发表机构
Institute for Advanced Computational Science, Stony Brook University; Animal Culture Observatory; Goldsmiths, University of London; Stony Brook University; Aarhus University（石溪大学高级计算科学研究所; 动物文化观测站; 伦敦大学金史密斯学院; 石溪大学; 奥胡斯大学）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
该研究指出生成式AI语境下创造力是混合集体的属性，发现人类与模型搜索互补，混合群体表现和多样性更优，核心是探究能兼顾个体收益与集体多样性的智能体混合方式。
AI 中文摘要
生成式AI正在改变文化产物的创造与传播方式，也改变着我们对创造力本身的理解。研究人员对这些工具是丰富还是削弱文化存在分歧，我们认为这种分歧很大程度源于混淆了创造力的两个不同组成部分：单个产物的新颖性，以及群体的多样性。我们进一步提出，在生成式AI语境下，创造力最好被理解为混合集体（即相互作用的人与算法组成的群体）的属性，而非个体的属性。AI辅助构思会可靠地提升个体产出的新颖性，但会缩小整体多样性，不过这并非机器参与的必然结果。由于人类与模型的搜索方式互补，混合群体的表现和多样性会优于单一类型的群体，且机器发现的解决方案可进入人类文化并留存。结果由构成决定：存在哪些智能体、比例如何、连接方式怎样。问题不再是AI是否助力或损害创造力，而是何种混合方式能让个体收益累积而不侵蚀集体多样性。
英文摘要
Generative AI is changing how cultural artifacts are created and circulated, and with it our understanding of creativity itself. Researchers disagree about whether these tools enrich or impoverish culture, and we argue that much of that disagreement comes from conflating two distinct components of creativity: novelty, a property of single artifacts, and diversity, a property of populations. We argue further that creativity in the context of generative AI is best understood as a property of hybrid collectives, or populations of interacting people and algorithms, rather than of individuals. AI-assisted ideation reliably raises the novelty of individual output while narrowing diversity in the aggregate, but this is not an inevitable consequence of putting machines in the loop. Because humans and models search in complementary ways, mixed groups can outperform and out-diversify groups of either kind alone, and machine-discovered solutions can enter human culture and persist there. What decides the outcome is composition: which agents are present, in what proportion, and how they are connected. The question is no longer whether AI helps or harms creativity, but which mixtures let individual gains accumulate without eroding collective diversity.
