Embodiment and Computational Creativity (original) (raw)
Related papers
The (Artificial) Physicality of Creativity: How Embodiment Influences Perceptions of Creativity
Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Computational Creativity, 2022
The generation of artifacts through computational creativity (CC) systems is hitting the headlines with increasing frequency. Although impressive, this paper will not focus on the outcomes achieved by these systems, but rather on a specific dimension of artistic processes: embodiment. I discuss the results of a recent factorial survey study aimed at testing the influence that embodiment has on the evaluation of creativity. These findings show that the physical dimension of artificial systems interacting with human artists contributes to the perception of the interplay between artificial and human agents as a creative collaboration. I propose that a closer study of the dynamics of interaction between embodied machines, human artists, and the public can facilitate progress in both the artistic and the technology sector.
Embodied Creativity: A Critical Analysis of an Underdeveloped Subject
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2015
While the idea that cognition is embodied appeared in the literature more than four decades ago, studies concerned with how and to what degree might the body and the environment influence creative thinking represent a relatively recent scientific endeavor. In this paper we wish to provide a critical examination of the core ideas of this new field, suggesting new experimental paradigms for testing the more radical and often ignored assertions of the embodied cognition program. We conclude that given the extremely small number of papers that are produced on this subject, as well as its obscurity within the scientific community, future research will have to expand its theoretical considerations greatly if the field is to survive and flourish.
[PDF]Whence is Creativity? - Computational Creativity
2012
We start with a critical examination of the traditional view of creativity in which the creator is the major player. We analyze many different examples to point out that the origin of all different creativity scenarios is rooted in the viewer-artifact interaction. To recognize this explicitly, we propose an alternative formulation of creativity by putting the viewer in the driver's seat. We examine some implications of this formulation, especially for the role of computers in creativity, and argue that it captures the essence of creativity more accurately.
Leaps and Bounds: An Introduction to the Field of Computational Creativity
New Generation Computing
Computers have enhanced productivity and cost-effectiveness in all of the creative industries, and their value as tools is rarely doubted. But can machines serve as more than mere tools, and assume the role and responsibilities of a co-creative partner, or even become goal-setting, autonomous creators in their own right? These are the questions that define the discipline of computational creativity. The answers require an algorithmic understanding of how humans give meaning to form, but a transformation in the way we think about creativity is unlikely to occur in a single bound. Rather, interdisciplinary insights from diverse fields must first inform our models, and shape a narrative of creativity in which machines are both tools and creators. To set the stage for the newest work, this introduction to the special issue on computational creativity shows where the field is going, and where it has come from.
Connotation in Computational Creativity
Cognitive Computation, 2012
The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.
Beyond Two Minds: Cognitive, Embodied, and Evaluative Processes in Creativity
Social Psychology Quarterly, 2019
Scholars in sociology and social psychology typically represent creativity as an imaginative and deliberate mental activity. Such a perspective has led to a view of creativity as disconnected from the body and the senses as well as from nonanalytic cognition. In this article, we demonstrate that creativity is more grounded in bodily and sensory experience and more reliant on a combination of cognitive processes than has been typically recognized. We use literature on social cognition and embodiment to build our arguments, specifically, the embodied simulation perspective and tripartite process models. We draw from data on elite chefs to show how actors rely on embodied simulations, continually switch between heu-ristic and analytical thinking, and monitor and control their cognitive processing during the creative process. We outline the implications of this study for the understanding of creativity and extant models of cognition and action more generally.
A Digital Touch. The ‘Body Issue’ in Computational Creativity
Body and Corporeality in 20th and 21st Century Music, 2020
Can machines become truly creative? In this paper we argue that is not likely the case, basing our argumentation on the Chinese room argument by John Searle and on the philosophy of the body in Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Roland Barthes. Later on, we connect our ideas with contemporary findings in neuroscience, to give our claims more credibility. Note: an expanded and significantly revised version of this paper has been published in an edited collection published by Transcript Verlag (see https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839458914-014). I recommend checking that version out and referencing it in your own work instead of this seminal version.
There has been increasing attention paid to the question of how to evaluate the creativity of computational creativity systems. A number of different evaluation methods, strategies and approaches have been proposed recently, causing a shift in focus: which methodology should be used to evaluate creative systems? What are the pros and cons of using each method? In short: how can we evaluate the different creativity evaluation methodologies? To answer this question, five meta-evaluation criteria have been devised from cross-disciplinary research into good evaluative practice. These five criteria are: correctness; usefulness; faithfulness as a model of creativity; usability of the methodology; generality. In this paper, the criteria are used to compare and contrast the performance of five various evaluation methods. Together, these metaevaluation criteria help us explore the advantages and disadvantages of each creativity evaluation methodology, helping us develop the tools we have available to us as computational creativity researchers.
Frontiers in Psychology, 2019
Modern ideas of embodiment have been influential in cognitive science for the past several decades, yet there is minimal evidence of embodied cognition approaches in creativity research or pedagogical practices for teaching creativity skills. With creativity research in crisis due to conceptual, methodological, and theoretical issues, radical embodied cognitive science (RECS) may offer a framework to move the field forward. This conceptual analysis examines the current state of creativity research from the 4E (embodied, embedded, enactive, and extended) cognition and RECS perspectives. Two streams are critiqued for their potential to further knowledge about the development of creative expertise and inform educational practices. Promising directions for future research is discussed, including ways dynamical systems approaches, such as those used in improvisational and musical creativity, might yield new insights about how people develop creative expertise and help address the "higher order thinking" criticisms of RECS.