It found AI excelled in originality and elaboration, sparking debate about the "soul” of AI creativity.However, in the quest to unravel the creative potential of AI, particularly through the lens of large language models , a simple question frames the discussion: Is AI more creative than humans? A newputs man against machine to ask this simple question and reveal insights that might cut to the core of our very humanity.
This method circumvents potential human-centered issues such as fatigue, biases, and the cost of time, which could influence the scoring process. The automated scoring approach has been found to correlate robustly with human ratings, suggesting that it effectively captures the essence of creativity without the need for a separate group of humans to evaluate the responses of both the human and AI arms of the study.
Furthermore, when comparing elaboration scores, which quantify the detail within each valid response, GPT-4's responses were significantly more elaborate than those of human participants. For instance, in response to using a fork, where a human might simply suggest"as a hair comb," GPT-4's elaboration would encompass a more detailed narrative, illustrating its ability to weave richer, more complex ideas from a single prompt.
Creativity, in its purest form, is often seen as an expression of something uniquely human—some may even say the soul. It's this manifestation of the innermost thoughts and feelings that transcend mere linguistic or conceptual novelty. The concern that AI-generated ideas, despite their originality or complexity, might lack the depth, intentionality, and emotional resonance that human creativity inherently possesses is poignant.