Towards Ontology Use, Re-use and Abuse in a Computational Creativity Collective - A Position Statement

S. Colton
{"title":"Towards Ontology Use, Re-use and Abuse in a Computational Creativity Collective - A Position Statement","authors":"S. Colton","doi":"10.3233/978-1-60750-544-0-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Computational creativity is broadly defined as the study of building software which exhibits behaviour that would be deemed creative if exhibited by a person. In more practical terms, we investigate how to engineer software that takes on some of the creative responsibility in arts and science projects which produce culturally interesting artefacts such as poems, theorems, paintings, melodies, etc. To this end, there are numerous examples of creative software being employed in musical composition, visual arts, pure mathematics , natural language generation, scientific discovery, video game design, and many more areas of discourse. Moreover, the computational creativity community is beginning to come to consensus on some of the thorny research questions that have arisen, such as: which AI processes are more suited to generative applications; how can we measure levels of creativity in software; and what roles can software have in creative acts? Our contributions to computational creativity research have revolved around our two pieces of research software: the HR system [2] and The Painting Fool (www.thepaintingfool.com). The former is mathematical theory formation software which can start with the bare minimum about a domain of pure mathematics, such as how to divide one number by another, and end with a rich theory of concepts, conjectures, theorems and proofs. The latter is an automated painter which we hope will one day be taken seriously as a creative artist in its own right. The majority of software developed by computational creativity researchers – including our own – is given domain knowledge only about its specific area of application. For instance, our HR software is given enough background information about domains of pure mathematics to enable it to invent concepts in those particular domains, but it is not given wider mathematical knowledge and is certainly not provided with information outside the sphere of pure mathematics. This is largely acceptable in domains where there are objective measures of value with which we can assess the artefacts produced by the creative systems. However, we argue in [3] that in certain domains (most noticeably the visual arts), the creativity and intelligence of the creator is taken into account when assessing the value of the artefacts that he/she/it produces. In particular, in such domains, the cultural awareness of the artist may well be questioned when people assess the value of their work. In these situations, there is much need for the kind of knowledge stored in ontologies, …","PeriodicalId":347742,"journal":{"name":"International Workshop on Modular Ontologies","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Workshop on Modular Ontologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-544-0-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Computational creativity is broadly defined as the study of building software which exhibits behaviour that would be deemed creative if exhibited by a person. In more practical terms, we investigate how to engineer software that takes on some of the creative responsibility in arts and science projects which produce culturally interesting artefacts such as poems, theorems, paintings, melodies, etc. To this end, there are numerous examples of creative software being employed in musical composition, visual arts, pure mathematics , natural language generation, scientific discovery, video game design, and many more areas of discourse. Moreover, the computational creativity community is beginning to come to consensus on some of the thorny research questions that have arisen, such as: which AI processes are more suited to generative applications; how can we measure levels of creativity in software; and what roles can software have in creative acts? Our contributions to computational creativity research have revolved around our two pieces of research software: the HR system [2] and The Painting Fool (www.thepaintingfool.com). The former is mathematical theory formation software which can start with the bare minimum about a domain of pure mathematics, such as how to divide one number by another, and end with a rich theory of concepts, conjectures, theorems and proofs. The latter is an automated painter which we hope will one day be taken seriously as a creative artist in its own right. The majority of software developed by computational creativity researchers – including our own – is given domain knowledge only about its specific area of application. For instance, our HR software is given enough background information about domains of pure mathematics to enable it to invent concepts in those particular domains, but it is not given wider mathematical knowledge and is certainly not provided with information outside the sphere of pure mathematics. This is largely acceptable in domains where there are objective measures of value with which we can assess the artefacts produced by the creative systems. However, we argue in [3] that in certain domains (most noticeably the visual arts), the creativity and intelligence of the creator is taken into account when assessing the value of the artefacts that he/she/it produces. In particular, in such domains, the cultural awareness of the artist may well be questioned when people assess the value of their work. In these situations, there is much need for the kind of knowledge stored in ontologies, …
在计算创造力集体中对本体的使用、重用和滥用——立场声明
计算创造力被广泛地定义为对构建软件的研究,该软件展示的行为如果由人展示将被视为创造性。在更实际的术语中,我们研究如何设计软件,使其在艺术和科学项目中承担一些创造性的责任,这些项目产生文化上有趣的人工制品,如诗歌、定理、绘画、旋律等。为此,创造性软件被应用于音乐创作、视觉艺术、纯数学、自然语言生成、科学发现、电子游戏设计以及许多其他领域的例子不胜枚举。此外,计算创造力社区开始就一些棘手的研究问题达成共识,例如:哪些人工智能过程更适合生成应用程序;我们如何衡量软件的创造力水平;软件在创造性行为中可以扮演什么角色?我们对计算创造力研究的贡献围绕着我们的两个研究软件:HR系统[2]和the Painting Fool (www.thepaintingfool.com)。前者是数学理论形成软件,它可以从最基本的纯数学领域开始,例如如何将一个数除以另一个数,并以丰富的概念,猜想,定理和证明理论结束。后者是一个自动化的画家,我们希望有一天它会被认真对待,成为一个有创造力的艺术家。大多数由计算创造力研究人员开发的软件——包括我们自己的软件——只被赋予有关其特定应用领域的领域知识。例如,我们的人力资源软件被赋予了足够的纯数学领域背景信息,使其能够在这些特定领域中发明概念,但它没有被赋予更广泛的数学知识,当然也没有被提供纯数学领域之外的信息。在存在客观价值衡量标准的领域中,这在很大程度上是可以接受的,我们可以用这些价值衡量标准来评估由创造性系统产生的人工制品。然而,我们在[3]中认为,在某些领域(最明显的是视觉艺术),在评估他/她/它所生产的人工制品的价值时,创造者的创造力和智力被考虑在内。特别是,在这些领域,当人们评估其作品的价值时,艺术家的文化意识很可能受到质疑。在这些情况下,非常需要存储在本体中的那种知识,……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信