Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
139 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
47 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Machine Learning Processes as Sources of Ambiguity: Insights from AI Art (2403.09374v1)

Published 14 Mar 2024 in cs.HC

Abstract: Ongoing efforts to turn Machine Learning (ML) into a design material have encountered limited success. This paper examines the burgeoning area of AI art to understand how artists incorporate ML in their creative work. Drawing upon related HCI theories, we investigate how artists create ambiguity by analyzing nine AI artworks that use computer vision and image synthesis. Our analysis shows that, in addition to the established types of ambiguity, artists worked closely with the ML process (dataset curation, model training, and application) and developed various techniques to evoke the ambiguity of processes. Our finding indicates that the current conceptualization of ML as a design material needs to reframe the ML process as design elements, instead of technical details. Finally, this paper offers reflections on commonly held assumptions in HCI about ML uncertainty, dependability, and explainability, and advocates to supplement the artifact-centered design perspective of ML with a process-centered one.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (99)
  1. Ada Ada Ada. 2022. in transitu. https://ada-ada-ada.art/projects/in-transitu
  2. Philip E. Agre. 1997. Computation and Human Experience (1 ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571169
  3. Memo Akten. 2021. Deep Visual Instruments: Realtime Continuous, Meaningful Human Control over Deep Neural Networks for Creative Expression. doctoral. Goldsmiths, University of London. https://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/30191/
  4. Learning to see: you are what you see. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2019 Art Gallery. ACM, Los Angeles California, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3306211.3320143
  5. Learning to See: You Are What You See. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2019 Art Gallery (Los Angeles, California) (SIGGRAPH ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 13, 6 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3306211.3320143
  6. Refik Anadol. 2022. Unsupervised - Machine Hallucinations - MoMa.
  7. Paul M. Aoki and Allison Woodruff. 2005. Making Space for Stories: Ambiguity in the Design of Personal Communication Systems. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Portland, Oregon, USA) (CHI ’05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1145/1054972.1054998
  8. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Information Fusion 58 (2020), 82–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012
  9. Sofian Audry. 2021. Art in the age of machine learning. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
  10. Jeffrey Bardzell and Shaowen Bardzell. 2015. Humanistic HCI. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 8, 4 (Sept. 2015), 1–185. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00664ED1V01Y201508HCI031
  11. Steve Benford and Gabriella Giannachi. 2011. Performing Mixed Reality. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  12. Sensitive Pictures: Emotional Interpretation in the Museum. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New Orleans, LA, USA) (CHI ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 455, 16 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3502080
  13. Machine Learning Uncertainty as a Design Material: A Post-Phenomenological Inquiry. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445481
  14. The Entoptic Field Camera as Metaphor-Driven Research-through-Design with AI Technologies. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Hamburg Germany, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581175
  15. Ruha Benjamin. 2020. Race after technology: abolitionist tools for the New Jim Code. Polity, Cambridge, UK ; Medford, MA.
  16. Michael Birchall. 2017. Situating participatory art between process and practice. Arken Bulletin 7 (2017), 56–74.
  17. Margaret A. Boden and Ernest A. Edmonds. 2019. From Fingers to Digits: An Artificial Aesthetic. MIT Press.
  18. Kirsten Boehner and Jeffrey T. Hancock. 2006. Advancing Ambiguity. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montréal, Québec, Canada) (CHI ’06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 103–106. https://doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124789
  19. Ian Bogost. 2019. The AI-Art Gold Rush Is Here. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/03/ai-created-art-invades-chelsea-gallery-scene/584134/ Section: Technology.
  20. Machine Flaws in Generative Art. In Lux Aeterna, ISEA2019 25th International Symposium on Electronic Art proceedings, Gwangju, Republic of Korea. 713–716.
  21. Meredith Broussard. 2018. Artificial Unintelligence: How Computers Misunderstand the World. MIT Press.
  22. Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee. 2017. The Business of Artificial Intelligence. Harvard Business Review (July 2017). https://hbr.org/2017/07/the-business-of-artificial-intelligence Section: Technology and analytics.
