Joseph Corneli

@inproceedings{Llano2016,
title = {What If A Fish Got Drunk? Exploring the Plausibility of Machine-Generated Fictions},
author = {Maria Teresa Llano and Christian Guckelsberger and Rose Hepworth and Jeremy Gow and Joseph Corneli and Simon Colton},
url = {http://ccg.doc.gold.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/ICCC_Plausibility_camera_ready-1.pdf},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-07-01},
booktitle = {Proc. 7th Int. Conf. Computational Creativity},
abstract = {Within the WHIM project, we study fictional ideation: processes for automatically inventing, assessing and presenting fictional ideas. Here we examine the foundational notion of the plausibility of fictional ideas, by performing an empirical study to surface the factors that affect judgements of plausibility. Our long term aim is to formalise a computational method which captures some intuitive notions of plausibility and can predict how certain types of people will assess the plausibility of certain types of fictional ideas. This paper constitutes a first firm step towards this aim.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}

@incollection{colton2015stakeholder,
title = {Stakeholder Groups in Computational Creativity Research and Practice},
author = { Simon Colton and Alison Pease and Joseph Corneli and Michael Cook and Rose Hepworth and Dan Ventura},
url = {http://ccg.doc.gold.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/colton_ccchapter15.pdf},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-01-01},
booktitle = {Computational Creativity Research: Towards Creative Machines},
pages = {3--36},
publisher = {Springer},
abstract = {The notion that software could be independently and usefully creative is becoming more commonplace in scientific, cultural, business and public circles. It is not fanciful to imagine creative software embedded in society in the short to medium term, acting as collaborators and autonomous creative agents for much societal benefit. Technologically, there is still some way to go to enable Artificial Intelligence methods to create artefacts and ideas of value, and to get software to do so in interesting and engaging ways. There are also a number of sociological hurdles to overcome in getting society to accept software as being truly creative, and we concentrate on those here. We discuss the various communities that can be considered stakeholders in the perception of computers being creative or not. In particular, we look in detail at three sets of stakeholders, namely the general public, Computational Creativity researchers and fellow creatives.We put forward various philosophical points which we argue will shape the way in which society accepts creative software. We make various claims along the way about how people perceive software as being creative or not, which we believe should be addressed with scientific experimentation, and we call on the Computational Creativity research community to do just that.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {incollection}
}

@inproceedings{Corneli2015,
title = {Computational Poetry Workshop: Making Sense of Work in Progress},
author = {Joseph Corneli and Anna Jordanous and Rosie Shepperd and Maria Teresa Llano and Joanna Misztal and Simon Colton and Christian Guckelsberger},
url = {http://ccg.doc.gold.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/corneli_iccc15_poetry-1.pdf},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-01-01},
booktitle = {Proc. 6th Int. Conf. Computational Creativity},
abstract = {Creativity cannot exist in a vacuum; it develops through feedback, learning, reflection and social interaction with others. However, this perspective has been relat- ively under-investigated in computational creativity re- search, which typically examines systems that operate individually. We develop a thought experiment showing how structured dialogues can help develop the creative aspects of computer poetry. Centrally in this approach, we ask questions of a poem, inviting it to tell us in what way it may be considered a “creative making.”},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}

@inproceedings{Gow2015,
title = {Towards Generating Novel Games Using Conceptual Blending},
author = {Jeremy Gow and Joseph Corneli},
url = {http://ccg.doc.gold.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/gow_exag15.pdf},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-01-01},
booktitle = {Proc. 2nd Workshop on Experimental AI in Games (EXAG)},
abstract = {We sketch the process of creating a novel video game by blending two video games specified in the Video Game Description Language (VGDL), following the COINVENT computational model of conceptual blending. We highlight the choices that need to be made in this process, and discuss the prospects for a computational game designer based on blending.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}

@inproceedings{colton2014assessing,
title = {Assessing Progress in Building Autonomously Creative Systems},
author = { Simon Colton and Alison Pease and Joseph Corneli and Michael Cook and Maria Teresa Llano},
url = {http://ccg.doc.gold.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/colton_iccc2014.pdf},
year = {2014},
date = {2014-01-01},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Computational Creativity},
pages = {137--145},
abstract = {Determining conclusively whether a new version of software creatively exceeds a previous version or a third party system is dicult, yet very important for scientific approaches in Computational Creativity research. We argue that software product and process need to be assessed simultaneously in assessing progress, and we introduce a diagrammatic formalism which exposes various timelines of creative acts in the construction and execution of successive versions of artefactgenerating software. The formalism enables estimations of progress or regress from system to system by comparing their diagrams and assessing changes in quality, quantity and variety of creative acts undertaken; audience perception of behaviours; and the quality of artefacts produced. We present a case study in the building of evolutionary art systems, and we use the formalism to highlight various issues in measuring progress in the building of creative systems.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}

@article{pease2017lakatos,
title = {Lakatos-style Collaborative Mathematics through Dialectical, Structured and Abstract Argumentation},
author = {Alison Pease and John Lawrence and Katarzyna Budzynska and Joseph Corneli and Chris Reed
},
journal = {Artificial Intelligence},
abstract = {The simulation of mathematical reasoning has been a driving force throughout the history of Artificial Intelligence research. However, despite significant successes in computer mathematics, computers are not widely used by mathematicians apart from their quotidian applications. An oft-cited reason for this is that current computational systems cannot do mathematics in the way that humans do. We draw on two areas in which Automated Theorem Proving (ATP) is currently unlike human mathematics: firstly in a focus on soundness, rather than understandability of proof, and secondly in social aspects. Employing techniques and tools from argumentation to build a framework for mixed-initiative collaboration, we develop three complementary arcs. In the first arc – our theoretical model – we interpret the informal logic of mathematical discovery proposed by Lakatos, a philosopher of mathematics, through the lens of dialogue game theory and in particular as a dialogue game ranging over structures of argumentation. In our second arc – our abstraction level – we develop structured arguments, from which we induce abstract argumentation systems and compute the argumentation semantics to provide labelings of the acceptability status of each argument. The output from this stage corresponds to a final, or currently accepted proof artefact, which can be viewed alongside its historical development. Finally, in the third arc – our computational model – we show how each of these formal steps is available in implementation. We demonstrate our approach with a formal, implemented example of real-world mathematical collaboration. Finally, we offer reflections on our mixed-initiative collaborative approach.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {forthcoming},
tppubtype = {article}
}