R. Rampa

F. Carichon, S. Sharma, M. Girard et al.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for tasks involving creative problem solving and idea generation. However, there is a lack of consensus concerning their creative capabilities: some studies report superior performances compared to humans, while others highlight structural limitations such as fixation and the homogenization of outputs. Existing evaluation approaches either rely on narrow, decontextualized tasks that do not capture goal-oriented generation or on broader settings that confound multiple aspects of the creative process, making it difficult to isolate the effects of task formulation, prompting, and evaluation design. Significantly, the role of structured prompting strategies in shaping idea generation remains underexplored. Therefore, we introduce IDEAFix, an evaluation framework for analyzing divergent thinking in open-ended idea generation tasks. We prompt models to generate multiple original solutions to controlled variations of short design scenarios, task attributes, and defixation prompting strategies. This design enables systematic analysis of how structured guidance influences LLMs' idea generation. Our results show that both task formulation and attribute selection significantly affect models' performance, and that simple prompting strategies can boost the originality of solutions. However, we also observe persistent output homogenization across models, confirming inherent limits in their ability to generate diverse solutions. Overall, IDEAFix provides a controlled, extensible framework for studying the mechanisms underlying LLMs' creativity.

F. Carichon, R. Rampa, G. Farnadi

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate and shape cultural content, ranging from narrative writing to artistic production. While these models demonstrate impressive fluency and generative capacity, prior work has shown that they also exhibit systematic cultural biases, raising concerns about stereotyping, homogenization, and the erasure of culturally specific forms of expression. Understanding whether LLMs can meaningfully align with diverse cultures beyond the dominant ones remains a critical challenge. In this paper, we study cultural adaptation in LLMs through the lens of cooking recipes, a domain in which culture, tradition, and creativity are tightly intertwined. We build on the \textit{GlobalFusion} dataset, which pairs human recipes from different countries according to established measures of cultural distance. Using the same country pairs, we generate culturally adapted recipes with multiple LLMs, enabling a direct comparison between human and LLM behavior in cross-cultural content creation. Our analysis shows that LLMs fail to produce culturally representative adaptations. Unlike humans, the divergence of their generated recipes does not correlate with cultural distance. We further provide explanations for this gap. We show that cultural information is weakly preserved in internal model representations, that models inflate novelty in their production by misunderstanding notions such as creativity and tradition, and that they fail to identify adaptation with its associated countries and to ground it in culturally salient elements such as ingredients. These findings highlight fundamental limitations of current LLMs for culturally oriented generation and have important implications for their use in culturally sensitive applications.