AI and Its Impact on Creativity and Diversity: An Empirical Study of LLM-Generated Product Ideas

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.27553v2
• Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 18:50:39 GMT
• Title: AI and Its Impact on Creativity and Diversity: An Empirical Study of LLM-Generated Product Ideas
• Abstract summary: This research examines how well large language models, or LLMs, generate new product ideas for college students priced under $50.<n>Our first study shows that LLM-generated product ideas have higher average quality than human ideas, based on purchase intent.<n>Our second study shows that this AI-induced creativity boost is not explained by the LLM's more persuasive pitching skills.
• Score: 0.24629531282150877
• License: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
• Abstract: This research examines how well large language models, or LLMs, generate new product ideas for college students priced under $50. Across a series of studies, we identify key strengths and weaknesses of using LLMs for product innovation. Our first study shows that LLM-generated product ideas have higher average quality than human ideas, based on purchase intent, and are 7 times more likely to rank in the top 10%. Our second study shows that this AI-induced creativity boost is not explained by the LLM's more persuasive pitching skills. Our third and fourth studies identify a weakness of using LLMs for brainstorming: AI-generated ideas are less novel at the idea level and less diverse at the set level. In our fifth study, we analyze prior LLM-based creativity studies and find consistently lower idea diversity across all of them, demonstrating the generalizability of these findings. Our sixth and seventh studies investigate techniques to mitigate this diversity loss. We compare LLMs from different vendors and versions and find that more recent models generate more diverse ideas, though they still fall short of human-level diversity. We also demonstrate techniques that increase idea diversity almost to the level of human idea generation: pooling ideas across vendors; prompt engineering, including Chain-of-Thought prompting and injecting heterogeneous personas or constraints; and creative agents that broadly explore the solution landscape to restore diversity. Finally, in our eighth study, we show that exploiting the near-zero marginal cost of AI idea generation by scaling the number of ideas steadily improves coverage of the idea space, approaching human-level coverage. We conclude by presenting actionable recommendations for innovation managers who want to identify better new product ideas with the help of LLMs.

