Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) encounters limitations in efficiency and fairness within the realm of Procedural Content Generation (PCG) when human creators solely drive and bear responsibility for the generative process. Alternative setups, such as Mixed-Initiative Co-Creative (MI-CC) systems, exhibited their promise. Still, the potential of an active mixed initiative, where AI takes a role beyond following, is understudied. This work investigates the influence of the adaptive ability of an active and learning AI agent on creators' expectancy of creative responsibilities in an MI-CC setting. We built and studied a system that employs reinforcement learning (RL) methods to learn the creative responsibility preferences of a human user during online interactions. Situated in story co-creation, we develop a Multi-armed-bandit agent that learns from the human creator, updates its collaborative decision-making belief, and switches between its capabilities during an MI-CC experience. With 39 participants joining a human subject study, Our developed system's learning capabilities are well recognized compared to the non-learning ablation, corresponding to a significant increase in overall satisfaction with the MI-CC experience. These findings indicate a robust association between effective MI-CC collaborative interactions, particularly the implementation of proactive AI initiatives, and deepened understanding among all participants.

Creativity serves as a cornerstone for societal progress and innovation. With the rise of advanced generative AI models capable of tasks once reserved for human creativity, the study of AI's creative potential becomes imperative for its responsible development and application. In this paper, we prove in theory that AI can be as creative as humans under the condition that it can properly fit the data generated by human creators. Therefore, the debate on AI's creativity is reduced into the question of its ability to fit a sufficient amount of data. To arrive at this conclusion, this paper first addresses the complexities in defining creativity by introducing a new concept called Relative Creativity. Rather than attempting to define creativity universally, we shift the focus to whether AI can match the creative abilities of a hypothetical human. The methodological shift leads to a statistically quantifiable assessment of AI's creativity, term Statistical Creativity. This concept, statistically comparing the creative abilities of AI with those of specific human groups, facilitates theoretical exploration of AI's creative potential. Our analysis reveals that by fitting extensive conditional data without marginalizing out the generative conditions, AI can emerge as a hypothetical new creator. The creator possesses the same creative abilities on par with the human creators it was trained on. Building on theoretical findings, we discuss the application in prompt-conditioned autoregressive models, providing a practical means for evaluating creative abilities of generative AI models, such as Large Language Models (LLMs). Additionally, this study provides an actionable training guideline, bridging the theoretical quantification of creativity with practical model training.

It looks like Fake Drake won't be taking home a Grammy. Recording Academy CEO Harvey Mason Jr. said this week that although the organization will consider music with limited AI-generated voices or instrumentation for award recognition, it will only honor songs written and performed "mostly by a human." "At this point, we are going to allow AI music and content to be submitted, but the Grammys will only be allowed to go to human creators who have contributed creatively in the appropriate categories," Mason said in an interview with Grammy.com. "If there's an AI voice singing the song or AI instrumentation, we'll consider it. But in a songwriting-based category, it has to have been written mostly by a human. Same goes for performance categories – only a human performer can be considered for a Grammy. If AI did the songwriting or created the music, that's a different consideration. But the Grammy will go to human creators at this point."

Creative works shape our identity, values, and worldview. And there are fundamental elements of our culture that are uniquely human. Only humans are capable of communicating the endless intricacies, nuances, and complications of the human condition through art - whether it be music, performance, writing, or any other form of creativity. Developments in artificial intelligence are exciting and could advance the world farther than we ever thought possible. But AI can never replace human expression and artistry.

AI tools have become incredibly powerful and increasingly good at mimicking human writing. GPT-3 and related tools like Jasper AI can compose articles, blog posts, and even entire books at scale. For the first time in history, it's possible to create thousands of pages of text with almost no effort at all. But a new backlash against this content is already brewing. As AI continues to scale up, we're going to see a strange trend -- bad, flawed writing will become way more prominent and way more commercially valuable. That might seem strange or negative, but it's actually a wonderful thing.

Artwork created by artificial intelligence (AI) was awarded a first place blue ribbon and a $300 prize after winning the digital category at the Colorado State Fair Fine Arts Competition, but human creators are furious about the news - with one saying the world is'watching the death of artistry unfold.' The AI artwork, dubbed Théâtre D'opéra Spatial, was submitted by Jason Allen, the president of a Pueblo-based gaming company Incarnate Games, who said he used Midjourney to make the stunning scenes that appear to combine medieval times with a futuristic world. Midjourney is an AI program that creates images from textual descriptions. Allen announced his win on Discord, an instant messaging social platform where he goes by the name Sincarnate, which then spread to Twitter where users shared their distaste that artwork generated by AI was chosen over those created by a human - one user stated'that's pretty f*cking sh*tty.' The Colorado resident appears to not be bothered by the criticism, as Allen notes on Discord how Twitter users are against AI-generated art, but are also'the first to throw the human under the bus by discrediting the human element.'

From the coining of the term back in the 1950's to now, AI has taken remarkable leaps forward and only continues to grow in relevance and sophistication But despite these advancements, there's one problem that continues to plague AI technology – the internal bias and prejudice of its human creators. The issue of AI bias cannot be brushed under the carpet, given the potential detrimental effects it can have. A recent survey showed that 36% of respondents reported that their businesses suffered from AI bias in at least one algorithm, resulting in unequal treatment of users based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion or age. These instances incurred a direct commercial impact: of those respondents, two-thirds reported that as a result they lost revenue (62%), customers (61%), or employees (43%). And 35% incurred legal fees because of lawsuits or legal action.

By that same logic, when Hollywood actors start tweeting about a once-obscure part of artificial intelligence (A.I.), you know that something big is happening, too. That's exactly what occurred recently when Zach Braff, the actor-director still best known for his performance as J.D. on the medical comedy series Scrubs, recorded himself reading a Scrubs-style monolog written by an A.I. "What is a hospital?" Braff reads, adopting the thoughtful tone J.D. used to wrap up each episode in the series. "A hospital is a lot like a high school: the most amazing man is dying, and you're the only one who wants to steal stuff from his dad. Being in a hospital is a lot like being in a sorority. You have greasers and surgeons. And even though it sucks about Doctor Tapioca, not even that's sad."

The concept of artificial intelligence began with the notion of making machines act like humans. At present, artificial intelligence has improved to such an extent that AI-based machines and robots can paint, write poems and easily do many things that a human can do. Recently AI technology has been able to solve an important issue with the concept of protein folding, that scientists had been working on in vain for a long time. So, one can say that AI stands in the middle of humans and machines. However, despite its expertise in human-like automation, there are still some simple but vital aspects of human nature that are yet to be achieved by AI.

In October last year, for example, AI-generated art hit the headlines when auction house Christie's New York sold an AI-created artwork for $432,000. AI is also being used in music production, with a new industry being built around the use of AI in music. The musician Taryn Southern has used an artificial intelligence platform called Amper to create an entire album, called I AM AI. The album was the first LP to be entirely composed and produced using AI. A patented AI system called "DABUS", created by Dr Stephen Thaler, can devise and develop new ideas.