  23. Baptiste Caramiaux and Sarah Fdili Alaoui. 2022. ”Explorers of Unknown Planets”: Practices and Politics of Artificial Intelligence in Visual Arts. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, CSCW2 (Nov. 2022). https://doi.org/10.1145/3555578
  24. Eva Cetinic and James She. 2022. Understanding and Creating Art with AI: Review and Outlook. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMM) 18, 2, Article 66 (feb 2022), 22 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3475799
  25. Harold Cohen. 1995. The further exploits of AARON, painter. Stanford Humanities Review 4, 2 (1995), 141–158.
  26. Framing In Computational Creativity-A Survey And Taxonomy.. In ICCC. 156–163.
  27. Kate Crawford. 2021. The Atlas of AI: Power, Politics, and the Planetary Costs of Artificial Intelligence. Yale University Press.
  28. Kate Crawford and Trevor Paglen. 2019. Excavating AI: The Politics of Images in Machine Learning Training Sets. (2019). https://excavating.ai
  29. Claudia Daudén Roquet and Corina Sas. 2021. Interoceptive Interaction: An Embodied Metaphor Inspired Approach to Designing for Meditation. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 265, 17 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445137
  30. ImageNet: A large-scale hierarchical image database. In 2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 248–255. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2009.5206848
  31. Laura Devendorf and Daniela K. Rosner. 2015. Reimagining Digital Fabrication as Performance Art. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 555–566. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702613.2732507
  32. Catherine D’ignazio and Lauren F Klein. 2020. Data feminism. MIT press.
  33. UX design innovation: Challenges for working with machine learning as a design material. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings 2017-May (2017), 278–288. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025739
  34. James Dyer and Christian Petersen. 2021. De-Signing Ambiguity. In Design Culture (s). Cumulus, 4500–4513.
  35. Painting authorship and forgery detection challenges with ai image generation algorithms: Rembrandt and 17th century dutch painters as a case study. IJIMAI 7, 7 (2022), 7–13. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=9036824 Publisher: UNIR-Universidad Internacional de La Rioja Section: IJIMAI.
  36. Hans-Georg Gadamer. 2004. Truth and method (2nd, rev. ed. / translation revised by joel weinsheimer and donald g. marshall. ed.). Continuum, London.
  37. Ambiguity as a resource for design. (April 2003), 233–240. https://doi.org/10.1145/642611.642653
  38. Mental Models of AI Agents in a Cooperative Game Setting. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376316
  39. Dejan Grba. 2021a. Brittle Opacity: Ambiguities of the Creative AI. In xCoAx, 9th Conference on Computation, Communication, Aesthetics & X. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4663408
  40. Dejan Grba. 2021b. Information Particles: Tracing the Ambiguities of the Creative AI. In Proceedings of Art Machines 2: International Symposium on Machine Learning and Art 2021. 2021–05.
  41. Dejan Grba. 2022. Deep Else: A Critical Framework for AI Art. Digital 2, 1 (2022), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.3390/digital2010001
  42. Li Gu and Yong Li. 2022. Who made the paintings: Artists or artificial intelligence? The effects of identity on liking and purchase intention. Frontiers in Psychology 13 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.941163
  43. Varvara Guljajeva and Mar Canet Sola. 2022. POSTcard Landscapes from Lanzarote. In Creativity and Cognition. ACM, Venice Italy, 634–636. https://doi.org/10.1145/3527927.3531191
  44. Failing with Style: Designing for Aesthetic Failure in Interactive Performance. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300260
  45. Aaron Hertzmann. 2020. Visual Indeterminacy in GAN Art. Leonardo 53, 4 (July 2020), 424–428. https://doi.org/10.1162/leon_a_01930
  46. Lars Erik Holmquist. 2017. Intelligence on tap: artificial intelligence as a new design material. Interactions 24, 4 (June 2017), 28–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/3085571
  47. Kristina Höök. 2010. Transferring Qualities from Horseback Riding to Design. In Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries (Reykjavik, Iceland) (NordiCHI ’10). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 226–235. https://doi.org/10.1145/1868914.1868943
  48. Ayanna Howard. 2020. Are We Trusting AI Too Much? Examining Human-Robot Interactions in the Real World. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1. https://doi.org/10.1145/3319502.3374842
  49. Word By Word: A Mobile Game To Encourage Collaborative Storytelling Within The Museum. In MW18: Museums and the Web 2018. Museums and the Web, Vancouver, BC. https://mw18.mwconf.org/paper/word-by-word-a-mobile-game-to-encourage-collaborative-storytelling-within-the-museum/
  50. Ambiguity in Design: An Airport Split-Flap Display Storytelling Installation. In CHI ’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Paris, France) (CHI EA ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 541–546. https://doi.org/10.1145/2468356.2468452
  51. The Electronicists: Techno-aesthetic Encounters for Nonlinear and Art-based Inquiry in HCI. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517506
  52. Mario Klingemann. 2017. The Butcher’s Son. https://www.artsy.net/artwork/mario-klingemann-imposture-series-the-butchers-son
  53. Designing the user experience of machine learning systems. In AAAI Spring Symposium Proceedings (Technical Report SS-17-04). 27–29.
