A Critical Review of Computational Creativity in Built Environment Design
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Quantitative Computational Experiment (Qce): an Alternative Post-Positivist Experimental Research Strategy of Inquiry for Design Studies
QUANTITATIVE COMPUTATIONAL EXPERIMENT (QCE): AN ALTERNATIVE POST-POSITIVIST EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH STRATEGY OF INQUIRY FOR DESIGN STUDIES 1ALI GHAFFARIANHOSEINI, 2RAHINAH IBRAHIM, 3JOHN TOOKEY, 4AMIRHOSEIN GHAFFARIANHOSEINI 1,3School of Engineering, Faculty of Design and Creative Technologies, AUT University, Auckland, New Zealand 2Faculty of Design and Architecture, University of Putra Malaysia (UPM), Malaysia 4Department of Geography, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Malaya (UM), Malaysia E-mail: [email protected] Abstract- One of the most important aspects for development of valid results in academic research is selection of the appropriate research methodology. Contemporary research in design studies confronts the rapid expansion of emerging high- tech trends. Correspondingly, an adapted research methodology is required to meet the needs of current circumstances. This paper articulates employment of a quantitative computational research methodology for design studies. The research framework, implementation and validations are expressed in details. Computational charrette test method and computational emulation reasoning and representation are incorporated in order to validate the discussed research methodology outputs. In summary, the developed research methodology is articulated in details to enable further exploitations in academic research and practices. Index terms- Quantitative Computation Experiment (QCE); Social Science Research; Design Cognition; Research Methodology; Design Studies I. INTRODUCTION artificial intelligent-based expert systems to better understand/perform the design process [17-19]. One of the most important aspects for development of Generally, QCE is applied in order to advance design valid results in academic research is selection of the computing and cognition [20] core progress by appropriate research methodology [1-6]. This paper understanding the way researcher/designer thinks/acts elaborates on an alternative method for putting into [21]. -
Combinational Creativity and Computational Creativity
Combinational Creativity and Computational Creativity By Ji HAN Dyson School of Design Engineering Imperial College London A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy April 2018 Originality Declaration The coding of the Combinator and the Retriever was accomplished in collaboration with Feng SHI, a PhD colleague in the Creativity Design and Innovation Lab at the Dyson School of Design Engineering, Imperial College London, and co-author with me of relevant publications. Except where otherwise stated, this thesis is the result of my own research. This research was conducted in the Dyson School of Design Engineering at Imperial College London, between October 2014 and December 2017. I certify that this thesis has not been submitted in whole or in parts as consideration for any other degree or qualification at this or any other institute of learning. Ji HAN April 2018 II Copyright Declaration The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commericial No Derivitives licence. Researchers are free to copy, distribute or transmit the thesis on the condition that they attribute it, that they do not use it for commercial purposes and that they do not alter, transform or build upon it. For any reuse or redistribution, researchers must make clear to others the license terms of this work. Ji HAN April 2018 III List of Publications The following journal and conference papers were published during this PhD research. Journal Publications 1. Han J., Shi F., Chen L., Childs P. R. N., 2018. The Combinator – A computer-based tool for creative idea generation based on a simulation approach. -
Open Design Education: Addressing Accountability in the Age of Computing Açık Tasarım Eğitimine Doğru: Hesaplama Ve Hesap Verebilme
ARTICLE MEGARON 2020;15(3):343-349 DOI: 10.14744/MEGARON.2020.32650 Open Design Education: Addressing Accountability in the Age of Computing Açık Tasarım Eğitimine Doğru: Hesaplama ve Hesap Verebilme Desantila HYSA,1 Mine ÖZKAR2 ABSTRACT Attitudes complement knowledge and skills but are often overlooked as assessable competencies in higher education. In architectural design curriculum, attitudes are especially relevant in order to ensure the training of responsible designers. As humanistic and environ- mental approaches are increasingly at the forefront, the studio cultures of the schools seek to cultivate collaborative and participato- ry skills on individual creativity. The parallel acclaim of computational methods expounds the reasoning processes of design and new opportunities arise for open and liable cultures of design. However, the task of connecting these methods to a broader competency in design is still not fulfilled. This paper provides an interdisciplinary context for accountability as an attitude in design education and a conceptual framework for implementing and assessing it through computational methods. It argues that computation in early-design education, in the form of shape rules and devices of visual computing, is supportive in instilling reflective attitudes by promoting knowl- edge sharing with accountability among learners. Keywords: Collaborative design; computational design; ethics; first-year design education; reflective practice. ÖZ Yükseköğretimde öğrenim çıktıları olarak bilgi ve becerileri tamamlayan tutumlar, -
Computational Creativity
Computational Creativity Hannu Toivonen University of Helsinki [email protected] www.cs.helsinki.fi/hannu.toivonen ECSS, Gothenburg, 9 Oct 2018 8.10.2018 1 The following video clips, pictures and audio files have been removed from this file to save space: – Video: Poemcatcher tests ”Brain Poetry” machine at Frankfurt Book Fair: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNnbTQL8j B4 – Images produced by Deep Dream, see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeepDream – Audio clip: music produced by a programme by Turing and his colleagues www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto 9.10.2018 2 Remote Associates Test (RAT) – What word relates to all of these three words? – coin – silver coin – quick – quick silver – spoon – silver spoon – Measures the ability to discover relationships between remotely associated concepts – A (controversial) psychometrical test of creativity – Correlates with IQ and originality in brain storming www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto 8.10.2018 3 Modeling RATs computationally – A single RAT question is a quadruple – A probabilistic approach: find that maximizes – Maximize (cf. naïve Bayes) www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto 8.10.2018 4 Modeling RATs computationally – Learn word frequencies from a large corpus – Use Google 1 and 2-grams to estimate probabilities and – (Google n-grams: a large, publically available collection of word sequences and their probabilities) – A lot more could be done, but we want to keep things as simple as possible – Creative behavior without an explicit semantic resource (such as WordNet) www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto 8.10.2018 -
This Copy Is for Staff Use Only
Architecture, Design and Planning Handbook 2018 This copy is for staff use only Handbooks online: sydney.edu.au/handbooks Contents Contents Honours 21 Welcome 1 Bachelor of Design in Architecture enrolment 21 A message from the Dean 1 planner Bachelor of Architecture and Environments 3 Bachelor of Design in Architecture 23 Overview 3 Bachelor of Design in Architecture 23 Bachelor in Architecture and Environment 3 Bachelor of Design in Architecture (Honours) 23 enrolment guide Course Resolutions 23 Summary of requirements 3 Master of Architecture prerequisite unit of study 3 Bachelor of Design in Architecture 25 Honours 3 Table A: Units of study in the Bachelor of Design 25 Bachelor of Architecture and Environments 3 in Architecture enrolment planner Bachelor of Design in Architecture 29 Bachelor of Architecture and Environments 5 Table A: Units of study in the Bachelor of Design 29 Bachelor of Architecture and Environments 5 in Architecture Bachelor of Architecture and Environments 5 Bachelor of Design in Architecture - Core units of 29 (Honours) study Course Resolutions 5 Junior units of study 29 Senior units of study 29 7 Bachelor of Architecture and Environments Bachelor of Design in Architecture 31 Table D: Units of study in the Bachelor of 7 (Honours)/Master of Architecture honours core Architecture and Environments units Recommended electives 31 Bachelor of Architecture and Environments 9 Master of Architecture - Prerequisite unit of study 31 Table D: Units of study in the Bachelor of 9 Architecture and Environments School electives -
Collaboratively Designing Metrics to Evaluate Creative Machines
ISEA 2020 MEASURING COMPUTATIONAL CREATIVITY: COLLABORATIVELY DESIGNING METRICS TO EVALUATE CREATIVE MACHINES EUNSU KANG JEAN OH ROBERT TWOMEY WELCOME! :D WE UNDERSTAND WE CANNOT MEASURE EVERY ASPECT OF CREATIVITY BUT WE WANT TO FIGURE OUT THE MEASURABLE ASPECTS OF CREATIVITY WE ARE HERE FOR • Collectively brainstorming evaluation metrics and producing a set of metrics. • Creating a map of metrics to help us have a better view on the problem • Building a community that contributes to this difficult task OUR SCHEDULE TODAY IS • Introduction (20 min) • Small group discussion: Elements of creative AI (30 min) • Sharing the first discussion results (15 min) • Invited speaker panel 1 (35 min) • Small group discussion 2: Evaluating selected projects (30 min) • Sharing the second discussion results (15 min) • Invited speaker panel 2 (35 min) • Small group discussion 3: Revising metrics, evaluating the second project (30 min) • Presentation of results and Q&A (30 min) • 5 min breaks as needed PANEL DISCUSSIONS BY INVITED SPEAKERS Panel 1: Graham Wakefield, Haru Ji, Fabrizio Poltronieri, Allison Parrish, Aaron Hertzmann • What are your methods and metrics for evaluating the creative AI system that you and your colleagues have developed? • How does the study of creative AI systems inform human creative practice? • How do we attribute (who is responsible for) the creativity in collaborative creative systems? • Do you think there is a difference between creative AI and human creativity? What would be the difference? If not, why not. PANEL DISCUSSIONS -
Ryangibboney.Com RYANGIBBONEY @Firehoot VISUAL DESIGNER + EDUCATOR Ryangibboneydesign
