CCDSF: A Computational Creative Design Systems Framework

From a mixed perspective of the fields of computational creativity and design research, we present a formal framework called Computational Creative Design Systems Framework (CCDSF) for describing, analyzing, and modeling Computational Creative Design Systems (CCDSs), either as autonomous agents or as collaborative systems integrating different agents, including both pure computational and human–computer scenarios. The CCDSF extends and unifies three existing frameworks: (i) the Function–Behavior–Structure framework for designing, to integrate design domain-specific knowledge; (ii) the Creative Systems Framework, to model design as a creative process; and (iii) the Conceptual Spaces Theory framework, to define the CCDSF at a more neutral level to be compatible with both the conceptual-space nature of the creative process and the implementation-level representation systems. The CCDSF core is a layered schema that structures the activity of designing through design concepts produced by design processes instrumented by agent-specific perception and action strategies, within a hierarchy of what we call design levels. Each layer of the schema constitutes a creative system that can implement exploratory, combinational, and transformational creativity mechanisms, including the possibility of defining the system at a meta-creative level. The hierarchical arrangement of creative systems defines the architecture of a CCDS. This architecture enables modeling CCDSs considering both the perspective of the generation and evaluation of artifacts that could be deemed creative and the precise modeling of the cognitive process of design, emphasizing its situated nature. To illustrate its usefulness, in the last part of this paper, we use the proposed framework to describe a real system in the videogame design domain.

[1]  David G. Novick,et al.  What is Mixed-Initiative Interaction? , 1997 .

[2]  John S. Gero,et al.  COMPARING DESIGNING ACROSS DIFFERENT DOMAINS: AN EXPLORATORY CASE STUDY , 2011 .

[3]  Francesca Montagna,et al.  Beyond the Design Perspective of Gero's FBS Framework , 2010, DCC.

[4]  John S. Gero,et al.  The Function-Behaviour-Structure Ontology of Design , 2014 .

[5]  Rafael Pérez y Pérez The Computational Creativity Continuum , 2018, ICCC.

[6]  Twan Basten,et al.  A domain-independent descriptive design model and its application to structured reflection on design processes , 2006 .

[7]  A. Webb,et al.  TRIZ: an inventive approach to invention , 2002 .

[8]  Bob Eberle Scamper: Games for Imagination Development , 1984 .

[9]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  A Review of Theories and Models of Design , 2016 .

[10]  John S. Gero,et al.  Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Schema for Design , 1990, AI Mag..

[11]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  Theories and Models of Design: A Summary of Findings , 2014 .

[12]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Semantic Knowledge, Domains of Meaning and Conceptual Spaces , 2017 .

[13]  P. Gärdenfors The Geometry of Meaning: Semantics Based on Conceptual Spaces , 2014 .

[14]  Peter J. Bentley,et al.  Generic Evolutionary Design , 1998 .

[15]  John S. Gero,et al.  The Situated Function — Behaviour — Structure Framework , 2004 .

[16]  John S. Gero,et al.  Commonalities across Designing: Empirical Results , 2014 .

[17]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Representing part–whole relations in conceptual spaces , 2013, Cognitive Processing.

[18]  Antonios Liapis,et al.  Mixed-initiative co-creativity , 2014, FDG.

[19]  Simon Colton,et al.  Creativity Versus the Perception of Creativity in Computational Systems , 2008, AAAI Spring Symposium: Creative Intelligent Systems.

[20]  Andrés Gómez de Silva Garza,et al.  An introduction to and comparison of computational creativity and design computing , 2017, Artificial Intelligence Review.

[21]  John S. Gero,et al.  Situated interpretation in computational creativity , 2015, Knowl. Based Syst..

[22]  Julian Togelius,et al.  Sentient Sketchbook: Computer-aided game level authoring , 2013, FDG.

[23]  John S. Gero,et al.  DOES DESIGNING HAVE A COMMON COGNITIVE BEHAVIOR INDEPENDENT OF DOMAIN AND TASK: A META-ANALYSIS OF DESIGN PROTOCOLS , 2014 .

[24]  Armand Hatchuel,et al.  Design as Forcing: Deepening the Foundations of C-K Theory , 2007 .

[25]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Conceptual spaces - the geometry of thought , 2000 .

[26]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Representing actions and functional properties in conceptual spaces , 2007 .

[27]  Tomasz Arciszewski,et al.  CONSTRUCTIVE INDUCTION: THE KEY TO DESIGN CREATIVITY , 1995 .

[28]  Thomas J. Howard,et al.  Describing the creative design process by the integration of engineering design and cognitive psychology literature , 2008 .

[29]  J. Gero Computational Models of Innovative and Creative Design Processes , 2000 .

[30]  Seda Yilmaz,et al.  Evidence-based design heuristics for idea generation , 2016 .

[31]  Simon Colton,et al.  Computational Creativity Theory: Inspirations behind the FACE and the IDEA models , 2011, ICCC.

[32]  Geraint A. Wiggins,et al.  A preliminary framework for description, analysis and comparison of creative systems , 2006, Knowl. Based Syst..

[33]  John S. Gero,et al.  Is designing independent of domain? Comparing models of engineering, software and service design , 2015 .

[34]  Margaret A. Boden,et al.  Creativity and Artificial Intelligence , 1998, IJCAI.

[35]  Per Galle,et al.  The ontology of Gero's FBS model of designing , 2009 .

[36]  Jaime R. Carbonell,et al.  AI in CAI : An artificial intelligence approach to computer-assisted instruction , 1970 .

[37]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Using Conceptual Spaces to Model Actions and Events , 2012, J. Semant..

[38]  Hannu Toivonen,et al.  Modes for Creative Human-Computer Collaboration: Alternating and Task-Divided Co-Creativity , 2016, ICCC.

[39]  M. Boden The creative mind : myths & mechanisms , 1991 .

[40]  Alexander Zeier,et al.  Extending the Situated Function-Behaviour-Structure Framework for User-Centered Software Design , 2008 .

[41]  Simon Colton,et al.  Computational Creativity Theory: The FACE and IDEA Descriptive Models , 2011, ICCC.

[42]  Francesca Montagna,et al.  Situating needs and requirements in the FBS framework , 2013 .