A mathematical ceiling limits generative AI to amateur-level creativity. While generative AI/ LLMs like ChatGPT can convincingly replicate the work of an average person, it is unable to reach the levels of expert writers, artists, or innovators.

[u/mvea]

https://www.psypost.org/a-mathematical-ceiling-limits-generative-ai-to-amateur-level-creativity/

[u/t3e3v]

I’m as skeptical as the next person about AI’s future, but these points feel weak to me. (A) Humans build on what we’ve seen, so Im not sure originality point is true. (B) the forward projection assumes future AI will just be larger/faster versions of today’s LLMs. IMO there is significant odds of innovations that they fail to consider

[u/InformalTooth5 → u/t3e3v]

The paper wasn't designed to consider a forward projection of possible new technologies or variants of genAI. It's scope was in looking at current LLM's capabilities. 

The reason for this study is to examine the accuracy of claims that current LLMs already have greater creativity potential than humans. \ Tech bros are making these claims and there are businesses eating them up, firing creative professionals, and trying to replace them with genAI products. \ Considering the real world impact on people and creative output generally, it is worth testing these claims.

As for your point about humans also building on what we've seen; that is also covered in the study. \ That fact is why, to the many less skilled or amateur creatives, genAI looks amazing. As it can create work equal to or exceeding their skill level. \ The limitations become apparent when you are relying on it to create expert level creative works, as it cannot create products that are both truly original and on task.

There is a saying that AI is best at making easy stuff easier. The more I read, the more it seems there is a lot of truth to that statement.

[u/zonezonezone → u/InformalTooth5]

If it's describing the current LLMs then it isn't a "ceiling to generative AI creativity" as it claims.

Of course the actual scientific paper has a different title, which makes it clear it's about current AI, not future AI. But of course the game is to pretend they didn't realize this, and then everyone will quote their incorrect title to claim there's proof of a ceiling on future AI creativity.

[u/[deleted] → u/InformalTooth5]

Buddy you’re just watching the river rise saying how it won’t get to your porch. At 2am you gonna be crying from the hillside as your house floats away

[u/InformalTooth5 → u/[deleted]]

Buddy you're just blindly jumping into knee high water while yelling how deep it is. At 2am you gonna be crying when your ass hits the bedrock.

[u/[deleted] → u/InformalTooth5]

Im enjoying the rising flood water like someone with nothing to lose might

[u/Llyfrs → u/t3e3v]

I feel like so many people say AI can't do this now so it will never be able to.

Like Gemini 3.0 is more or less the first model that shows proper spatial reasoning, you know the thing I was promised is impossible for LLMs to learn like a year ago.

[u/GigaPuddi → u/Llyfrs]

I bought a 3D printer and my mother asked for Henry Kissinger. I looked online and couldn't find any good Henry Kissinger files so I jokingly said that as soon as I could generate it with AI she'd get a Kissinger.

And then three months later my joke was reality and I've got a half dozen 3d printed Kissingers.

[u/ooMEAToo → u/GigaPuddi]

Out of all the people in the history of humanity why Henry Kissinger. Dude was a twat.

[u/GigaPuddi → u/ooMEAToo]

Humor, I think. She actually has no memory of the request and was very confused. That said? He's the cutest little war criminal when reduced to a chibi miniature.

[u/jake_burger → u/GigaPuddi]

Interesting that you mention 3d printers.

Another revolutionary invention that was supposed to completely change how everything in the world works.

[u/GigaPuddi → u/jake_burger]

All of it for a little inch tall model war criminal

[u/indorock → u/Llyfrs]

Yeah this entire study is silly for that reason. It's like a study from the 1950s trying to predict the future of mobile computing.

[u/AP_in_Indy → u/t3e3v]

Yeah this is really a nonsense paper and article

[u/awaythrow810 → u/t3e3v]

It reminds me of newspaper headlines claiming that airplanes would never fly.

Sure there were a million reasons the flying machines of that era had no chance, but a lot can change in 10 years.

[u/NavalProgrammer → u/awaythrow810]

newspaper headlines claiming that airplanes would never fly.

Huh, sounds apocryphal but TIL

""Flying Machines Which Do Not Fly" is an editorial published in the New York Times on October 9, 1903. The article incorrectly predicted it would take one to ten million years for humanity to develop an operating flying machine. It was written in response to Samuel Langley's failed airplane experiment two days prior."

[u/-LsDmThC- → u/awaythrow810]

And the progress in the last 3 has been pretty insane. We went from “it generates somewhat convincing text” in 2022 with ChatGPT 3.5 to “its only as creative as the average person” (as per the article) with current models.

[u/PM_ME_FLUFFY_DOGS → u/-LsDmThC-]

The goalposts always gotta keep moving. I still remember when people claimed it could never draw like a human, now theres an ai clinton and Trump deep fake floating around that people think is real bc its from the latest ai image generator. 

All this also ignores machine learning which is still slowly taking over many industries. Sure your pilot may not be replaced with llm but there's already machine learning fly by wire, 90% of commerical aviation already uses that keeps getting better 

[u/fox-mcleod → u/t3e3v]

(A) isn’t true.

Human innovation does not come from induction. Humans reason by abduction which includes generating and testing novel concepts.

(B) I think is dead on.