I think creativity is the uniquely human ability to come up with ideas/solutions formed through their unique lived experiences. Cause of that, I do think you can become “more” creative – through trying new things, and meeting people different from you.
For the experiment, I used Google Gemini. I don’t think its response was particularly creative. I asked it to write a poem in the style of Frank Ocean, a music artist. Here’s what it gave me:

“The streetlights bleed orange through the tinted glass. We are moving too fast to read the signs, just letting the city blur into something soft. You smell like chlorine and wet concrete, a suburban summer caught in your bleached hair.

I think about the way you looked at the deep end, half afraid to jump but wanting the water to swallow you. Now the radio is playing a song we do not know the words to, humming low under the sound of the engine.

White sneakers resting on the dashboard, counting miles like they are loose change in a pocket. You ask me if the world feels different at night. I just keep my hands on the wheel, watching the taillights ahead fade into the dark.

We loved each other in the spaces between the quiet. A fleeting kind of gold, slipping through my fingers before the sun even tried to rise.”

Although I could see the inspiration it used to draft what I asked, it still felt uninspired. Frank talks a lot about his environment and tries to use metaphors for how he feels in his music, but something like the last sentence just isn’t what a song of his would sound like. Also, no contractions (“We are moving” – sounds unnatural) or any colloquial language also shows LLMs’ current lack of being able to copy and artist’s entire style (which is probably for the better of art).

Alan Turing’s quote from the slides: “A computer would deserve to be called intelligent if it could deceive a human into believing that it was human.” resonates with me in this example. I think no one would be able to be convinced that a human wrote these lyrics.

I think our experiments this week definitely showed me more of the limitations of AI when it comes to the creative sphere. I mostly use AI for other kinds of computing, so it is interesting to think about its role in shaping entertainment and art as we know it (right now).

There are many ways a person may describe the word “Creativity”. I would describe it as – Being able to produce a unique piece of art that holds value. I think having creativity is very important to everyone’s life. Creativity can define you as a person and help you figure out who you want to be. My definition says “unique piece of art”, which could mean anything. A piece of art could be from making a painting all the way to running a route in football.

I was in group 5 and I used the prompt “Create a poem using the style of the music artist Baby Keem”. The results that I received did not surprise me at all.

Two-door coupe, yeah, I’m out the way,

I don’t do the drama, I don’t do the play.

(No, no)

High-speed chase with the toddler energy,

I’m my own cousin, I’m my own remedy.

Hykeem! ### The Protocol

• Phone ring? Ignore it. * The beat? I floor it. * New boots? I wore it. * The fake? Abhor it. —

I’m the range brother, I’m the 2-phone king,

Check the frequency, check the way I swing.

I might jump out the porch, I might jump out the gym,

The lights get low and the world gets dim.

“Top of the morning, top of the morning, top of the morning.”

I’m evolving,

Problem solving,

The globe is revolving,

My ego is dissolving…

Wait. I’m back in the booth, I’m the truth, I’m the youth,

I just chipped a diamond on my front tooth.

(Ayy, ayy, ayy)

I’m cool,

I’m calm,

I’m the bomb,

Ask your mom.

Vent.

This response is not creative at all. Baby Keem is nicknamed “2-phone king” so AI making a rhyme of it just isn’t creative. It also isn’t creative for AI to go, “I’m cool, I’m calm, I’m the bomb, ask your mom”. These are just simple words put together to make it seem like it is Baby Keem writing it.

Overall, This made me rethink how AI is extremely uncreative. It drives itself to be in the rulebook and not think outside of the box or be original. This project helped me realize that LLM’s are not able to produce a unique piece of art that holds value. Which in my understanding is the definition of creativity.

Sources:

Google Gemini. Gemini. https://gemini.google.com/app/9042412a074caa57

In class on Tuesday, my group researched Serbia and its connections with AI while carefully examining what artificial intelligence is like in foreign countries. During class, we put a lot of emphasis on creativity and what it’s defined as. With Ai, it’s a hard topic to cover, everyone’s definition is different. After researching and reading Arriagada and Ais role in creativity, we came upon the definition of “Peoples generalized perception of creativity often involves the idea of inspiration, a mysterious muse that comes to the creators aid, an insightful burst of imagination.” After this and our class discussion on creativity, we were tasked to be experimenting with an LLM. We told our AI machine to write a poem like Shakespeare would, then had the class guess which one was human and which one was AI. Obviously, this is very difficult as some cannot tell the differences in what AI is human or if it isn’t. The poem our LLM came up with was a built off, more enhanced version of an older poem written by Shakespeare.

