Olivier Penacchio

Silvia Rondini, Claudia Alvarez-Martin, Paula Angermair-Barkai et al.

While recent research suggests Large Language Models match human creative performance in divergent thinking tasks, visual creativity remains underexplored. This study compared image generation in human participants (Visual Artists and Non Artists) and using an image generation AI model (two prompting conditions with varying human input: high for Human Inspired, low for Self Guided). Human raters (N=255) and GPT4o evaluated the creativity of the resulting images. We found a clear creativity gradient, with Visual Artists being the most creative, followed by Non Artists, then Human Inspired generative AI, and finally Self Guided generative AI. Increased human guidance strongly improved GenAI's creative output, bringing its productions close to those of Non Artists. Notably, human and AI raters also showed vastly different creativity judgment patterns. These results suggest that, in contrast to language centered tasks, GenAI models may face unique challenges in visual domains, where creativity depends on perceptual nuance and contextual sensitivity, distinctly human capacities that may not be readily transferable from language models.

C. Alejandro Parraga, Olivier Penacchio, Marcos Muňoz Gonzalez et al.

While it is easy for human observers to judge an image as beautiful or ugly, aesthetic decisions result from a combination of entangled perceptual and cognitive (semantic) factors, making the understanding of aesthetic judgements particularly challenging from a scientific point of view. Furthermore, our research shows a prevailing bias in current databases, which include mostly beautiful images, further complicating the study and prediction of aesthetic responses. We address these limitations by creating a database of images with minimal semantic content and devising, and next exploiting, a method to generate images on the ugly side of aesthetic valuations. The resulting Minimum Semantic Content (MSC) database consists of a large and balanced collection of 10,426 images, each evaluated by 100 observers. We next use established image metrics to demonstrate how augmenting an image set biased towards beautiful images with ugly images can modify, or even invert, an observed relationship between image features and aesthetics valuation. Taken together, our study reveals that works in empirical aesthetics attempting to link image content and aesthetic judgements may magnify, underestimate, or simply miss interesting effects due to a limitation of the range of aesthetic values they consider.