Evaluating evaluation: Assessing progress in computational creativity research

Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computational Creativity, ICCC 2011

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 102-107

  Jordanous, Anna ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS; COMPUTATIONAL SYSTEM; CREATIVE SYSTEMS; EVALUATION GUIDELINES; LITERATURE SURVEY; RESEARCH COMMUNITIES; STANDARD PRACTICES;

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY;

RESEARCH;

EID: 84866052923     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Berliner, P. F. 1994. Thinking in Jazz: The Infinite Art of Improvisation. Chicago Studies in Ethnomusicology. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
2. Biles, J. A. 2007. Improvising with genetic algorithms: GenJam. In Miranda, E. R., and Biles, J. A., eds., Evolutionary Computer Music. London, UK: Springer-Verlag. chapter 7, 137-169.
3. Colton, S. 2008. Creativity versus the perception of creativity in computational systems. In Proceedings of AAAI Symposium on Creative Systems, 14-20.
4. Dunning, T. 1993. Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. Computational Linguistics 19(1):61-74.
5. Gibbs, L. 2010. Evaluating creative (jazz) improvisation: Distinguishing invention and creativity. In Gibbs, L., ed., Proceedings of Leeds International Jazz Conference 2010: Improvisation - jazz in the creative moment.
6. Hodgson, P. 2006. Learning and the evolution of melodic complexisty in virtuoso jazz improvisation. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2006), 1506-1510.
7. Jennings, K. E. 2010. Developing creativity: Artificial barriers in artificial intelligence. Minds and Machines 1-13. Article in Press.
8. Jordanous, A. 2010a. Defining creativity: Finding keywords for creativity using corpus linguistics techniques. In Ventura, D.; Pease, A.; Pérez y Pérez, R.; Ritchie, G.; and Veale, T., eds., Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Creativity, 278-287.
9. Jordanous, A. 2010b. A fitness function for creativity in jazz improvisation and beyond. In Ventura, D.; Pease, A.; Pérez y Pérez, R.; Ritchie, G.; and Veale, T., eds., Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Creativity, 223-227.
10. Jordanous, A. forthcoming. Evaluating Computational Creativity: A Standardised Evaluation Methodology and its Application to Case Studies. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
11. León, C., and Gervás, P. 2010. The role of evaluation-driven rejection in the successful exploration of a conceptual space of stories. Minds and Machines. Article in Press.
12. Lewis, G. E. 2000. Too many notes: Computers, complexity and culture in Voyager. Leonardo Music Journal 33-39.
13. Pearce, M. T.; Meredith, D.; and Wiggins, G. A. 2002. Motivations and methodologies for automation of the compositional process. Musicae Scientae 6(2):119-147.
14. Pease, A.; Winterstein, D.; and Colton, S. 2001. Evaluating machine creativity. In Proceedings of ICCBR Workshop on Approaches to Creativity, 129-137.
15. Peinado, F., and Gervas, P. 2006. Evaluation of automatic generation of basic stories. New Generation Computing 24(3):289-302.
16. Pérez y Pérez, R. 1999. MEXICA: A Computer Model of Creativity in Writing. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
17. Plucker, J. A.; Beghetto, R. A.; and Dow, G. T. 2004. Why isn't creativity more important to educational psychologists? potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist 39(2):83-96.
18. Ritchie, G. 2007. Some empirical criteria for attributing creativity to a computer program. Minds and Machines 17:67-99.
19. Widmer, G.; Flossmann, S.; and Grachten, M. 2009. YQX plays Chopin. AI Magazine 30(3):35-48.
20. Wiggins, G. A. 2006. A preliminary framework for description, analysis and comparison of creative systems. Knowledge-Based Systems 19(7):449-458.