Example: Good morrow, sun, thou golden ball so bright,​

That peeks above the hills with merry cheer;​

I greet thee now with laughter and delight,​

And chase my dreams as thou dost draw me near.​

Mine wooden sword, a kingly blade I claim,​

I battle beasts no grown-up eye can see;​

A cardboard crown doth grant me noble name,​

And in my yard I rule a realm most free.​

When lessons call, I sigh yet still obey,​

For wisdom grows as seeds in fertile ground;​

Yet soon enough I’m loosed again to play,​

Where joys untold in simple things are found.​

So let me dream ‘fore sleep doth close mine eyes,​

A child today, tomorrow wondrous wise.​

Other Example: Let me not to the marriage of true minds​

Admit impediments; love is not love​

Which alters when it alteration finds,​

Or bends with the remover to remove:​

O, no, it is an ever-fixèd mark,​

That looks on tempests and is never shaken;​

It is the star to every wand’ring bark,​

Whose worth’s unknown, although his heighth be taken.​

Love’s not Time’s fool, though rosy lips and cheeks​

Within his bending sickle’s compass come;​

Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,​

But bears it out even to the edge of doom.​

If this be error and upon me proved,​

I never writ, nor no man ever loved.​

These models demonstrated creativity by forming and building off human work in how creativity is defined by researchers. I believe the models are creative because the whole point of Ai itself is to be creative. Being a creative individual means that I use Ai in a way to broaden the spectrum of work. I like to use it to bring ideas to my mind along with letting it show what needs to get done. This is important, as AI allows for creativity at the hands of anything. Ask it any question, and it will deliver a very creative answer. I don’t see any risks to this in the form of a work context; all I find are benefits. The only risk I can think of is when ChatGPT does not properly upload correct information, instead keeping bias within answers. Overall, I think creativity is a fine definition for AI and solves what’s trying to get done pretty well.

Sources: OpenAI. (n.d.). ChatGPT. Retrieved April 9, 2026, from https://chatgpt.com/

Based on Tuesday’s readings, we talked about how creativity can be described as both “novelty and usefulness.” I personally do not agree with this definition of creativity because there is no standard metric by which we can define usefulness nor novelty (to some extent). When I think of creativity, I think of “a personal touch, meaning that is deeply personal and authenticity.” After today’s discussion with the CS professors, I began to reflect more on how creativity is not always about one’s self, because we are often inspired by others and that in itself can spur bursts of creativity.

My group’s chosen poet was Dr. Seuss and one of our prompts to ChatGPT was to” use the settings and era from which Dr. Seuss was from, Dr. Seuss’s life story /background, audience, rhythm, rhyme scheme, etc., to write a poem.” We got the following output to our prompt:

On Maple Street, past the cracked old sign,​

Lived a kid named Jake in ‘09.​

He rode his bike past Miller’s store,​

Where the bell still rings on the squeaky door.​

His mom yelled, “Dinner!” at half past six,​

Same as always; meatloaf, potatoes, and Fix.​

(That’s the soda his dad always drank on ice,​

Said, “Not too warm and not too nice.”)​

The bus came early on cold fall days,​

With fog on the windows and sleepy haze.​

Ms. Carter would greet with a nod and a grin,……

​In my opinion, this output from ChatGPT was not creative, but it had some interesting characteristics. For example, the entirety of the poem rhymed and there was also good imagery throughout. However, it seemed very generic and inauthentic. The writing seemed like words that were put together based on their ability to rhyme and it lacked that personal touch connected to one’s own deeply meaningful story.

Nevertheless, this was not very surprising as AI produces output based on the millions of data it’s been trained on, and so the output it provides is not original and is instead based on the datasets and the probability of the next token approach that LLMs in this case use. For example, in our reading from Tuesday, Ashish Bhatia spoke about how creativity is traditionally defined as something that demonstrates both novelty and usefulness (Bhatia, 2025). And so although this poem might be classified as useful, it cannot necessarily be classified as novel because it is not authentic and it’s based on preexisting data and information. In the same reading we saw how psychologist, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi talked about how AI doesn’t labor through ambiguity nor does it explore. This is exemplified in the ChatGPT poem, as it is very generic and lacks fluidity.

Overall, our experiments this week shifted my thinking about creativity and AI and made me more aware of the limitations AI has in terms of creativity, and how AI though useful in a huge range of scenarios, is not as well-versed when it comes to creative work. However, AI models are constantly evolving and being trained and so that might change.

Source: Bhatia, A. (2025, April 4). The artifact isn’t the art: Rethinking creativity in the age of AI. Freethink; Freethink Media. https://www.freethink.com/opinion/studio-ghibli-chatgpt-creativity?utm_source=tldrai

Before the Tuesday’s lab I was very skeptical about this topic, considering that creativity is something that differs every person from another, our thinking, our imagination and is a way to express deep emotions, something that reflects on us as human beings. As we read in our reading defining as “Something that demonstrates both novelty and usefulness” (Bhatia, 2025). Creativity should have a meaning even if it’s just for the author, in my eyes it is something that should be useful, even if it would be only for one person. It’s a way to express yourself and leave a “note” after yourself.

Using Gemini me and my group tried multiple ways to ask for a poem written as Silverstein’s and this was the outcome :

“The 9-to-5-a-Saurus​

The 9-to-5-a-saurus has a tie around its neck,​

 It lives on bitter coffee and a monthly little check​

It doesn’t have a tail, but it has a rolling chair, ​

And a very frantic look beneath its thinning, grayish hair.​

​

It spends its morning screaming at a glowing plastic screen,​

 n a cubicle that’s smaller than a can of lima bean. ​

It talks of “synergy” and “growth” and “pivoting the plan,”​

 While wondering where the heck its happy childhood years all ran.​

​

It dreams of sandy beaches and a drink inside a coconut, ​

But then it hears a ding and gets a kick right in the gut. ​

“The spreadsheet’s due by five!” the Senior Manager will yell, ​

(The Senior Manager, of course, lives in a deeper hell).​

​

So the 9-to-5-a-saurus grinds its teeth and clicks its mouse, ​

To pay for a garage that’s attached to a giant house, ​

Where it sleeps for seven minutes till the sun begins to rise, ​

With circles ‘round its soul and bags beneath its heavy eyes.​

​

Oh, be careful, little children, when you say you want to grow,​

 There’s a monster in a blazer that the grown-ups all should know.

If you don’t watch out, you’ll wake up in a suit of navy blue, ​

And the 9-to-5-a-saurus… Will be you.​”

This poem does not stand a chance to a poem written by an actual author who enjoys writing. It is far away from creativity, meaning and any emotions. This experiment made me realize how grateful we should be for being able to be creative. It is something deep, subjective, and unique. Even though LLMs are useful as a tool for other things, it still lacks of empathy and humanity. Overall I still disagree that LLMs should be used for this, there are things where technology can’t compare to human’s and this is one of them, but now I know how easy it is to recognize LLMs poems from the pieces of an actual author’s :).

https://www.freethink.com/opinion/studio-ghibli-chatgpt-creativity?utm_source=tldrai

I do not think that the AI model used, more specifically, Copilot, demonstrated creativity. Going from Bhatia’s definition: “Something that demonstrates both novelty and usefulness” (Bhatia, 2025). This definition includes that creativity is involved in novelty and being useful, but lacks the full palette that creativity can show and be defined as through human experiences, thoughts, and ideas. In class on Thursday, AI merged the definitions together and more or less described exactly that creativity is defined as something that demonstrates novelty and usefulness, not totally getting out what the concept of creativity truly encapsulates, relating to the reading on Tuesday that discussed Bhatia’s definition, with AI lacking the human capacity of synthesis.

Regarding how AI did not appear as creative, I asked Copilot with a prompt of: “Please construct a poem in the style of Shel Silverstein regarding the theme of compassion, with a four-stanza maximum.” It responded with this:

In the Pocket of My Pocket

I found a little kindness In the pocket of my coat— It must’ve slipped in quietly Like a whisper on a note.

I handed it to someone Who looked chilly in the rain, And suddenly the cloudy world Felt warm and bright again.

They passed it to another Who had dropped their heavy day, And soon that tiny kindness Grew too big to tuck away.

So now I check my pockets Every morning, just to see— ’Cause compassion has a funny way Of finding its way back to me.

The first area that jumped out at me was its unexciting and boring nature. I expected the LLM to generate a Silverstain-like poem that would be difficult to compare to a real one, but this was not the case. The big thing about Shel Silverstein is that his poems are stories that you can really visualize and can take values from. This AI poem almost forces this sense of compassion to you without any buildup and personalization. I do not believe that this output was creative at all. The framing of the word choice and rhyming was in the realm of Silverstein, but the lack of storytelling and personalization instantly made me see this poem as artificial intelligence. Bhatia offers that: “This is the aspect of creativity that AI lacks. It doesn’t feel tension. It doesn’t labor through ambiguity. It doesn’t explore. Where AI can offer 10 answers to a problem instantly, humans may wrestle for years to arrive at one — but it could be the only one that matters” (Bhatia, 2025). This AI constructed poem perfectly describes AI lacking and not feeling tension, operating without any internal struggle that encompasses every human when putting their relationships, thoughts, and experiences into their own creativity.

My definition of creativity would be having the ability to generate original ideas through experiences, personalization, thoughts, and feelings that can act as problem-solving tools, as well as work in the realm of art. This definition connects with Bhatia in the sense that AI lacks the human capacity of synthesis that truly encapsulates what creativity is, but adds to it, focusing on creativity as a pivotal tool in problem-solving and artistic ways.

The experiments engaged upon this week made me think a lot about what creativity should be defined as. The term is veyr ambiguous and personalized, but because it is personalized, it showed how AI lacks the true nature of creativity and is incapable at this moment of using the human capacity of synthesis in encapsulating relationships, experiences, and thoughts, which contribute heavily to what creativity is and how it is generated. These experiments allowed me to envision my own writing process and how my own creativity is sparked, which I’ve found a lot of the time comes from previous experiences and being able to attribute those to acting as problem-solving tools, as well as artistic value. AI would be useful in helping to aid with topic brainstorming and importing my information and getting an output of a chart or area of organizartion, but relying on AI to showcase creativity is not what I would recommend.

Reference: Bhatia, A. (2025, April 7). The artifact isn’t the art: Rethinking creativity in the age of AI. Freethink. https://www.freethink.com/opinion/studio-ghibli-chatgpt-creativity?utm_source=tldrai