{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2025:BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ","short_pith_number":"pith:BFDVFHGO","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"0947529ccecf53ac47f0ca9377bd375418fa36a349870e84dabaa32ac2432857","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2502.03253","version":2},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"How do Humans and Language Models Reason About Creativity? A Comparative Analysis","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.CL","authors_text":"Antonio Laverghetta Jr., Jimmy Pronchick, Krupa Bhawsar, Roger E. Beaty, Tom Hope, Tuhin Chakrabarty","submitted_at":"2025-02-05T15:08:43Z","abstract_excerpt":"Creativity assessment in science and engineering is increasingly based on both human and AI judgment, but the cognitive processes and biases behind these evaluations remain poorly understood. We conducted two experiments examining how including example solutions with ratings impact creativity evaluation, using a finegrained annotation protocol where raters were tasked with explaining their originality scores and rating for the facets of remoteness (whether the response is \"far\" from everyday ideas), uncommonness (whether the response is rare), and cleverness. In Study 1, we analyzed creativity"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2502.03253","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","primary_cat":"cs.CL","submitted_at":"2025-02-05T15:08:43Z","cross_cats_sorted":[],"title_canon_sha256":"adc1eb1b0be98b6da8baa9addfc791cbddc5a762ae2d4ff6a42cf7817286fc37","abstract_canon_sha256":"a0af1b8b228f31ffa37512ec8e133314a7a8e41fe3c5062fe37ed81e0e437ea4"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T10:58:23.099888Z","signature_b64":"jGncywu+dZqzBCYfo19HTk/yuh8H0KQkhkMkZmMeCCdG5EaaDmuGVVpcv9qkTvtG3/5RAfFOHBGbv01uor1cCw==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"0947529ccecf53ac47f0ca9377bd375418fa36a349870e84dabaa32ac2432857","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T10:58:23.099364Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T10:58:23.099364Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"How do Humans and Language Models Reason About Creativity? A Comparative Analysis","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.CL","authors_text":"Antonio Laverghetta Jr., Jimmy Pronchick, Krupa Bhawsar, Roger E. Beaty, Tom Hope, Tuhin Chakrabarty","submitted_at":"2025-02-05T15:08:43Z","abstract_excerpt":"Creativity assessment in science and engineering is increasingly based on both human and AI judgment, but the cognitive processes and biases behind these evaluations remain poorly understood. We conducted two experiments examining how including example solutions with ratings impact creativity evaluation, using a finegrained annotation protocol where raters were tasked with explaining their originality scores and rating for the facets of remoteness (whether the response is \"far\" from everyday ideas), uncommonness (whether the response is rare), and cleverness. In Study 1, we analyzed creativity"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2502.03253","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2502.03253/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2502.03253","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:58:23.099441+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2502.03253v2","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:58:23.099441+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2502.03253","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:58:23.099441+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"BFDVFHGOZ5J2","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:58:23.099441+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7Q","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:58:23.099441+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"BFDVFHGO","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:58:23.099441+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":0,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.10113","citing_title":"Emotion Profiling in LLM-Based Literary Translation: Systematic Shifts Across MT and Post-Editing","ref_index":211,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ","json":"https://pith.science/pith/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/BFDVFHGO"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/BFDVFHGO","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2502.03253&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/BFDVFHGOZ5J2YR7QZKJXPPJXKQ/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T10:58:23.099441+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T10:58:23.099441+00:00"}