27T18:32:58Z)
• Biases in Generative Art -- A Causal Look from the Lens of Art History [3.198144010381572]
  We investigate biases in the generative art AI pipeline from those that can originate due to improper problem formulation to those related to algorithm design. We highlight how current methods fall short in modeling the process of art creation and thus contribute to various types of biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-26T00:49:09Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.