Powers of observation in creative design

Abstract Being perceptive is a trait highly valued in scientific and engineering professions. What a scientist or engineer notices while considering a problem, evaluating alternatives, or interpreting data has a profound impact on how a problem is viewed and solved. This paper focuses on processes we believe underlie being perceptive: firstly, preparation—becoming attuned to salient or important features; secondly, assimilation-detection and exploration of patterns (invariants) as well as anomalies; and thirdly, strategic control-heuristic strategies for exploring the implications of what has been observed. These processes play an integral role in characteristic activities within creative design, including problem reformulation, the emergence of properties and constraints on the solution, and the ability to incorporate into the design experimental feedback from the environment and from experiences with prototypes and previous designs. The paper presents a computational model incorporating these ideas, implemented in a system called IMPROVISER.

[1]  Eric Kimball Jones.  The flexible use of abstract knowledge in planning , 1992 .

[2]  Nancy J. Nersessian,et al.  In the Theoretician's Laboratory: Thought Experimenting as Mental Modeling , 1992, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association.

[3]  N. Chater,et al.  Proceedings of the fourteenth annual conference of the cognitive science society , 1992 .

[4]  W. Köhler.  The Mentality of Apes. , 2018, Nature.

[5]  Kristian J. Hammond,et al.  Opportunistic memory , 1989, IJCAI 1989.

[6]  Janet L. Kolodner,et al.  Reconstructive Memory: A Computer Model , 1983, Cogn. Sci..

[7]  Janet L. Kolodner,et al.  Understanding Creativity: A Case-Based Approach , 1993, EWCBR.

[8]  Janet L. Kolodner,et al.  Paying Attention to the Right Thing: Issues of Focus in Case-Based Creative Design , 1993 .

[9]  Stefan Wess,et al.  Topics in Case-Based Reasoning , 1994 .

[10]  Vinod Goel,et al.  Motivating the Notion of Generic Design within Information-Processing Theory: The Design Problem Space , 1989, AI Mag..

[11]  C SchankRoger,et al.  Dynamic Memory: A Theory of Reminding and Learning in Computers and People , 1983 .

[13]  Ashwin Ram,et al.  AQUA: Questions that drive the explanation process , 1993 .

[14]  Gerhard Fischer,et al.  Turning breakdowns into opportunities for creativity , 1994, Knowl. Based Syst..

[15]  Richard M. Young,et al.  Options and Criteria: Elements of design space analysis , 1991 .

[16]  G. Wallas.  The art of thought , 1926 .

[17]  D. Navinchandra.  Exploration and Innovation in Design: Towards a Computational Model , 1990 .

[18]  D. Navinchandra,et al.  Innovative design Systems, where are we and where do we go from here? Part I: Design by association , 1990, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[19]  Janet L. Kolodner,et al.  Using the points of large cases , 1993, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[20]  Roger C. Schank,et al.  Inside case-based explanation , 1994, Artificial intelligence series.

[21]  Stella Vosniadou.  Modelling the Learner: Lessons from the Study of Knowledge Reorganization in Astronomy , 1992 .

[22]  N. Maier.  Reasoning in humans. II. The solution of a problem and its appearance in consciousness. , 1931 .

[23]  Janet L. Kolodner,et al.  Case-Based Reasoning , 1989, IJCAI 1989.

[24]  Lawrence Birnbaum,et al.  Integrated processing in planning and understanding , 1986 .

[25]  Katia P. Sycara,et al.  Representing and indexing design cases , 1989, IEA/AIE '89.

[26]  Phyllis Koton,et al.  Reasoning about Evidence in Causal Explanations , 1988, AAAI.

[27]  J. Clement.  Learning via Model Construction and Criticism , 1989 .

[28]  K. Duncker,et al.  On problem-solving , 1945 .

[29]  Craig A. Kaplan,et al.  In search of insight , 1990, Cognitive Psychology.

[30]  Kristian J. Hammond,et al.  Predictive Encoding: Planning for Opportunities* , 1993 .

[31]  D. Navin Chandra,et al.  Innovative design Systems, where are we and where do we go from here? Part I: Design by association , 1992 .

[32]  Ashwin Ram,et al.  A Model of Creative Understanding , 1994, AAAI.

[33]  Janet L. Kolodner,et al.  CASE-BASED CREATIVE DESIGN , 1993 .

[34]  Ashok K. Goel,et al.  Innovation in Analogical Design: A Model-Based Approach , 1994 .

[35]  Florence Vidal.  Problem solving and creativity in individuals and groups , 1973 .

[36]  Nancy J. Nersessian,et al.  Understanding the Creative Mind: A Review of Margaret Boden's Creative Mind , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[37]  Lawrence Birnbaum,et al.  Opportunistic Planning and Freudian Slips , 1992 .

[38]  R. Corrigan,et al.  The World of the Theatre , 1978 .

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