  54. Lucian Leahu. 2016. Ontological Surprises: A Relational Perspective on Machine Learning. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM, Brisbane QLD Australia, 182–186. https://doi.org/10.1145/2901790.2901840
  55. Convolutional networks for images, speech, and time series. The handbook of brain theory and neural networks 3361, 10 (1995), 1995.
  56. Szu-Yen Lin. 2023. Art and Interpretation. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://iep.utm.edu/art-and-interpretation/
  57. Todd Lubart. 2005. How can computers be partners in the creative process: Classification and commentary on the Special Issue. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 63, 4 (Oct. 2005), 365–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.04.002
  58. Nicolas Malevé. 2021. On the data set’s ruins. AI & SOCIETY 36, 4 (Dec. 2021), 1117–1131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-020-01093-w
  59. Michael Mateas. 2001. Expressive AI: A Hybrid Art and Science Practice. Leonardo 34, 2 (April 2001), 147–153. https://doi.org/10.1162/002409401750184717
  60. Michael Mateas and Andrew Stern. 2003. Facade: An Experiment in Building a Fully-Realized Interactive Drama. In Game Developers Conference. Game Design Track.
  61. Marian Mazzone and Ahmed Elgammal. 2019. Art, Creativity, and the Potential of Artificial Intelligence. Arts 8, 1, 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts8010026 Number: 1 Publisher: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute.
  62. John McCarthy and Peter Wright. 2007. Technology as experience (1. paperback ed ed.). MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
  63. Stefania Milan and Emiliano Treré. 2019. Big Data from the South(s): Beyond Data Universalism. Television & New Media 20, 4 (May 2019), 319–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476419837739 Publisher: SAGE Publications.
  64. Poison. https://www.munchmuseet.no/en/exhibitions/archive/2021/poison/
  65. Tim Murray-Browne and Panagiotis Tigas. 2021. Emergent Interfaces: Vague, Complex, Bespoke and Embodied Interaction between Humans and Computers. Applied Sciences 11, 18 (Sept. 2021), 8531. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11188531
  66. Metaphors for designers working with AI. In DRS Biennial Conference Series, Dan Lockton, S Lenzi, P Hekkert, A Oak, J Sádaba, and P Lloyd (Eds.). Bilbao, Spain. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2022.667
  67. Jonas Oppenlaender. 2022. The Creativity of Text-based Generative Art. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2206.02904
  68. The Rogue in the Lovely Black Dress: Intimacy in World of Warcraft. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Atlanta, Georgia, USA) (CHI ’10). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 233–242. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753361
  69. Trevor Paglen and Kate Crawford. 2019. ImageNet Roulette. https://paglen.studio/2020/04/29/imagenet-roulette/
  70. Simon Penny. 2009. Art and Artificial Life – a Primer. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1z07j77x
  71. Simon Penny. 2013. Art and robotics: sixty years of situated machines. AI & SOCIETY 28, 2 (May 2013), 147–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-012-0404-4
  72. Voice Interfaces in Everyday Life. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174214
  73. Overtrust of robots in emergency evacuation scenarios. In 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). 101–108. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451740 ISSN: 2167-2148.
  74. Interpersonalizing Intimate Museum Experiences. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 37, 12 (July 2021), 1151–1172. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1870829 Publisher: Taylor & Francis.
