Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Characterising the Creative Process in Humans and Large Language Models

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

arxiv 2405.00899 v2 pith:U6QB7GMC submitted 2024-05-01 cs.HC cs.AIcs.CLq-bio.NC

classification cs.HCcs.AIcs.CLq-bio.NC
keywords creativitycreativellmsprocesssemanticflexiblehumanhumans
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models appear quite creative, often performing on par with the average human on creative tasks. However, research on LLM creativity has focused solely on \textit{products}, with little attention on the creative \textit{process}. Process analyses of human creativity often require hand-coded categories or exploit response times, which do not apply to LLMs. We provide an automated method to characterise how humans and LLMs explore semantic spaces on the Alternate Uses Task, and contrast with behaviour in a Verbal Fluency Task. We use sentence embeddings to identify response categories and compute semantic similarities, which we use to generate jump profiles. Our results corroborate earlier work in humans reporting both persistent (deep search in few semantic spaces) and flexible (broad search across multiple semantic spaces) pathways to creativity, where both pathways lead to similar creativity scores. LLMs were found to be biased towards either persistent or flexible paths, that varied across tasks. Though LLMs as a population match human profiles, their relationship with creativity is different, where the more flexible models score higher on creativity. Our dataset and scripts are available on \href{https://github.com/surabhisnath/Creative_Process}{GitHub}.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Dynamic Reinforcement Learning for Actors

    cs.LG 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A reinforcement learning update that adjusts each neuron's input-output sensitivity using TD error can replace external exploration noise and backpropagation through time in small actor-critic tasks.

  2. Pencils to Pixels: A Systematic Study of Creative Drawings across Children, Adults and AI

    cs.HC 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new dataset and computational framework quantify style and content in children's, adults', and DALL-E drawings, showing that expert and automated creativity scores disagree across groups.

  3. Next Token Prediction Is a Dead End for Creativity

    cs.AI 2025-05 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    Next-token prediction is argued to be fundamentally misaligned with the spontaneity, adversarial responsiveness, and rhythmic timing of live improvisational creativity such as battle rap.

Pith tools