Creative Machine Performance: Computational Creativity and Robotic Art

Aus de_evolutionary_art_org
Version vom 13. November 2015, 13:18 Uhr von Gubachelier (Diskussion | Beiträge)

(Unterschied) ← Nächstältere Version | Aktuelle Version (Unterschied) | Nächstjüngere Version → (Unterschied)
Wechseln zu: Navigation, Suche


Petra Gemeinboeck and Rob Saunders: Creative Machine Performance: Computational Creativity and Robotic Art. In: Computational Creativity 2013 ICCC 2013, 215-219.



The invention of machine performers has a long tradi- tion as a method of philosophically probing the nature of creativity. Robotic art practices in the 20th Century have continued in this tradition, playfully engaging the public in questions of autonomy and agency. In this position paper, we explore the potential synergies be- tween robotic art practice and computational creativ- ity research through the development of robotic per- formances. This interdisciplinary approach permits the development of significantly new modes of interaction for robotic artworks, and potentially opens up compu- tational models of creativity to rich social and cultural environments through interaction with audiences. We present our exploration of this potential with the de- velopment of Zwischenr ̈aume (In-between Spaces), an artwork that embeds curious robots into the walls of a gallery. The installation extends the traditional relation- ship between the audience and artwork such that visitors to the space become performers for the machine.

Extended Abstract


author = {Petra Gemeinboeck and Rob Saunders},
title = {Creative Machine Performance: Computational Creativity and Robotic Art},
editor = {Simon Colton, Dan Ventura, Nada Lavrac, Michael Cook},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Computational Creativity},
series = {ICCC2013},
year = {2013},
month = {Jun},
location = {Sydney, New South Wales, Australia},
pages = {215-219},
url = {, },
publisher = {International Association for Computational Creativity},
keywords = {computational, creativity},

Used References

Barad, K. 2003. Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Jour- nal of Women in Culture and Society 23(1):801–831.

Barad, K. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quan- tum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Berlyne, D. E. 1960. Conflict, Arousal, and Curiosity. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Brooks, R. 1990. Elephants don’t play chess. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 6:3–15.

Clancey, W. J. 1997. Situated Cognition: On Human Knowl- edge and Computer Representations. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Clark, A. 1998. Where brain, body and world collide. Daedalus: Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 127(2):257—280.

Hoffmann, G., and Weinberg, G. 2011. Interactive improvi- sation with a robotic marimba player. In Autonomous Robots 31, 133–153. Springer.

Huhtamo, E. 2004. Trouble at the interface, or the identity crisis of interactive art. Framework: The Finnish Art Review (2):38–41.

Hult ́en, P. 1975. Tinguely. ‘M ́eta’. London, UK: Thames & Hudson.

Hult ́en, P. 1987. Jean Tinguely. A Magic Stronger than Death. New York, NY: Abbeville Press.

Kac, E. 1997. Foundation and development of robotic art. Art Journal 56(3):60–67.

Kac, E. 2001. Towards a chronology of robotic art. Conver- gence: The Journal of Research into New Media Technolo- gies 7(1).

Kohonen, T. 1984. Self-Organization and Associative Mem- ory. Berlin: Springer.

Lazardig, J. 2008. The machine as spectacle: Function and admiration in seventeenth-century perspectives on ma- chines. In de Gryter, W., ed., Instruments in art and science: on the architectonics of cultural boundaries in the 17th cen- tury. 152–175.

Maturana, H., and Varela, F. 1987. The Tree of Knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Boston, MA: Shambhala Publications.

Paul, C. 2003. Digital Art. London, UK: Thames & Hudson. Penny, S. 2000. Agents as artworks and agent design as artistic practice. In Dautenhahn, K., ed., Human Cognition and Social Agent Technology. John Benjamins Publishing Co. 395–414.

Pickering, J. 2005. Embodiment, constraint and the cre- ative use of technology. In Freedom and Constraint in the Creative Process in Digital Fine Art.

Reichle, I. 2009. Art in the Age of Technoscience: Genetic Engineering, Robotics, and Artificial Life in Contemporary Art. Wien: Springer.

Rieser, M. 2002. The art of interactivity: from gallery to street. In Mealing, S., ed., Computers and Art. Bristol, UK: Intellect. 81–96.

Russell, S. J., and Norvig, P. 2003. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. New Jersey, NY: Prentice Hall.

Rye, D.; Velonaki, M.; Williams, S.; and Scheding, S. 2005. Fish-bird: Human-robot interaction in a contemporary arts setting. In Proceedings of the 2005 Australasian Conference on Robotics and Automation.

Saunders, R. 2001. Curious Design Agents and Artificial Creativity. Ph.d. thesis, Faculty of Architecture, The Uni- versity of Sydney.

Thompson, E. 2005. Sensorimotor subjectivity and the en- active approach to experience. Phenomenology and the Cog- nitive Sciences 4(4):407–427.

Von Uexk ̈ull, J. 1957. A stroll through the worlds of animals and men: A picture book of invisible worlds. In Schiller, C., ed., Instinctive Behavior: The Development of a Modern Concept. New York, NY: Int’l Universities Press. 5–80.

Watkins, C. 1989. Learning from Delayed Rewards. Phd thesis, Cambridge University, Cambridge, England.


Full Text

intern file

Sonstige Links