814–502–3700 [email protected] www.ryangibboney.com RYANGIBBONEY @firehoot VISUAL DESIGNER + EDUCATOR ryangibboneydesign EDUCATION Masters of Fine Art in Visual Communications Design \\ December 2013 Purdue University – West Lafayette, IN \\ Summa Cum Laude, GPA: 3.95 Bachelors of Fine Art in Graphic Design \\ August 2008 Savannah College of Art and Design – Savannah, GA \\ Magna Cum Laude, GPA: 3.72 Renaissance Masters: Innovators of Italian Styles Off Campus Seminar – Italy \\ June 2008 Savannah College of Art and Design off campus study abroad program. Received the Neely Elizabeth Toohill Memorial Scholarship for studying abroad. Trip included stud- ies in Rome, Pienza, Sienna, Florence, Bologna, and Venice over a four week period. Associate in Specialized Technology in Graphic Design \\ July 2003 Pittsburgh Technical Institute – Pittsburgh, PA \\ Magna Cum Laude, GPA: 3.93 ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS Instructor of Integrated Media Arts \\ Fall 2015 - Present Integrated Media Arts Department, Juniata College – Huntingdon, PA Taught an 18 credit load under a 1 year fixed term position. In addition to course work, worked with students to create Practicum Projects focused on Adobe Creative Cloud programs in addition to supervising local internship students focused on web design and social media marketing. Courses Taught: IM110: Principles of Digital Media IM275 Integrated Media Arts Lab IM276: Integrated Media Arts Lab II IM360: Digital Video Production IM399: Digital Video Production II IT341: Web Design Instructor of Graphic Design \\ Spring 2015 Graphic Design, College of Arts and Architecture, Penn State University – State College, PA Instructed and developed projects, exercises, schedule, lab and studio lectures, and lesson plans for the freshman-level graphic design course: GD102: Introductory Design Studio. -
Explainable Computational Creativity
Explainable Computational Creativity Maria Teresa Llano Mark d’Inverno Matthew Yee-King SensiLab, Monash University Goldsmiths, University of London Goldsmiths, University of London Melbourne, Australia London, United Kingdom London, United Kingdom Jon McCormack Alon Ilsar Alison Pease Simon Colton SensiLab, Monash University SensiLab, Monash University Dundee University SensiLab, Monash University Melbourne, Australia Melbourne, Australia Dundee, United Kingdom Queen Mary, University of London Abstract for intermediate explanations as the process progresses, let Human collaboration with systems within the Computational alone place for exchanges of information that can exploit Creativity (CC) field is often restricted to shallow interac- human-machine co-creation. tions, where the creative processes, of systems and humans alike, are carried out in isolation, without any (or little) inter- In this paper we propose Explainable Computational Cre- vention from the user, and without any discussion about how ativity (XCC) as a subfield of XAI. The focus of this subfield the unfolding decisions are taking place. Fruitful co-creation is the study of bidirectional explainable models in the con- requires a sustained ongoing interaction that can include dis- text of computational creativity – where the term explainable cussions of ideas, comparisons to previous/other works, in- is used with a broader sense to cover not only one shot-style cremental improvements and revisions, etc. For these interac- explanations, but also for co-creative interventions -
Download Thesis
Department of Computer Science Series of Publications A Report A-2021-4 Computational Understanding, Generation and Evaluation of Creative Expressions Khalid Alnajjar Doctoral dissertation, to be presented for public discussion with the permission of the Faculty of Science of the University of Helsinki, in Auditorium B123, Exactum, Pietari Kalmin katu 5, on the 22nd of March, 2021 at 12:00 o’clock. The defence is also open for the audience through remote access. University of Helsinki Finland Supervisor Hannu Toivonen, University of Helsinki, Finland Pre-examiners Josep Blat, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain Tapio Salakoski, University of Turku, Finland Opponent Pablo Gervás, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain Custos Hannu Toivonen, University of Helsinki, Finland Faculty Representative Teemu Roos, University of Helsinki, Finland Contact information Department of Computer Science P.O. Box 68 (Pietari Kalmin katu 5) FI-00014 University of Helsinki Finland Email address: [email protected].fi URL: https://cs.helsinki.fi/ Telephone: +358 2941 911 Copyright c 2021 Khalid Alnajjar ISSN 1238-8645 ISBN 978-951-51-7145-0 (paperback) ISBN 978-951-51-7146-7 (PDF) Helsinki 2021 Unigrafia Computational Understanding, Generation and Evaluation of Creative Expressions Khalid Alnajjar Department of Computer Science P.O. Box 68, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland khalid.alnajjar@helsinki.fi https://www.khalidalnajjar.com/ https://www.rootroo.com/ PhD Thesis, Series of Publications A, Report A-2021-4 Helsinki, March 2021, 56 pages ISSN 1238-8645 ISBN 978-951-51-7145-0 (paperback) ISBN 978-951-51-7146-7 (PDF) Abstract Computational creativity has received a good amount of research interest in generating creative artefacts programmatically. -
Teaching Computational Creativity Margareta Ackerman1, Ashok Goel2, Colin G
