Back to Back with a Copy: A Computational Analysis of AI-Generated Visual Contemporary Art Pastiches

The aim of this paper is twofold. First, it investigates whether newer generative models are getting better at pastiching contemporary artworks. Second, it explores the consistency of the multidimensional nature of stylistic evaluation across different LLMs. Building on previous work, we analyze stylistic similarity between AI generated pastiches and the original artworks of twelve contemporary artists. We used five complementary computer vision models to capture texture, color, semantics, composition, and perceptual features through cosine distance in high-dimensional embedding spaces. The distances obtained show that the newer image generation model that we used has produced pastiches with improved semantic alignment and greater diversity than the model used in previous work. However, it was slightly less performant on shallow features such as color, texture, and perceptual adherence. Our findings confirm that artistic style is inherently multidimensional, and measuring it does not depend on any spatial architecture. These quantitative findings are contextualized through feedback from human evaluators, which are the artists themselves.

A Comparative Approach to Assessing Linguistic Creativity of Large Language Models and Humans

The following paper introduces a general linguistic creativity test for humans and Large Language Models (LLMs). The test consists of various tasks aimed at assessing their ability to generate new original words and phrases based on word formation processes (derivation and compounding) and on metaphorical language use. We administered the test to 24 humans and to an equal number of LLMs, and we automatically evaluated their answers using OCSAI tool for three criteria: Originality, Elaboration, and Flexibility. The results show that LLMs not only outperformed humans in all the assessed criteria, but did better in six out of the eight test tasks. We then computed the uniqueness of the individual answers, which showed some minor differences between humans and LLMs. Finally, we performed a short manual analysis of the dataset, which revealed that humans are more inclined towards E(extending)-creativity, while LLMs favor F(ixed)-creativity.