Defining art is so complex that not even the SAR gets wet enough, turning the concept into a sort of tailor's drawer in which almost everything is valid.We wonder if within this huge drawer that is art fit objects whose creation has needed an artificial intelligence.
Art 2.mo f.Manifestation of human activity through which the real is interpreted or the imagined is embodied with plastic resources, linguistic or sound.
Throughout history, different tools have served us when it comes to composing art: dyes on rock in caves or the steel of the strings of a violin.Today are the processors and software that make up an artificial intelligence tools in those who support us to create art. Or do AIs rely on us?
The artist helped by artificial intelligence
All artists have relied on the latest knowledge of their time or high-tech objects (as Andrew Huang does with his "musical unicorn").
At this time in our history, the most advanced science on which to build and understand art is the artificial intelligence helped by a huge computing power.The artist is helped by a second brain .
This is the case of the day a computer wrote a novel called The Day A Computer Writes A Novel in a guino to meta-narration.He gave in a Japanese literary contest in which the novel was officially written by the team that wrote artificial intelligence.The truth is that this team only corrected the manuscript of the AI, which wrote about itself writing.To the Hitoshi Matsubara team , from Future University Hakodate, it seemed funny that artificial intelligence recounted its own experiences in the novel.
Another example of an artist helped by an AI was the beginnings of The Painting Fool .Although later evolved in the form of artificial intelligence that "created art by itself", in its origins it only transformed the photographs of Simon Colton (his designer) towards something close to the artistic pieces as understood by the limited human point of view.
Blaise Aguera's AI trying to recognize faces in a cloud sky.Source: Aguera 2016 .
It is approximately the same artistic level as the one that returned Blaise Aguera's image recognition AI, an AI designed to recognize images, when asked about Baise's face (image above).
Without a doubt, we could recognize this as art.At least it would be art if it had been done by a human and exhibited at the MOMA (Museum of Modern Art).But, Is it art if a machine does it? Has the machine really done it, or is the machine a tool? Or is AI the next true canvas on which artist-programmers will express themselves?
The researcher Ramon Lopez de Mantaras, an AI expert and director of the Artificial Intelligence Research Institute, helps us understand this: «In a way it could be considered that, indeed, the Program designer is co-creator of the resulting work of art .Some consider programming itself an art.[...] One of the most important algorithm experts in the world (Professor Donald Knuth of Stanford University) I publish several volumes on programming entitled " The Art of Computer Programming ".
However, I don't think you can say that programming is the real canvas , I think it's an extraordinary element to help and even amplify artistic creativity. »
The artist who is simulated by an AI
Perhaps the next level of AI art would be to use artificial intelligence to create art through learning in a process called Case-based Reasoning (CBR, reasoning based on cases).The CBR would consider artistic creation as a problem to solve, of which current art is a valid solution.
Studying hundreds or thousands of artistic pieces, AI is able to apply certain techniques to compose in the same way.Probably the best known case is The Next Rembrandt , that painting that is all that is a Rembrandt but that the painter never got to paint:
This project linked in 2016 such diverse subjects as art, big data, computing, beauty, canvases and 3D printing, among others.After analyzing all the paintings they could, the The team Next Rembrandt use data mining to understand what makes a Rembrandt a Rembrandt .Then, they used artificial intelligence to paint based on what learned a new picture.
It has reached such a level that today it is difficult to distinguish between art generated by a human and art generated by a human (through artificial intelligence).Do not you think so ? We leave two cases of Jazz, one interpreted by a human being and another by an AI.Would you know which is which? (solution below)
https://img.blogs.es/anexom/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/curt_exp.wavhttps://img.blogs.es/anexom/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Allme-jexp.mp3
As Ramon Lopez de Mantaras tells us, « there are works generated by AI that you see (or hear in the case of music) and you cannot differentiate them [from those made by humans].The expressive music generated by our SaxEx system was not possible to detect that it was generated by software.The same thing happens with works by The Painting Fool or something even those generated by the software AARON of Harold Cohen »
Indeed, the two tracks that sound are found in the presentation of Saxex and have been interpreted by artificial intelligence.
The artist who is replaced by an AI
If an artificial intelligence can create a work of art even better than a human, will AI replace artists as they replace other jobs?
Ramon Lopez de Mantaras is not so sure because « will always be behind the human being , although [...] the programs that play chess far exceed the level of play not only of his programmers, but also the best players in the world ».
Maybe that's what happens when the artificial intelligences write the scripts of our footage, as in Sungpring , the short written by the AI called Benjamin, although, seen the result of nine unbearable minutes of script, that we leave you below so that you have the opportunity to value, one of two:
Or the scripts of artificial intelligences far exceed human understanding capabilities;
Or, as the NYT said, it's nonsense that nobody understands:
This brings us back to the question of which is art or creativity that we have not known very well to answer at the beginning of the article.Ramon, in his article Artificial intelligence and the arts.Towards a computational creativity rightly comments that «creativity is not a mystical gift outside the scope of scientific study, but something that can be investigated, simulated and redirected for the benefit of society».
That we be replaced 100% by artificial intelligences, in art or in any other field, it seems at least a precipitous deduction to the advancement in field IA.That is undoubtedly developing at high speed.
But, «for that to happen, the software would have to have intentionality , desires, goals, motivations, etc., and I doubt very much that in an AI these properties will never emerge., I believe that the human being will continue, to a greater or lesser extent, being at the origin of art in the future ”, concludes Lopez de Mantaras.
Images | iStock/Victor_Tongdee, iStock/liuzishan
Comments
Post a Comment