 |
 |
chris said I would rather concentrate on the question of how we would recognise a designing artefact - what's our Turing test? That would be a valid and useful thing for us to offer anybody who wants to pursue the challenge. A few years ago I had a go at that... "“Can machines do creative design?” suffers from the same problems, which beset the question facing Turing. The question is meaningless. What do the words “machine, do, creativity, design, can” mean? The task of defining an agreed meaning of those words is probably insoluble. But, it is possible to re-frame the question like Turing in terms of a game: a Creativity Game. 1.2 THE CREATIVITY GAME A known creative designer is placed in a room. A machine is placed in the next door room. An interrogator is allowed to ask each to solve creative design problems. The machine and designer must solve the problems and reply to the interrogator. If the interrogator cannot distinguish between the computer and human solutions we deem the machine capable of creativity." Perhaps the problem of the Ford Mustang is too wicked but I think it is concievable that if the design tasks set in the game were, to for example, design a logotype for a solicitors office, say Bradley and Bradley, an expert system could produce a result that could be mistaken for a human graphic design result. If that point is won, then the wicked end of the problem is just an issue of scale. anton Anthony Hutton Senior Lecturer in Design School of Art and Design Magee Campus University of Ulster Rock Road Derry City BT48 7JL Mobile +44 (0)7813 780316 http://www.ulst.ac.uk/staff/a.hutton.html [log in to unmask]