Teaching Computational Creativity Margareta Ackerman1, Ashok Goel2, Colin G. Johnson3, Anna Jordanous3, Carlos Le´on4, Rafael P´erezy P´erez5, Hannu Toivonen6, and Dan Ventura7. 1 Computer Engineering Department, Santa Clara University. [email protected]. 2 School of Interactive Computing, Georgia Tech. [email protected] 3 School of Computing, University of Kent. fC.G.Johnson, [email protected] 4 Department of Software Engineering and Artificial Intelligence, Complutense University of Madrid. [email protected] 5 Depto. de Tecnolog´ıasde la Informaci´on,Universidad Aut´onomaMetropolitana. [email protected] 6 Department of Computer Science, University of Helsinki. [email protected] 7 Computer Science Department, Brigham Young University. [email protected] Abstract • Master theoretical and conceptual tools for analysing and discussing creative systems The increasing popularity of computational creativity (CC) in recent years gives rise to the need for educa- • Develop and understand one's own creative processes tional resources. This paper presents several modules that together act as a guide for developing new CC • Become familiar with the latest advances in CC, and courses as well as improving existing curricula. As well be able to critically discuss current state-of-the-art as introducing core CC concepts, we address pedagog- • Become able to create CC systems and/or techniques ical approaches to this interdisciplinary subject. An accessible overview of the field lets this paper double • Gain the ability to describe, employ and debate as an introductory tutorial to computational creativity. methods for evaluation of computational creativity • Be able to identify appropriate contexts for using CC Introduction In what follows, we offer examples of extant CC sys- As computational creativity (CC) grows in popular- tems that can be used as archetypes for introducing ity, it is increasingly being taught in some form as a key questions in the field; discuss different modeling university-level course. -
Computational Creativity: Coming of Age
Editorial Computational Creativity: Coming of Age Simon Colton, Ramon López de Mántaras, and Oliviero Stock n This editorial provides an introduction to current AI research on computationally created A artifacts as well as to the papers and topics cov- t its heart, computational creativity is the study of build- ered by this special issue on computational cre- ing software that exhibits behavior that would be deemed cre- ativity. ative in humans. Such creative software can be used for autonomous creative tasks, such as inventing mathematical the- ories, writing poems, painting pictures, and composing music. However, computational creativity studies also enable us to understand human creativity and to produce programs for cre- ative people to use, where the software acts as a creative collab- orator rather than a mere tool. Historically, it’s been difficult for society to come to terms with machines that purport to be intel- ligent and even more difficult to admit that they might be cre- ative. For instance, in 1934, some professors at the University of Manchester in the United Kingdom built meccano models that were able to solve some mathematical equations. Groundbreak- ing for its time, this project was written up in a piece in Mecca- no Magazine. The article was titled “Are Thinking Machines Pos- sible” and was very upbeat, but surprisingly ends by stating that “Truly creative thinking of course will always remain beyond the power of any machine.” Surely, though, this attitude has changed in light of the amaz- ing advances in hardware and software technology that fol- lowed those meccano models? Sadly, no. -
The Computational Creativity Complex
The Computational Creativity Complex Dan Ventura Abstract We briefly examine the subject of computational creativity through the lenses of three different systems for producing creative artifacts in three different domains: music, visual art and cookery. From these we attempt to abstract some- thing of a “general-purpose” computationally creative agent and examine how this agent might behave in the context of an archetypical “algorithm” for creativity. Fi- nally, we consider this agent’s behavior from the point of view of the theory of (Turing) computability and suggest that computational creativity as a field provides an interesting opportunity for looking at computational complexity in new ways. 1 Inception The question of computational creativity can be approached from several different angles. Here we assume that creativity is possible in computational systems and examine the idea of a general, abstract mechanism for computational creativity that exists somehow independently from any particular domain. This is a difficulty ques- tion, and it is clear that much of creativity is not a domain independent construct. However, we posit that there does exist some core abstraction or creativity “algo- rithm” that can be applied to any domain (with suitable domain-specific augmen- tation, of course). Given this hypothesis, we attempt an inductive approach to the problem by first examining three computationally creative systems in three differ- ent domains and then attempt to generalize from these specific examples an abstract model of a creative system. As a complementary view of the problem, we also discuss an abstract “al- gorithm” for creativity and relate this “algorithm” to the abstract system, asking whether this “algorithm” could, in fact, become an algorithm in the formal sense, Dan Ventura Computer Science Department, Brigham Young University, e-mail: [email protected] 1 2 Dan Ventura and attempt to reason about the answer to that question.