  75. Photorealistic Text-to-Image Diffusion Models with Deep Language Understanding. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, S. Koyejo, S. Mohamed, A. Agarwal, D. Belgrave, K. Cho, and A. Oh (Eds.), Vol. 35. Curran Associates, Inc., 36479–36494. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2022/file/ec795aeadae0b7d230fa35cbaf04c041-Paper-Conference.pdf
  76. Ambiguity as a Resource to Inform Proto-Practices: The Case of Skin Conductance. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 26, 4, Article 21 (jul 2019), 32 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3318143
  77. Diffraction-in-Action: Designerly Explorations of Agential Realism Through Lived Data. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New Orleans, LA, USA) (CHI ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 540, 18 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3502029
  78. Prototyping Machine Learning Through Diffractive Art Practice. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2021 (DIS ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2013–2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3461778.3462163
  79. Reflective design. In Proceedings of the 4th decennial conference on Critical computing: between sense and sensibility (CC ’05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1145/1094562.1094569
  80. Phoebe Sengers and Bill Gaver. 2006. Staying Open to Interpretation: Engaging Multiple Meanings in Design and Evaluation. In Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (University Park, PA, USA) (DIS ’06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1145/1142405.1142422
  81. Educating the attention of museum visitors through non-verbal art mediation. In IASDR 2023: Congress of the International Association of Societies of Design Research. Design Research Society, Milan, Italy. https://doi.org/10.21606/iasdr.2023.222
  82. Art Critique by Other Means. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS ’23). ACM, Pittsburg, PA, 10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3563657.3596069
  83. Katherine W Song and Eric Paulos. 2021. Unmaking: Enabling and Celebrating the Creative Material of Failure, Destruction, Decay, and Deformation. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445529
  84. Luke Stark and Kate Crawford. 2019. The work of art in the age of artificial intelligence: What artists can teach us about the ethics of data practice. Surveillance & Society 17, 3/4 (2019), 442–455.
  85. Nell Tenhaaf. 2008. Art Embodies A-Life: The VIDA Competition. Leonardo 41, 1 (Feb. 2008), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1162/leon.2008.41.1.6
  86. Anna Vallgårda and Ylva Fernaeus. 2015. Interaction Design as a Bricolage Practice. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1145/2677199.2680594
  87. How to play storytelling games with masterpieces: from art galleries to hybrid board games. Journal of Computers in Education 6, 1 (March 2019), 79–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-018-0124-y
  88. Frank Vetere and Niels Wouters. 2018. AI scans your data to assess your character but Biometric Mirror asks: what if it is wrong? The Conversation (July 2018). http://theconversation.com/ai-scans-your-data-to-assess-your-character-but-biometric-mirror-asks-what-if-it-is-wrong-100328
  89. ”I Want To See How Smart This AI Really Is”: Player Mental Model Development of an Adversarial AI Player. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, CHI PLAY (Oct. 2022), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3549482
  90. Julia Carrie Wong. 2019. The viral selfie app ImageNet Roulette seemed fun – until it called me a racist slur. The Guardian (Sept. 2019). https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/17/imagenet-roulette-asian-racist-slur-selfie
  91. Biometric Mirror: Exploring Ethical Opinions towards Facial Analysis and Automated Decision-Making. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 447–461. https://doi.org/10.1145/3322276.3322304
  92. Muhan Xu. 2021. An exploratory study of AI creativity inspired by descriptive ambiguity.
  93. Re-Examining Whether, Why, and How Human-AI Interaction Is Uniquely Difficult to Design. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376301
  94. Nushin Isabelle Yaszdani. 2018. Machine Bias. https://nushinyazdani.com/Machine-Learning-Bias
  95. Paulina Yurman and Anuradha Venugopal Reddy. 2022. Drawing Conversations Mediated by AI. In Creativity and Cognition (Venice, Italy) (C&C ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 56–70. https://doi.org/10.1145/3527927.3531448
  96. Jichen Zhu. 2009. Intentional systems and the artificial intelligence (ai) hermeneutic network: Agency and intentionality in expressive computational systems. Georgia Institute of Technology.
  97. Jichen Zhu and Santiago Ontanón. 2010. Towards Analogy-Based Story Generation.. In ICCC. Citeseer, 75–84.
  98. Player-AI Interaction : What Neural Network Games Reveal About AI as Play. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’21). arXiv:arXiv:2101.06220v2
  99. Joanna Zylinska. 2020. AI Art: Machine Visions and Warped Dreams. Open Humanites Press. http://www.openhumanitiespress.org/books/titles/ai-art/
Citations (3)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets