REVIEW 1 cited by
On the Injunction of XAIxArt
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
On the Injunction of XAIxArt
read the original abstract
The position paper highlights the range of concerns that are engulfed in the injunction of explainable artificial intelligence in art (XAIxArt). Through a series of quick sub-questions, it points towards the ambiguities concerning 'explanation' and the postpositivist tradition of 'relevant explanation'. Rejecting both 'explanation' and 'relevant explanation', the paper takes a stance that XAIxArt is a symptom of insecurity of the anthropocentric notion of art and a nostalgic desire to return to outmoded notions of authorship and human agency. To justify this stance, the paper makes a distinction between an ornamentation model of explanation to a model of explanation as sense-making.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Towards Standardized Light Field Quality Assessment: Hybrid Subjective Benchmarking and Objective Metric Evaluation
A hybrid DSCS+PC light-field QA framework and public dataset show objective metrics drop when view-synthesis/3DGS distortions join coding artifacts, and view pooling affects agreement.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.