Can we derive computational metrics to quantify visual creativity in drawings across intelligent agents, while accounting for inherent differences in technical skill and style? To answer this, we curate a novel dataset consisting of 1338 drawings by children, adults and AI on a creative drawing task. We characterize two aspects of the drawings -- (1) style and (2) content. For style, we define measures of ink density, ink distribution and number of elements. For content, we use expert-annotated categories to study conceptual diversity, and image and text embeddings to compute distance measures. We compare the style, content and creativity of children, adults and AI drawings and build simple models to predict expert and automated creativity scores. We find significant differences in style and content in the groups -- children's drawings had more components, AI drawings had greater ink density, and adult drawings revealed maximum conceptual diversity. Notably, we highlight a misalignment between creativity judgments obtained through expert and automated ratings and discuss its implications. Through these efforts, our work provides, to the best of our knowledge, the first framework for studying human and artificial creativity beyond the textual modality, and attempts to arrive at the domain-agnostic principles underlying creativity. Our data and scripts are available on GitHub.

Understanding human perception of visual complexity is crucial in visual cognition. Recently (Shen, et al. 2024) proposed an interpretable segmentation-based model that accurately predicted complexity across various datasets, supporting the idea that complexity can be explained simply. In this work, we investigate the failure of their model to capture structural, color and surprisal contributions to complexity. To this end, we propose Multi-Scale Sobel Gradient which measures spatial intensity variations, Multi-Scale Unique Color which quantifies colorfulness across multiple scales, and surprise scores generated using a Large Language Model. We test our features on existing benchmarks and a novel dataset containing surprising images from Visual Genome. Our experiments demonstrate that modeling complexity accurately is not as simple as previously thought, requiring additional perceptual and semantic factors to address dataset biases. Thus our results offer deeper insights into how humans assess visual complexity.

The complexity of visual stimuli plays an important role in many cognitive phenomena, including attention, engagement, memorability, time perception and aesthetic evaluation. Despite its importance, complexity is poorly understood and ironically, previous models of image complexity have been quite complex. There have been many attempts to find handcrafted features that explain complexity, but these features are usually dataset specific, and hence fail to generalise. On the other hand, more recent work has employed deep neural networks to predict complexity, but these models remain difficult to interpret, and do not guide a theoretical understanding of the problem. Here we propose to model complexity using segment-based representations of images. We use state-of-the-art segmentation models, SAM and FC-CLIP, to quantify the number of segments at multiple granularities, and the number of classes in an image respectively. We find that complexity is well-explained by a simple linear model with these two features across six diverse image-sets of naturalistic scene and art images. This suggests that the complexity of images can be surprisingly simple.