Cited by 101Music Technology and Sound StudiesArt, Technology, and CultureInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Design Considerations for Real-Time Collaboration with Creative Artificial Intelligence

McCormack, Jon, Hutchings, Patrick, Gifford, Toby, Yee-King, Matthew, Llano, Maria Teresa, D’inverno, Mark·2020·Organised Sound

Abstract

Machines incorporating techniques from artificial intelligence and machine learning can work with human users on a moment-to-moment, real-time basis to generate creative outcomes, performances and artefacts. We define such systems collaborative, creative AI systems, and in this article, consider the theoretical and practical considerations needed for their design so as to support improvisation, performance and co-creation through real-time, sustained, moment-to-moment interaction. We begin by providing an overview of creative AI systems, examining strengths, opportunities and criticisms in order to draw out the key considerations when designing AI for human creative collaboration. We argue that the artistic goals and creative process should be first and foremost in any design. We then draw from a range of research that looks at human collaboration and teamwork, to examine features that support trust, cooperation, shared awareness and a shared information space. We highlight the importance of understanding the scope and perception of two-way communication between human and machine agents in order to support reflection on conflict, error, evaluation and flow. We conclude with a summary of the range of design challenges for building such systems in provoking, challenging and enhancing human creative activity through their creative agency.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1355771819000451

Cites

96 of 96 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 98 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McCormack, J., Hutchings, P., Gifford, T., Yee-King, M., Llano, M. T., & D’inverno, M.
Affiliations
  • Monash University (AU)
  • Goldsmiths University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
McCormack, Jon
Venue
Organised Sound
Published
2020-03-04
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
41-52
ISSN
  • 1355-7718 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8153
OpenAlex
W3010100160
Cited by
101
References
98
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 1
FWCI
2.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Organised Sound (publishedVersion)
  • Goldsmiths (University of London) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Music Technology and Sound Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Visual Arts and Performing Arts › Art, Technology, and Culture
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
human-AI collaboration, real-time interaction, improvisation, co-creation, performance, trust, cooperation, shared awareness, shared information space, human-machine communication, flow, creative agency, design considerations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review