This HTML5 document contains 22 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
n17doi:10.1007/
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
n8https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/80114#
n2https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/
n13https://kar.kent.ac.uk/80114/
wdrshttp://www.w3.org/2007/05/powder-s#
n15http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/status/
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n7https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/subject/
n10https://demo.openlinksw.com/about/id/entity/https/raw.githubusercontent.com/annajordanous/CO644Files/main/
n6http://eprints.org/ontology/
n14http://www.loc.gov/loc.terms/relators/
bibohttp://purl.org/ontology/bibo/
n11https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/org/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
n18https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
n19https://demo.openlinksw.com/about/id/entity/https/www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/akj22/materials/CO644/
n5https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/person/

Statements

Subject Item
n2:80114
rdf:type
bibo:BookSection n6:BookSectionEPrint n6:EPrint bibo:Article
rdfs:seeAlso
n13:
owl:sameAs
n17:978-3-319-43610-4_10
n14:EDT
n5:ext-982446bad7d546edf780e8318d7a2bf0 n5:ext-d8b69e553cb6ec3b8ed2105672222cdd
dcterms:title
Evaluating evaluation: Assessing progress and practices in computational creativity research
wdrs:describedby
n10:export_kar_RDFN3.n3 n19:export_kar_RDFN3.n3
dcterms:date
2019-08-07
dcterms:creator
n5:ext-a.k.jordanous@kent.ac.uk
bibo:status
n15:peerReviewed n15:published
dcterms:publisher
n11:ext-1c5ddec173ca8cdfba8b274309638579
bibo:abstract
Computational creativity research has produced many computational systems that are described as ‘creative’. Historically, these ‘creative systems’ have not received much in terms of evaluation of the actual creativity of the systems, although this has recently attracted more attention as a research perspective. As a scientific research community, computational creativity researchers can benefit from more systematic/standardised approaches to evaluation of the creativity of our systems, to help us progress in understanding creativity and modelling it computationally. A methodology for creativity evaluation should accommodate different manifestations of creativity but also requires a clear, definitive statement of the tests used for evaluation. Here a historical perspective is given on how computational creativity researchers have evaluated (or not evaluated) the creativity of their systems, considering contextual reasons behind this. Different evaluation approaches and frameworks are currently available, though it is not yet clear which (if any) of several recently proposed methods are emerging as the preferred options to use. The Standardised Procedure for Evaluating Creative Systems (SPECS) forms an overarching set of guidelines for how to tackle evaluation of creative systems and can incorporate recent proposals for creativity evaluation. To help decide which evaluation method is best to use, this chapter concludes by exploring five meta-evaluation criteria devised from cross-disciplinary research into good evaluative practice. Together, these considerations help us explore best practice in computational creativity evaluation, helping us develop the tools we have available to us as computational creativity researchers.
dcterms:isPartOf
n18:repository
dcterms:subject
n7:QA76.76 n7:Q335
bibo:authorList
n8:authors
bibo:editorList
n8:editors