Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36095028›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

The perceived value of human-AI collaboration in early shape exploration: An exploratory assessment.

Andrés Arias-Rosales

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Andrés Arias-RosalesDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9266-8950

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As a vital element of early shape exploration, divergence can be time-consuming and challenging, with iterative cycles where idea fixation and creative blocks must be overcome for fuzzy ideas to be fully expanded and understood. Despite interesting tools that have been developed for this purpose, some important challenges remain, as it appears that many designers still prefer simple freehand sketching and tend to defer the use of computational tools to later stages. This work presents an exploratory assessment of the perceived value of a new tool, Shapi, developed to assist early shape exploration by addressing some of the pitfalls reported in the literature. Shapi is envisioned as an autonomous assistant that provides local and global shape variations in the form of rough sketches based on an initial human sketch and interactive cycles. These shape variations are What-If scenarios and cognitive facilitators that may spark new ideas or enable a deeper understanding of the shape and the identification of interesting patterns. Shapi's capabilities are explored in a diverse set of case studies with different purposes: nine implementations in industrial design, three in graphic design, and five with open-ended artistic purposes. These implementations are then used in a survey about initial perceived value in which the majority gave high ratings in terms of exploration (75.5% ≥ 4 out of 5), interpretation (83.7% ≥ 4), adaptation (77.6% ≥ 4), value (73.5% ≥ 4), creativity (69.4% ≥ 4), and general interest in the tool (79.6% ≥ 4). This work brings insight into promising functionalities, opportunities, and risks in the intersection between artificial intelligence, design, and art.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCreativityHumans

Identifiers

PMID36095028
PMCPMC9467378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.