Related papers

• Measuring the Gap Between Human and LLM Research Ideas [63.27812052187884]
  We build an evaluation framework for ideation from high-quality human research papers.<n>For each paper, we reverse-engineer a small set of closely related prior works that likely inspired its core idea.<n>We introduce a two-axis research-taste taxonomy to profile each idea by its opportunity pattern and research paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-01T17:59:56Z)
• OneReason Technical Report [135.82017930661263]
  We show that generative recommendation models can only benefit from the scaling advantage, while their reasoning ability is hard to activate.<n>We propose OneReason, which includes: (1) strong itemic token perception in pre-training, (2) a three-level cognition-enhanced CoT format for recommendation tasks in SFT, and (3) a specialize-then-unify training recipe in RL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T15:04:34Z)
• Multi-agent AI systems outperform human teams in creativity [55.46056199651459]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted in research and innovation.<n>Here we demonstrate that multi-agent LLM teams substantially outperform human teams in creativity.<n>This advantage is driven by novelty while maintaining comparable usefulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T05:52:11Z)
• Examining and Addressing Barriers to Diversity in LLM-Generated Ideas [0.7009487789080344]
  Ideas generated by independent samples of humans tend to be more diverse than ideas generated from independent LLM samples.<n>These concerns raise concerns that widespread reliance on LLMs could homogenize ideation and undermine innovation at a societal level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T23:10:47Z)
• Divergent-Convergent Thinking in Large Language Models for Creative Problem Generation [22.659182231103443]
  Large language models (LLMs) can generate educational questions and problems, enabling educators to create large-scale learning materials.<n>LLMs are limited by the Artificial Hivemind'' effect, where they generate similar responses within the same model and produce homogeneous outputs across different models.<n>We propose CreativeDC, a two-phase prompting method that explicitly scaffolds the LLM's reasoning into distinct phases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-29T16:53:48Z)
• The Ideation-Execution Gap: Execution Outcomes of LLM-Generated versus Human Research Ideas [90.26363107905344]
  A good idea should not simply appear to be novel, it should also result in better research after being executed.<n>To test whether AI-generated ideas lead to better research outcomes, we conduct an execution study.<n>Comparing the review scores of the same ideas before and after execution, the scores of the LLM-generated ideas decrease significantly more than expert-written ideas.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T19:47:23Z)
• Probing and Inducing Combinational Creativity in Vision-Language Models [52.76981145923602]
  Recent advances in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have sparked debate about whether their outputs reflect combinational creativity.<n>We propose the Identification-Explanation-Implication (IEI) framework, which decomposes creative processes into three levels.<n>To validate this framework, we curate CreativeMashup, a high-quality dataset of 666 artist-generated visual mashups annotated according to the IEI framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-17T17:38:18Z)
• VL-Rethinker: Incentivizing Self-Reflection of Vision-Language Models with Reinforcement Learning [55.97950660659051]
  We aim to enhance the slow-thinking capabilities of vision-language models using reinforcement learning (without relying on distillation)<n>We introduce Forced Rethinking, which appends a rethinking trigger token to the end of rollouts in RL training, explicitly enforcing a self-reflection reasoning step.<n>Our model, VL-Rethinker, advances state-of-the-art scores on MathVista, MathVerse to achieve 80.4%, 63.5% respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T17:41:56Z)
• Chain of Ideas: Revolutionizing Research Via Novel Idea Development with LLM Agents [64.64280477958283]
  An exponential increase in scientific literature makes it challenging for researchers to stay current with recent advances and identify meaningful research directions. Recent developments in large language models(LLMs) suggest a promising avenue for automating the generation of novel research ideas. We propose a Chain-of-Ideas(CoI) agent, an LLM-based agent that organizes relevant literature in a chain structure to effectively mirror the progressive development in a research domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T03:26:37Z)
• A Novel Mathematical Framework for Objective Characterization of Ideas [0.0]
  This study introduces a comprehensive mathematical framework for automated analysis to objectively evaluate the plethora of ideas generated by CAI systems and/or humans.<n>By converting the ideas into higher dimensional vectors and quantitatively measuring the diversity between them using tools such as UMAP, DBSCAN and PCA, the proposed method provides a reliable and objective way of selecting the most promising ideas.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-11T19:10:29Z)
• Good Idea or Not, Representation of LLM Could Tell [86.36317971482755]
  We focus on idea assessment, which aims to leverage the knowledge of large language models to assess the merit of scientific ideas. We release a benchmark dataset from nearly four thousand manuscript papers with full texts, meticulously designed to train and evaluate the performance of different approaches to this task. Our findings suggest that the representations of large language models hold more potential in quantifying the value of ideas than their generative outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-07T02:07:22Z)
• Can LLMs Generate Novel Research Ideas? A Large-Scale Human Study with 100+ NLP Researchers [90.26363107905344]
  Large language models (LLMs) have sparked optimism about their potential to accelerate scientific discovery. No evaluations have shown that LLM systems can take the very first step of producing novel, expert-level ideas.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-06T08:25:03Z)
• Benchmarking Language Model Creativity: A Case Study on Code Generation [39.546827184857754]
  In this work, we introduce a framework for quantifying LLM creativity.<n>We define NEOGAUGE, a metric that quantifies both convergent and divergent thinking in the generated creative responses.<n>We test the proposed framework on Codeforces problems, which serve as both a natural dataset for coding tasks and a collection of prior human solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-12T05:55:22Z)
• Prompting Diverse Ideas: Increasing AI Idea Variance [0.0]
  This paper delves into the burgeoning interest in employing Artificial Intelligence to enhance the productivity and quality of the idea generation process. Previous studies have found that the average quality of AI ideas is quite high. Prior research also has pointed to the inability of AI-based brainstorming to create sufficient dispersion of ideas, which limits novelty and the quality of the overall best idea.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-27T21:02:50Z)
• How AI Ideas Affect the Creativity, Diversity, and Evolution of Human Ideas: Evidence From a Large, Dynamic Experiment [3.7900123585903827]
  We conducted an experiment where participants viewed creative ideas that were from ChatGPT or prior experimental participants and then brainstormed their own idea.<n>We varied the number of AI-generated examples (none, low, or high exposure) and if the examples were labeled as 'AI' (disclosure)<n>We find that high AI exposure did not affect the creativity of individual ideas but did increase the average amount and rate of change of collective idea diversity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-24T14:29:39Z)

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.