Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
41 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
59 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
41 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
7 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Rapid AIdeation: Generating Ideas With the Self and in Collaboration With Large Language Models (2403.12928v1)

Published 19 Mar 2024 in cs.HC

Abstract: Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) can rapidly produce large and diverse volumes of content. This lends to it a quality of creativity which can be empowering in the early stages of design. In seeking to understand how creative ways to address practical issues can be conceived between humans and GenAI, we conducted a rapid ideation workshop with 21 participants where they used a LLM to brainstorm potential solutions and evaluate them. We found that the LLM produced a greater variety of ideas that were of high quality, though not necessarily of higher quality than human-generated ideas. Participants typically prompted in a straightforward manner with concise instructions. We also observed two collaborative dynamics with the LLM fulfilling a consulting role or an assisting role depending on the goals of the users. Notably, we observed an atypical anti-collaboration dynamic where participants used an antagonistic approach to prompt the LLM.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (22)
  1. Teresa Amabile. 1996. Creativity in context.
  2. Mariette Bengtsson. 2016. How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlus Open 2 (2016), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.npls.2016.01.001
  3. H. Ekvall and P. Winnberg. 2023. Integrating ChatGPT into the UX Design Process: Ideation and Prototyping with LLMs (Dissertation). Retrieved August 1, 2023 from https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-211251
  4. Giorgio Franceschelli and Mirco Musolesi. 2023. On the Creativity of Large Language Models. arXiv:2304.00008 [cs.AI]
  5. Ideas are Dimes a Dozen: Large Language Models for Idea Generation in Innovation. Retrieved August 1, 2023 from https://ssrn.com/abstract=4526071orhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4526071
  6. J. P. Guilford. 1967. The nature of human intelligence. McGraw-Hill New York, New York.
  7. Comparing the Ideation Quality of Humans With Generative Artificial Intelligence. IEEE Engineering Management Review (2024), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMR.2024.3353338
  8. J Kawakita. 1967. Hassouho: Sozosei Kaihatsu notameni [Abuduction Method: For Development of Creativity] in Japanese. Chuokoronsha.
  9. Sprint: How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days. Simon & Schuster.
  10. Benchmarking Cognitive Biases in Large Language Models as Evaluators. arXiv:2309.17012 [cs.CL]
  11. Ewa Luger and Abigail Sellen. 2016. ”Like Having a Really Bad PA”: The Gulf between User Expectation and Experience of Conversational Agents. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA) (CHI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 5286–5297. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858288
  12. The More Is Not the Merrier: Effects of Prompt Engineering on the Quality of Ideas Generated By GPT-3.
  13. Beyond semantic distance: Automated scoring of divergent thinking greatly improves with large language models. Thinking Skills and Creativity 49 (2023), 101356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101356
  14. Alex F. Osborn. 1957. Applied imagination: principles and procedures of creative thinking.
  15. The selection of creative ideas after individual idea generation: Choosing between creativity and impact. British Journal of Psychology 101, 1 (2010), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712609X414204 arXiv:https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1348/000712609X414204
  16. John R. Rossiter and Gary L. Lilien. 1994. New “Brainstorming” Principles. Australian Journal of Management 19, 1 (1994), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/031289629401900104 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1177/031289629401900104
  17. Large Language Models are Not Yet Human-Level Evaluators for Abstractive Summarization. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023, Houda Bouamor, Juan Pino, and Kalika Bali (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, Singapore, 4215–4233. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.278
  18. Decoding ChatGPT: A taxonomy of existing research, current challenges, and possible future directions. Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences 35, 8 (2023), 101675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2023.101675
  19. Brainstorm, then Select: a Generative Language Model Improves Its Creativity Score. In The AAAI-23 Workshop on Creative AI Across Modalities. https://openreview.net/forum?id=8HwKaJ1wvl
  20. Jakob Tholander and Martin Jonsson. 2023. Design Ideation with AI - Sketching, Thinking and Talking with Generative Machine Learning Models. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (¡conf-loc¿, ¡city¿Pittsburgh¡/city¿, ¡state¿PA¡/state¿, ¡country¿USA¡/country¿, ¡/conf-loc¿) (DIS ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1930–1940. https://doi.org/10.1145/3563657.3596014
  21. ”It Felt Like Having a Second Mind”: Investigating Human-AI Co-creativity in Prewriting with Large Language Models. arXiv:2307.10811 [cs.HC]
  22. Why Johnny Can’t Prompt: How Non-AI Experts Try (and Fail) to Design LLM Prompts. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (, Hamburg, Germany,) (CHI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 437, 21 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581388
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (2)
  1. Gionnieve Lim (11 papers)
  2. Simon T. Perrault (15 papers)
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets