Your browser does not support JavaScript!

Navigating Ethics in AI-Driven Art

General Report June 4, 2025
goover

TABLE OF CONTENTS

  1. Philosophical and Ethical Foundations
  2. Legal, Copyright, and Ownership Issues
  3. Stakeholder Perceptions and Societal Impact
  4. Guidelines and Best Practices for Ethical AI Art

Executive Summary

  • This report, titled 'Navigating Ethics in AI-Driven Art,' explores the intricate ethical, legal, and societal challenges posed by integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into artistic creation. Central to this investigation is the core question: What ethical challenges arise from AI in creative arts, and how can they be addressed? Key findings highlight the unresolved debates surrounding authorship, ownership, and the moral responsibilities of creators, as well as the necessity for robust ethical frameworks founded on theories of deontology, consequentialism, and virtue ethics. Our analysis reveals that while AI opens new avenues for artistic expression, it also complicates traditional concepts of creativity and raises concerns about equity, bias, and representation. The report provides actionable guidelines and best practices designed to foster ethical engagement with AI in art, emphasizing the importance of collaboration between humans and AI as a means to enrich the creative process.

  • As the landscape of AI-driven creative practices continues to evolve, this report underscores the imperative for ongoing discourse among artists, technologists, and policymakers. Future directions include the establishment of comprehensive regulatory frameworks to address the legal ambiguities surrounding AI-generated works and further exploration of societal impacts, particularly concerning access and representation in the arts. Ensuring that ethical considerations remain at the forefront of AI integration in creative practices is essential for fostering a fair and inclusive future for the artistic community.

Introduction

  • The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into creative arts represents one of the most significant technological advancements of our time, prompting profound questions about the nature of creativity and the ethical implications of machine-generated works. As AI systems increasingly take on roles traditionally reserved for human artists, we must ask: What does it mean for a machine to create art? This inquiry not only challenges our understanding of creativity but also necessitates a reevaluation of artistic authorship, ownership, and the moral responsibilities inherent in creative expression. The significance of these questions extends far beyond the confines of academia; they resonate throughout society as we confront the implications of AI’s growing presence in creative practice.

  • This report aims to unpack the complex interplay between technology, ethics, and the arts, presenting a thorough analysis of the emerging ethical dilemmas associated with AI-generated art. Through a multi-perspective lens—including technology philosophy, normative ethics, and legal frameworks—we will examine core issues such as the ontological debates surrounding creativity, the responsibilities of developers and artists, and the changing legal landscape regarding intellectual property and authorship. By doing so, we hope to provide valuable insights that can guide stakeholders in navigating this rapidly evolving terrain. The structure of the report is designed to comprehensively tackle these themes, beginning with a philosophical and ethical foundation, followed by an exploration of legal challenges, stakeholder perceptions, and culminating in practical guidelines for ethical AI art.

3. Philosophical and Ethical Foundations

  • The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into the realm of artistic creation invites a profound exploration of philosophical and ethical dimensions that resonate deeply with both technology and creativity. As the frontiers of AI artistry expand, so do the complexities surrounding the nature of creativity itself and the moral frameworks that govern its application in our society. What does it mean for a machine to create art, and what implications does that have for our understanding of creativity as an inherently human endeavor? These questions are not merely theoretical; they underpin a critical discourse as society grapples with the ramifications of AI's role as a 'creator'.

  • At the heart of this investigation lies the relationship between ontology—the study of existence—and creativity within AI art. Consider that generative AI operates not only as a tool wielded by human hands but also as an emergent system, one that acts independently to produce novel outputs. This emergent quality raises essential inquiries about the authorship and ownership of AI-generated works, shifting the lens through which we view artistic value and originality. The philosophical foundation set forth in this section melds these inquiries with the ethical responsibilities that frame the deployment of such revolutionary technologies.

  • 3-1. Overview of ontological and creativity debates in AI art (emergence, complex systems)

  • AI art presents a unique ontological challenge that interrogates the nature of creativity itself. Traditional notions of artistic creation have long been tethered to human experiences, emotions, and intentions. However, as machines increasingly engage in the act of creation, defining creativity in a human-centric manner becomes increasingly problematic. The concept of emergence—where complex systems and patterns arise from relatively simple rules—becomes a pivotal framework for understanding how AI can produce artistic works. These systems learn and adapt through vast datasets, drawing upon existing human artistry to forge new and often unexpected results. Artists now find themselves in dialogue not just with paint or clay, but with algorithms that possess the capacity for motif reinterpretation and stylistic innovation.

  • The intricacies of these emergent systems reflect broader discussions of creativity that extend beyond individual authorship. In exploring AI-generated artworks, we observe a fusion of human input and machine learning—a collaboration that can yield products unexpected by either party. Take, for instance, the notorious 'Portrait of Edmond de Belamy,' crafted by the Obvious collective through a Generative Adversarial Network (GAN). This piece challenges normative assumptions about creativity: who, if anyone, can be called the 'artist'? The implications of AI as a participatory creator propel stimulating debates over the essence of artistic agency, prompting a reevaluation of traditional boundaries around authorship and intellectual property in art.

  • Moreover, the concept of complex systems and their inherent unpredictability signals that while AI can create, the arts produced stem from a blend of stochastic processes, user interactions, and historical timelines embedded in the training data. This ambiguous terrain requires thoughtful engagement from artists and technologists alike, contemplating both the capabilities and constraints of AI as an artistic entity. As the discourse evolves, an essential task will be identifying how human creativity can imbue and inform these emerging systems, ultimately leading to AI's role as a collaborative partner in artistic endeavors.

