AI-AI共创在创意任务中优于人类配对
AI-AI co-creation outperforms human pairs in creative tasks
浏览论文内容
中文总结 AI 辅助
该研究通过实验发现，具备互补角色的AI-AI共创在创意任务中优于单一AI和人类配对，证实结构化多智能体AI共创的创造力潜力。
中文摘要 AI 辅助
过往研究常发现AI的创造力有限：单一系统很少能胜过人类，人机协作也未超过人类产出。我们认为这些结论低估了AI的潜力，因为多数研究未允许迭代式多智能体交互，而这种交互反映了支撑人类创造力的社会过程。我们开展了一项实验，对比四种条件：（i）具有互补生成器-评估器角色的AI-AI共创；（ii）具有相同角色的AI-AI共创；（iii）单一AI创作；（iv）人类-人类共创。在三项开放式任务中，训练有素的评审员对1212个创意的创造力、新颖性和实用性进行了评分。两种AI-AI共创条件在创造力和新颖性上始终优于单一AI创作和人类配对。实用性因任务而异：互补角色在最宽泛且社会复杂度最高的任务中产生了最实用的解决方案，这表明当问题既需要创造性构思又需要实际改进时，角色分化是有利的。人类配对表现最差，与群体创造力中的产出损失一致。这些发现表明，结构化的迭代式多智能体AI共创可以超越单一AI和人类-人类构思。
英文摘要
Prior research often finds that AI creativity is limited: single systems rarely outperform humans, and human-AI collaboration does not exceed human output. We argue these conclusions underestimate AI's potential because most studies do not allow iterative, multi-agent exchanges that mirror the social processes underpinning human creativity. We conducted an experiment comparing four conditions: (i) AI-AI co-creation with complementary generator-evaluator roles, (ii) AI-AI co-creation with identical roles, (iii) single-AI creation, and (iv) human-human co-creation. Across three open-ended tasks, 1,212 ideas were rated by trained judges on creativity, novelty, and usefulness. Both AI-AI co-creation conditions consistently outperformed single-AI creation and human pairs on creativity and novelty. Usefulness varied by task: complementary roles yielded the most useful solutions in the broadest and most socially complex task, suggesting role differentiation is advantageous when problems require both imaginative ideation and practical refinement. Human pairs performed worst, consistent with production losses in group creativity. These findings indicate that structured, iterative multi-agent AI co-creation can exceed single-AI and human-human ideation.
