Книжная полка Сохранить
Размер шрифта:
А
А
А
|  Шрифт:
Arial
Times
|  Интервал:
Стандартный
Средний
Большой
|  Цвет сайта:
Ц
Ц
Ц
Ц
Ц

Communication Trends in the Post-Literacy Era: Polylingualism, Multimodality and Multiculturalism As Preconditions for New Creativity

Покупка
Артикул: 799506.01.99
Доступ онлайн
2 350 ₽
В корзину
The monograph presents the research results of the discussion held at the Fifth International Research Conference "Communication trends in the post-literacy era: polylingualism, multimodality and multiculturalism as prerequisites for new creativity” (Ekaterinburg, UrFU, November 26-28, 2020). The book is a result of joint efforts by the research group "Multilingualism and Interculturalism in the Post-Literacy Era”. The research results are presented in the form of sections that consistently reveal the features of modern media culture; its contradictory manifestations associated with both positive and negative consequences of mass media use; the positive role of new media in education during the COVID-19 pandemic; creative potential of contemporary art and mediation, contemporary art and media environment. The collective monograph will be of interest to researchers in media culture, media education, media art and tools of social networks and new media in modern education, primarily in teaching foreign languages and Russian as a foreign language, in the professional education of journalists and specialists in the field of media communications.
Communication Trends in the Post-Literacy Era: Polylingualism, Multimodality and Multiculturalism As Preconditions for New Creativity / Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation, Ural Federal University, Ural State Pedagogical University : monograph / . - Ekaterinburg : Ural Univ. Press, 2020. - 787 p. - ISBN 978-5-7996-3081-2. - Текст : электронный. - URL: https://znanium.com/catalog/product/1942659 (дата обращения: 19.03.2024). – Режим доступа: по подписке.
Фрагмент текстового слоя документа размещен для индексирующих роботов. Для полноценной работы с документом, пожалуйста, перейдите в ридер.
MINISTRY OF SCIENCE AND HIGHER EDUCATION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
URAL FEDERAL UNIVERSITY
NAMED AFTER THE FIRST PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA B. N. YELTSIN
URAL STATE PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITY





COMMUNICATION TRENDS
IN THE POST-LITERACY ERA: POLYLINGUALISM, MULTIMODALITY AND MULTICULTURALISM
AS PRECONDITIONS FOR NEW CREATIVITY











Ekaterinburg Ural University Press 2020

УДК
ББК

374.7(063)
Ч110.1я43
C73


Published with the support of RFBR grant 20-011-22081 “The Fifth International Research Conference “Communication trends in the post-literacy era: polylingualism, multimodality and multiculturalism as prerequisites for new creativity”
Editorial board of the series “Communication trends in the post-literacy era”: Maria Guzikova, Margarita Gudova, Olga Kocheva, Elena Rubtsova, Tatiana Rasskazova, Ksenia Fedorova, Polina Golovatina-Mora, Raul Alberto Mora, Forteza Fernandez Rafael Filiberto
The head of the translation group is Tatiana Rasskazova, the translators are Nadezhda Mikhailovna Miller, Eduard Mikhailovich Kurilovich, Elena Yurievna Zyulina, Daria Dmitrievna Glazkova

Editor of the English translation — Ryan Simpson Reviewers:

          Department of Philosophy, Sociology and Cultural Studies, Institute of Social Sciences,

                           Ural State Pedagogical University (Ekaterinburg)

          Doctor of Cultural Studies, Vice-Rector for Research of the Humanitarian University

Alla Vladimirovna Drozdova (Ekaterinburg)


           Communication Trends in the Post-Literacy Era: Polylingualism, Multi-

C73 modality and Multiculturalism As Preconditions for New Creativity / Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation, Ural Federal University, Ural State Pedagogical University. — Ekaterinburg : Ural Univ. Press, 2020. — 787 p. — 100 copies. — ISBN 978-5-7996-3081-2 — Text: direct.

           ISBN 978-5-7996-3081-2
           DOI 10.15826/B978-5-7996-3081-2.0

            The monograph presents the research results of the discussion held at the Fifth International Research Conference “Communication trends in the post-literacy era: polylingualism, multimodality and multiculturalism as prerequisites for new creativity” (Ekaterinburg, UrFU, November 26-28, 2020). The book is a result of joint efforts by the research group “Multilingualism and Interculturalism in the Post-Literacy Era”.
            The research results are presented in the form of sections that consistently reveal the features of modern media culture; its contradictory manifestations associated with both positive and negative consequences of mass media use; the positive role of new media in education during the COVID-19 pandemic; creative potential of contemporary art and mediation, contemporary art and media environment.
            The collective monograph will be of interest to researchers in media culture, media education, media art and tools of social networks and new media in modern education, primarily in teaching foreign languages and Russian as a foreign language, in the professional education of journalists and specialists in the field of media communications.

УДК 374.7(063)
ББК Ч110.1я43


ISBN 978-5-7996-3081-2

© Ural Federal University, 2020

                CONTENTS






Gudova Margarita, Guzikova Maria, Yamshchikov Ivan
    Creativity in the Age of Robots: A Polemic, Philosophical
    and Cultural Preface to a Discussion                                 8

Part 1
NEW MEDIA AND THE NEW CREATIVITY IN EDUCATION

1.1.  Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic:
New Technologies and New Educational Environments
Yurlova Svetlana
    Problems and Prospects of On-Line Education in Russia                21
Kartasheva Anna
    Emotion Design in the Educational Program
    “Intelligent Systems in the Humanities”                              35
Belyakova Irina, Kecherukova Marina
    Creativity as a Challenge in the EFL Classroom                       44
Mikhailova Svetlana, Zaitseva Alena
    Creative Speech Making as One of the Goals of Teaching
    a Foreign Language                                                   59
Alimova Maria, Gutorova Daria, Prokopova Ivanna
    Implementation Features and Development Prospects in Distance
    Learning of Russian as a Foreign Language (RFL) at Pre-University Faculty. ,72
Martynova Margarita, Nikolenko Elena, Nikolenko Galina
    New Communicative and Expressive Powers in Online
    and Offline Teaching Russian as a Foreign Language                   89
Trocuk Svetlana
    Specifics of Using E-Educational Resources
    in Teaching Russian as a Foreign Language                            107
Si Xi
    Short Video — a New Approach to Language International Education 121 Aksenova Marina
    Creative Potential of Memes in Foreign Language Training             130

3

Mirzoyeva Leila, Syurmen Oxana, Dosmakhanova Raikul, Azhiyev Kanat
    Code Switching as a Peculiar Feature of Digital Communication
    in Multilingual Settings                                          140
Soboleva Anna, Urvantceva Natalia
    Non-Verbal Tools of Intercultural Communication in the Practice
    of Teaching Russian as a Foreign Language                         151
Astanina Anna, Boltenkova Yuliya, Rassakazova Tatiana
    The Role of Multimodality and Technology in Teaching EFL
    to Visually Impaired Lower-Level Learners                         182
Leontjev Dmitri, Rasskazova Tatiana
    Assessment Cultures and Virtual L2 Teaching and Learning          193

1.2. Features of Multilingual Education in a Multicultural Environment

Efremova Yulia, Simbirtseva Natalia
    Formation of Cultural Identity of Bilingual Children
    in the Conditions of Russian Everyday Life                           210
Tangalycheva Rumiya
    Cultural Assimilator Technique as a Creative Method for Increasing
    Intercultural Competence in Multicultural Groups of Students         229
Ivanyan Elena, Gurova Irina
    Laboratory of Linguistic Meanings Within Communication Trends of the Post-Literacy Era                                            241
Darzhinova Liubov
    Resolving Structural Ambiguity in Language Processing:
    A Systematic Review                                                  259
Mukhina Irina, Efremovskikh Anastasia
    Opposition “Universal and Specific Names of Coffee” as a New Communication Trend                                        271
Magsar Tseven
    Some Peculiarities of Russian Cultural Constants
    in the Language and Culture of Mongolia                              289
Forteza Fernandez Rafael Filiberto, Rubtsova Elena
    Cultural Representations of Spain and Latin America
    in Spanish as a Foreign Language. A Critique                         302

4

Part 2
NEW CREATIVITY, MEDIA AND MEDIATORS


2.1.  Modern Media Culture: Gains and Losses
Yarkova Elena
    The Notion of Media Culture: An Attempt at Deconstruction           319
Gudova Margarita, Litwinova Anastasia
    Language Diversity in Business Communication in the Social Network
    Instagram (On the Example of Bars, Cafes and Restaurants Ads)       336
Kalaykova Julia, Pankina Marina
    Boundaries of Multimodality in Virtual Information
    Environment Design                                                  353
Gudova Margarita, Glazkova Daria
    Use of New Nature Texts in the VKontakte Social Network             368
Blinova Olesya, Gorbunova Yuliya, Deviatovskaia Irina
    Marginal Political Practices of Youth
    as a Communication Trend in the Post-Politics Era                   379
Vorobyova Irina, Kruzhkova Olga
    Stress Factors of the Virtual Environment of a Metropolis:
    Perception of Youth                                                 393
Shalagina Elena Vladimirovna
    Cyber Bullying in the Modern Media Environment:
    Sociological Analysis of the Ideas of Adolescents and Teachers
    (Based on the Materials of Applied Sociological Research)           403
Latu Maxim, Tagiltseva Julia
    The Use of Cartoon Characters in Extremist Internet Discourse
    as a ‘Soft Impact’ Technology                                       414
Murzina Irina
    Introduction to the Historical Past:
    Informal Educational Media Practices in Modern Russia               424
Simonova Irina
    The Concept of a National Idea in a Multicultural Media Space:
    Formal vs Informal Logics                                           446
Yazovskaya Olga, Gudova Iuliia
    Problems of the Phenomenon of Empireness in the Postcolonial Era
    and Its Expression in Various Forms of Media Imperialism
    via the Examples of the USA, Japan and Russia                       459

5

Muratshina Ksenia Gennadievna, Valeeva Marina Vladimirovna
    Russia — Post-Soviet Central Asia Cooperation
    in Information and Media                                           476
Iakimova Olga A.
    Representation of Migrants in the Public Discourse of Russia       496

2.2.  Modern Media Education
Yefanov Aleksandr, Tomin Vitaly
    Segmentation and Profiling of Media Communications: Industrial and

     Educational Determinants                                               507
Myasnikova Marina, Martsevich Yury
     “New Journalism” as a Synthesis of Forms: Relationships
     With Literature, Fiction Publicistics and Screen Documentary           521
Zvereva Ekaterina
     Interaction “Journalist — Robot Journalist”:
     Communicative Advantages and Social Responsibility                     536
Sumskaya Anna, Sumskoy Pavel, Solomeina Valeria
     Subcultures of the “Analogue” and the “Digital”:
     Prospects of Intergenerational Communication                           550
Oleshko Vladimir, Oleshko Eugene
     Creative Environment as a Factor of Professional Culture Formation
     of Journalists in the Digital Era                                      573
Antonova Natalya, Khafizova Viktoria, Gurarii Anna
     Media Globalisation and Desacralisation of a Journalist’s Image        588
Chelysheva Irina
     Reflection of University Students’ Interethnic Tolerance
     in Russian Media Education: Past and Present                           598


2.3.  New Arts, Media and Mediators as a World of Meanings in New Media
Muravleva Valeriya
    The Mass Media Communicative Situation and the Text Semantics 605 Shesterina Alla
    Modern Trends in the Development
    of Audiovisual Media as Translators of Cultural Values           618
Boeva Galina
    Literary Reputations in the Post-Literacy Era:
    The Image of a Writer in the Runet                               630

6

Mirzoeva Leila, Syurmen Oksana
    Precedent Text as a Special Kind of Code
    in the Internet Communication                                     648
Mengmen Yuan
    Bestiary in Modern Media Art (Based on the Tales of P. P. Bazhov
    and the “Shan Hai Jing” Materials)                                660
Bogomyakov Vladimir, Chistyakova Marina
    Upgrade of a Fungus in Contemporary Art:
    From Media to Co-Author                                           667
Tangalycheva Rumiya
    Zombie Apocalypse in Cinema as a Form of Adaptation
    to New Digital Technologies and Their Consequences                679
Temlyakova Alina
    Creativity in the Film Director’s Work:
    An Example of Works by A. Zvyagintsev                             696
Yarmosh Anastasia Sergeevna
    Art & Science Potential in the Development of Russian Scientific
    Communication in the Museum Exhibition Policy Context             708
Melnikova Svetlana, Zhuravleva Nadezhda, Bulatova Anastasiya
    The Role of a Mediator in the Participatory Practices
    in the Museum (Mediation and Facilitated Discussion)              719
Pryamikova Elena, Vandyshev Mikhail
    Multimedia Practices in Corporate Museums: Tribute
    to Fashion or Canon Transformation                                738
Golovatina-Mora Polina, Rubtsova Elena, Fedorova Ksenia
    Media and Audio Practices: a Search for Philosophical
    Background of Analysis                                            749
Smirnova Tatyana
    Renewal of the Language of Music Through Silence                  761
Okhvat Kristina
    Nikolai Ironov: How Neuronets Create Digital Visual Culture       775


Authors                                                               782

    DOI 10.15826/B978-5-7996-3081-2.01





                Creativity in the Age of Robots:
                A Polemic, Philosophical
                and Cultural Preface to a Discussion




            Gudova Margarita¹, Guzikova Maria², Yamshchikov Ivan³


    ¹ Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia
    ² Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia
    ³ ABBYY, Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences, Leipzig, Germany Corresponding author: marggoodova@gmail.com

        Abstract. The article mainly argues that education today is the area where “smart machines” such as super-powerful computing technology operate, capable of storing and processing huge amounts of data produced by modern academic researchers, under whose influence new models of human existence — new ontologies — are generated. In addition, there are social “smart machines” for processing information in broadcasting and communication — "new media", which also create their own worlds with their own rules and algorithms; as well as there are personal “smart machines” (gadgets), in which information processing algorithms are reproduced in the form of programs that are created by scientists and programmers, and on the basis of which reading, information analysis and decision-making takes place in the memory of a “smart machine”.
        Keywords: age of robots, creativity, creative intelligence, human intelligence, artificial intelligence


            Gudova M.:


    For a long time, man as a species considered himself the only bearer of intelligence on the planet. The intellectual exclusivity of man was presented by many generations of thinkers as a decisive advantage of man over all other living beings and the natural world as a whole. Gradually, in the history of culture, robots became part of human life. They were used as machines and mechanisms capable of acquiring and analysing information and making decisions. Today, artificial systems can have physicality, sensibility and intelligence meaning that they can make decisions. From the point of view of improving the ability of machines to process information, the entire history of human culture is just a preamble to the modern stage, when robots

8

became part of our everyday lives, were spread to production and various service industries, act as assistants, substitutes and prostheses of certain organs and human systems like exo- or 3D prostheses. Media are exactly the same ‘prostheses’. M. McLuhan said that they are an artificial extension of man; and at the same time, that means the separation and transfer of a part of the human to a machine, e. g. the ability to memorise, transmit and broadcast information. The twentieth century, as defined by M. McLuhan, is the ‘age of the redistribution of consciousness’, ‘Rapidly, we approach the final phase of the extensions of man — the technological simulation of consciousness, when the creative process of knowing will be collectively and corporately extended to the whole of human society, much as we have already extended our senses and our nerves by the various media’ [McLuhan, 5]. From the point of view of modern media research, one of the key scientific ideas of M. McLuhan is the description of the social and cultural consequences of media. For M. McLuhan, media were associated with texts and languages. One after one, he describes the means of production, storage and transmission of information, as well as the means of communication that appeared at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries and appropriated the functions of perception, storage, processing and transmission of information, and how they changed the way of life, the object-material world, habits and forms of communication between people. The media’s capability of performing these functions transformed the world during the 20th century in such a way that the cultures of the megalopolises of the late 19th and early 21st centuries differ in a striking way in both technical and technological saturation and in terms of existential issues.
    For us, robots in modern education is the relevant target of interest. In our opinion, education today is the area where “smart machines” such as super-powerful computing technology operate, capable of storing and processing huge amounts of data produced by modern academic researchers, under whose influence new models of human existence — new ontologies — are generated. In addition, there are social “smart machines” for processing information in broadcasting and communication — “new media”, which also create their own worlds with their own rules and algorithms; as well as there are personal “smart machines” (gadgets), in which information processing algorithms are reproduced in the form of programs that are created by scientists and programmers, and on the basis of which reading, information analysis and decision-making takes place in the memory of a “smart machine”.

9

    Why is the education sector so sensitive today to the creation of new ontologies and algorithms? The answer seems to be obvious: from an anthropological point of view, the education system is that of human-to-human communication, ‘processing people by people’ [Marx, Engels, 29]. When intermediaries in the form of complex intellectual systems and algorithms appear in the relations between people, then a person finds himself/herself in a new existential context, the human world becomes a human-machine world, the ontology of the human turns into an ontology of hybrid existence, and a person feels existential tension in his/her existence between human and inhuman. How do man-made algorithms cause this existential discomfort? Being in a hybrid human-machine world requires considering the peculiarities of not only a person as a partner in educational activities but also an algorithm. In the case of industrial use of robots, humans exploit their ability to perform major repetitive operations with absolute precision an infinite number of times. Industrial robots are slaves to humans, and they are valued for their efficiency; they are ideal performers of heavy and monotonous production operations, freeing people and increasing labour productivity. Service robots in education are another thing. The peculiarity of interaction with ‘smart machines’ in the education system is that they are not only tools for implementing it but also tools for organising it, algorithms that determine the procedure for and speed of interaction of one actor in the educational process with a machine and then another actor... The set of features associated with the use and organisation allows us to talk about the agent-based active nature of artificial intelligent systems in education, where they act as agents of rational action, by invading the world of human irrationality, impulsivity, emotionality etc. According to B. Cope and M. Kalantzis, the advantage of educational robots is not that they are smarter but that they act logically and consistently, that is reasonably and efficiently.
    Let us consider in more detail what kind of artificial intelligent systems an ordinary teacher of a Russian university is dealing with today. This is an incentive scheme for academic staff that collects, places and systematizes information about teachers’ work during the academic year, keeps track of their educational, methodological and research achievements. Another agent is a scoring system that collects and posts information about the students’ educational problems and the quality of problem solving. It analyses and processes that information, gives advice to users,

10

and makes decisions about how successfully the students cope with their tasks based on those points that the teacher gave to the students, and notifies students and teachers about decisions made, either passed or failed. A more complex service robot of the first generation is the Ural Federal University Electronic Open Resources system that not only hosts various electronic courses in its space but also allows limited interactivity with users by posting answers in the form of scanned files or the option of passing tests in an AutoTest mode.
    This is intended to provide a composite rating for all these intelligent systems in the methodology set by M. McLuhan in terms of amputations and increments [McLuhan, 5], or, as G. Kress wrote, ‘gains and losses’ [Kress, 5], or, according to B. Cope and M. Kalantzis, from the point of view of the advantages and disadvantages of artificial intelligence [Cope, Ka-lantzis, 2019]. First generation educational intelligent systems do not provide any possibility of interactivity. It is possible for such educational robots to use multimodal texts, create archives and interact to a limited extent. The impact that first generation educational robots have on people are tools: they limit and reduce the emotional and impulsive reactions of people in educational interaction and expand the formal and logical abilities, qualities and properties, ensure the sequence of actions and mathematical accuracy of assessments while maintaining out-of-emotionality and value-based neutrality. That is, the first-generation educational robots act as tools for formalising and streamlining the educational relations. That is why the first-generation educational robots, intelligent systems, that do not allow full-fledged interaction, have limited algorithms for variable action and are not perfect in design are target for criticism from the point of new literacy pedagogy and new creativity ideas.
    Educational robots of the first generation are those algorithms and tools for ensuring and organising the educational process that form a new hybrid ontology of education and today determine the ways of existence of teachers and students, pupils outside any feedback, the empathy and interactivity sought by man. Critical pedagogy proceeds from the premise that ‘ontologies should determine algorithms, and not vice versa’ [Cope, Kalantzis, Searsmith, 2020, 4].

11

            Guzikova M.:


    The coexistence of humans and robots, their competitive relations in those areas, where machines are stronger, more accurate and more dispassionate, more reliable, raise the question of what the new pedagogy should be, and this meets our time’s challenges. According to K. Schwab, our new modernity already exists, and it is a digital world in which a person can be replaced by a machine. What will come of this for pedagogy? In the new ontology of the electronic educational environment, which is a law unto itself, the practices that have been developed in traditional education, those instructional concepts and principles that correspond to another ontology — lesson-class, didactic-synoptic — should not be reproduced. Didactic teaching was built on the transfer of knowledge from one teacher to many students, a teacher would have unique knowledge and pass it on ‘from mouth to mouth’. As Cope and Kalantzis write, ‘artificial intelligence promises a new way forward for assessment and education’ [Cope, Kalantzis, Searsmith 14]. Today, the educational situation is fundamentally different, the ways of gaining knowledge and literacy are diverse and they are not limited to the interaction between holders and adepts of knowledge within the scope of formal educational institutions and outside; and in combination with both formal and informal education, modern pedagogical science calls this phenomenon ‘individual educational trajectories’. Another aspect of the new literacy is that, in the didactic model of education, the knowledge transfer process was in line with the teacher’s ideas about what students should know. Today, the situation has fundamentally changed. The same way as a new consumer-oriented ‘on-demand economy’ is created, knowledge is also transmitted upon request from a student or his/her representatives planning his/her successful life trajectory. The acquisition of knowledge on social demand of students, the increased search by the consumer in the international open Internet of in search of the necessary professional educational programmes and curricula, makes teachers face competition, meet such requests and offer the most popular and attractive curricula that meet the consumers’ and programmes’ challenges. This aggravates the issue of the methodological packaging for the knowledge transfer and the content of that packaging, which retains intrigue and interest, generates creative tasks that require finding solutions, as well as the manifestation of student creativity abilities. Therefore, all these reasons make it necessary to look at the educational process from the point of view of pedagogical design, innovative

12

methodological support and the most attractive structuring of the content of knowledge. Deep online in the 2nd generation educational systems enables the teacher to be a designer and co-creator of the educational environment and implement collaborative forms of education. If a machine can not only count and recognise correct answers in closed tests, not only collect but also subject texts to the contextual, semantic and discursive analysis, interpret, unite students and teachers into separate groups on social networks, generate new friendly ontologies, and implement algorithms, which satisfy a person’s need for communication in order to support and develop his/her humanity and sociality, allows assessing the students’ progress by not only any figures from the teacher but also the opinion of other students and teachers, then the machine becomes an assistant can radically chang in the educational process in the online mode. This is the position of online optimism.
    The advantages of an educational system built at the intersection of the intersection of the artificial intelligence achievements (storage and fast processing of big data arrays), ‘new media’ — social networks and the mobile Internet are that the educational process can be carried out at any time and place, synchronously and asynchronously, convenient and comfortable for introverts and autists, and people with cognitive and physical disabilities in the form of short lectures, multimodal texts of tasks and answers. All these conditions free a teacher from the need to be a lecturer-preacher; it is suggested that he/she becomes a designer of the knowledge received by his/ her students. To do this, the teacher, in our opinion, needs to answer several fundamental and new questions: How does the proposed knowledge meet the needs of the trainees? How well is the transferred knowledge structured? In what language do students master this knowledge better? In the language of verbal text? Audiobooks? Videos? In the language of touch and tactile sensations or in the language of plasticity and music? In the pedagogical interaction all this leads to the need to take into account not only the initial knowledge request for knowledge of students but also their cognitive request for the presentation of material in a certain sign-oriented and semiotic package. A hybrid environment, in which we work together with a machine, the synergy of man and machine, the machine’s ability to recognise a text of various nature — verbal, acoustic, visual and/or tactile ensures that the educational process is multimodal and multilingual. The transition from didactic pedagogy to collaborative pedagogy, in which the teacher is the educational process designer, due thanks artificial intelligence, will


13

free the teacher from the routine of endless control tests and works, as well as home assignments, as it can be done by a machine, and will give scope for the creative activities by the teacher-designer in not only of educational programmes, courses and lessons but also social groups, and social and human relations in the educational process by trying out the best human qualities, such as kindness, responsibility, honesty and creativity.


            Yamshchikov I.:


    Is it difficult to train a machine to be a teacher’s assistant, solve creative problems and evaluate the quality of the obtained solutions? Is it difficult to teach artificial intelligence to be creative and generate texts that are read like human-written texts? What are the creative possibilities of artificial intelligence and where are its limits? Can a modern computer surpass human intelligence in its creative capabilities?
    On the one hand, Turing writes in his article on statistical learning [1]: “If the meaning of the words “machine” and “think” are to be found by examining how they are commonly used it is difficult to escape the conclusion that the meaning and the answer to the question, “Can machines think?” is to be sought in a statistical survey such as a Gallup poll.” This starting argument turned out to be prophetic. It pinpoints the profound challenge for the generative models that use statistical learning principles. Indeed, if creativity is something on the fringe, on the tails of the distribution of outcomes, then it is hard to expect a model that is fitted on the center of distribution to behave in a way that could be subjectively perceived as a creative one. If we correlate this idea with the basic principles of statistical learning and try to answer the question about the possibility of creating something new by a machine, then we inevitably come to a disappointing conclusion: the result of a poll will never be something new. In this sense, the machine is able to do what the person taught it. Without creating anything fundamentally new, it re-as-sembles repeating patterns.
    On the other hand, people also reproduce something that they learned from other human beings. In this sense, it is rather difficult to distinguish the happy accident of a serendipitous machine creativity from the accidental insight of an artist. In 2016, Alexey Tikhonov and I conducted a series of experiments: we tried to train an algorithm to generate poems stylized as poems of a given author. The generated poems that resembled the lyrics of the cult Russian poet and musician Yegor Letov became the most widely

14

known in Russia. Globally our project with Kurt Cobain stylized songs got more public interest. We recorded two mini-albums (in Russian and in English) with poems generated by the algorithms. The Russian album is called “Neural Defense”, and the English one is called Neurona (https:// youtu.be/c759T8zOe5A)*. Both albums are available to listen to and have been published on various streaming platforms. The essence of the project was that we took all available poetic texts in Russian with information about their authorship, and trained the algorithm to create stylized texts similar to the poems of a particular poet. You can read more about this in our articles [2,3,4]. Having mastered the basic stylistic techniques of the chosen author, the machine can endlessly produce poems from his vocabulary, based on his rhythmic-melodic techniques. Some of these texts will be better, others worse, but the algorithm itself will not invent any new artistic poetic techniques, it simply uses statistical information that it can extract from the texts in the training set. People reading these poems distinguish well between authors and their style, sometimes machine stylizations are recognized as more ‘human’ than the original poems. Generally, the readers have hard times distinguishing the author and the machine. Modern generative algorithms tend to pass Turing test in terms of stylization. In some sense, artificial intelligence creates the best postmodern works today. The contribution of algorithms to culture is the death of postmodernism.
    There are experiments in other creative fields where algorithms generate music and graphics using statistical learning. But to which extent are these pieces novel? In order to understand this, one can regard the limits of creative artificial intelligence within a broader problematic field of communication. We interact with machines, but we do not communicate with them. There are two phases in machine learning process: exploration and exploitation. A person goes through the same phases both in phylogeny and ontogenesis. In humans, over the years, the research phase is increasingly displaced by the exploitation phase. A person develops certain algorithms — habitual, ritual actions, — and begins to reproduce them in her life. When we are kids, the task “go there — don’t know where, bring that — don’t know what” seems exciting and entertaining. Over the years we value clearly defined goals and objectives more and more. The desire for novelty is supplanted

    * Neurona — In the back of your glass. The lyrics of this song were written by an artificial neural network trained to resemble Kurt Cobain. Neurona is a project of Aleksey Tikhonov and Ivan Yamshchikov.

15

Доступ онлайн
2 350 ₽
В корзину