Izvestiya of Saratov University.

Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy

ISSN 1819-7671 (Print)
ISSN 2542-1948 (Online)


Full text:
(downloads: 21)
Language: 
Russian
Heading: 
Article type: 
Article
UDC: 
159.9:78
EDN: 
QFUZHO

The problem of comparative evaluation of paintings created by an artist and generated by a neural network

Autors: 
Panteleev Alexander Fedorovich, Saratov State University
Abstract: 

Introduction. The role of art in the life of society is to translate humanitarian values. The creator of a truly imaginative work is able to perceive when interacting with the world and embody in his works what may not be in statistics and will probably be relevant for humanity in the future. Theoretical analysis. According to the available data, the pictures aggregated by the neural network and painted by the artist do not differ in subjects. In this paper, an activity-based approach is implemented to assess the differences of such paintings. It is based on the decision of the test subject of the problem associated with the identification of this difference. The difference lies in the method of “translating” the idea of the painting from a symbolic code into a figurative one, objectifying the artist’s attitude to the world, translating humanitarian values in this way. Empirical analysis. In the course of an empirical study, a pairwise comparison of paintings was carried out, as a criterion, the comparison was proposed based on the possible success of the transfer of the artist’s attitude to the world. Conclusion. It was previously stated that the distinction between paintings written by the artist and those generated by the neural network in the conditions of solving a new task for the subject to identify the success of the transfer is problematic.

Reference: 
  1. Visilter Yu. V. “Strong” artifi cial intelligence is the heir of mankind. Part 1. Nauchnaya Rossiya (Scientifi c Russia), iss. 29.01.2020. Available at: https://scientificrussia.ru/articles/silnyj-iskusstvennyj-intellektnaslednik-chelovechestva  (accessed 5 February 2023) (in Russian).
  2. Merezhkovsky D. S. Voskresshie bogi Leonardo daVinchi [The Resurrected Gods of Leonardo daVinci]. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya literatura, 1990. 640 p. (in Russian).
  3. Mandelshtam O. E. Polnoe sobranie poezii i prozy v odnom tome [The Complete Collection of Poetry and Prose in One Volume]. Moscow, Alfa-kniga, 2017. 1182 p. (in Russian).
  4. Smallwood J., Schooler J. W. The science of mind wandering: empirically navigating the stream of consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 2015, vol. 66, pp. 487–518.
  5. Bernshtein N. A. O postroenii dvizheniy [On the construction of movements]. Moscow, Medgiz, 1947. 254 p. (in Russian).
  6. Freud 3. Khudozhnik i fantazirovanie [Artist and Fantasy]. Moscow, Respublika, 1995, 400 p. (in Russian).
  7. Rubinstein S. L. Osnovy obshchey psikhologii [Fundamentals of General Psychology]. St. Petersburg, Piter, 2006. 235 p. (in Russian).
  8. Doblaev L.P. Smyslovaya struktura uchebnogo teksta i problemy ego ponimaniya [Semantic Structure of the Educational Text and Problems of Its Understanding]. Moscow, Pedagogika, 1982. 176 p. (in Russian).
  9. Matyushkin A. M. Psikhologiya myshleniya. Myshlenie kak razreshenie problemnykh situatsiy: uchebnoe posobie [Psychology of Thinking. Thinking as a Solution to Problem Situations]. Moscow, KDU, 2009. 190 p. (in Russian).
  10. Gurova L. L. Psikhologicheskiy analiz resheniya zadach [Psychological Analysis of Problem Solving]. Voronezh, Voronezhskii gosudarstvenny universitet Publ., 1976. 327 p. (in Russian).
  11. Uittenhove K., Jeanneret S., Vergauwe E., From LabTesting to Web-Testing in Cognitive Research: Who You Test is More Important than how You Test. Journal of Cognition, 2023, vol. 6, iss. 1, pp. 1–17. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.259
  12. Gangadharbatla H. The Role of AI Attribution Knowledge in the Evaluation of Artwork. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 2021, vol. 40, iss. 2, pp. 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276237421994697
  13. Lotman Yu. M. On the nature of art. In: Yu. M. Lotman i tartussko-moskovskaya semioticheskaya shkola [Yu. M. Lotman and the Tartu-Moscow Semiotic School]. Moscow, Gnozis, 1994, pp. 432–438 (in Russian).
Received: 
06.03.2023
Accepted: 
09.06.2023
Published: 
29.09.2023