  • 3-2. Key ethical theories applied to AI (deontology, consequentialism, virtue ethics)

  • The exploration of AI in art necessitates a careful consideration of ethical frameworks that govern technology and its implications on society. Deontology—the ethics of duty—emphasizes the importance of actions and the principles behind them. Within the context of AI art, deontological thinkers would question the moral obligations of creators, developers, and users: is it ethical to employ AI for artistic production? Furthermore, could the act of delegating creativity to machines diminish the human spirit and detract from the integrity of art itself?

  • In contrast, consequentialism evaluates the ethicality of actions based on their outcomes. From this perspective, the use of AI to generate art could be justified if it leads to overall benefits, such as increased access to art, diversification of creation, and the democratization of artistic expression. However, consequentialism also urges scrutiny of potential harms, including the ubiquity of AI-generated content that could erode appreciation for traditional artistry, leading to a homogenization of creative output. This ethical approach invites ongoing examination of the balance between innovation and the preservation of human artistic endeavor.

  • Lastly, virtue ethics focuses on the character and intentions behind actions rather than strict rules or consequences. In the realm of AI art, this perspective encourages artists and technologists to cultivate virtues that enhance creativity, such as imagination, empathy, and critical thinking. As AI systems are incorporated into the artistic process, a commitment to developing such positive traits must remain paramount. Ensuring that AI serves not merely as a mechanistic tool but rather as a facilitator of human expression necessitates fostering a culture that appreciates innovation while acknowledging the intrinsic human qualities that define genuine artistic engagement.

  • 3-3. Insight into “responsibility” in AI development and deployment

  • Responsibility in AI's development and deployment is a linchpin of ethical discourse surrounding its integration into artistic practices. As AI systems increasingly permeate creative spaces, the ramifications of their deployment raise urgent questions: who is accountable for the outputs generated by AI, and how do we maintain the integrity of the artistic process? The notion of 'responsibility' in AI development extends beyond creators, encompassing a broader ecosystem of stakeholders, including programmers, artists, audiences, and policymakers. This collective responsibility necessitates a framework that prioritizes ethical standards and guidelines to mitigate risks associated with algorithmic biases, potential cultural appropriation, and the integrity of artistic intent.

  • For instance, AI's fascinating ability to curate and manipulate vast datasets leads to legitimate concerns about representation and bias in generated works. The deployment of AI technologies without sufficient oversight may perpetuate existing inequalities or inadvertently reinforce biases prevalent in the datasets. Herein lies a significant ethical obligation for developers to ensure that their AI systems are built on diverse and inclusive datasets, reflecting the breadth of human experiences rather than narrow stereotypes. Furthermore, transparency in AI algorithms fosters trust amongst audiences, as understanding the mechanisms behind AI art can demystify its process and validate its significance.

  • Additionally, the responsibility does not conclude with the delivery of AI-generated works; artists and developers alike must engage in ongoing discussions about their role in shaping cultural narratives through AI. The establishment of ethical stewardship in this domain becomes critical to harnessing AI's potential as an empowering force for artistic expression while safeguarding against the commodification and devaluation of human creativity. Addressing these complex challenges requires a commitment to continuous reflection and dialogue among all those engaged in the creative process, ensuring that AI is not merely viewed as a tool but rather as an instrument of change grounded in ethical considerations.

4. Legal, Copyright, and Ownership Issues

  • The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in creative fields presents unprecedented challenges to traditional concepts of authorship and ownership. As AI systems increasingly generate art, literature, and music, the very foundations of intellectual property law are called into question. Who owns a work created by an AI? Can an AI be considered an author, and if so, under what legal frameworks? These questions are not merely academic; they hold significant implications for artists, technologists, and legal scholars alike as they navigate this continuously evolving landscape.

  • Understanding the legal ramifications of AI-generated content is crucial as the boundaries of creativity and technology blur. The integration of AI into artistic processes raises concerns not only about ownership but also about the ethical considerations surrounding attribution, liability, and the potential for exploitation. Gradually, these issues are sparking debates that compel us to reassess our existing frameworks and gaze into the future of creativity in the age of generative intelligence.

  • 4-1. Analysis of authorship and intellectual property in AI-generated works

  • At the heart of the legal discourse surrounding AI-generated works lies the concept of authorship. Traditionally, authorship grants certain rights to the creator of a work, such as the right to reproduce, distribute, and publicly display that work. However, when an AI generates a piece, it challenges the foundational notion of authorship that has existed in intellectual property law for centuries. Does the creator of the AI—likely a programmer or a team of technologists—hold the rights to the work, or should the copyright belong to the entity that uses the AI to generate the output?

  • Legal scholars are actively engaged in unraveling these complex issues. The U.S. Copyright Office has indicated that works created by non-human entities do not qualify for copyright protection. This precedent raises significant questions about the future of AI-generated works. For instance, if an AI produces a stunning piece of artwork without any human intervention, the current legal framework does not allow for copyright protection, essentially deeming such works as in the public domain. Consequently, artists who leverage AI as a tool may find their creativity undermined, as their unique contributions to the process are overshadowed by the capabilities of the technology itself.

  • The discourse on authorship goes beyond mere recognition; it extends into considerations of moral rights, which protect the personal and reputational interests of the creator. With AI, the intangible and emotional aspect of creation is called into question. Can an entity devoid of consciousness and emotion truly claim authorship in a manner that honors the human experiences that typically influence art? As courts grapple with these questions, we are confronted with the reality that our current intellectual property laws may not adequately address the challenges posed by generative AI.

  • 4-2. Liability and attribution for automated content

  • As AI-generated content proliferates, the question of liability arises with equal urgency. If an AI creates a piece of work that infringes on existing copyrights or presents misleading information, who bears responsibility? The artist or organization that deployed the AI, or the developers of the algorithm? This ambiguity complicates the legal landscape and creates potential risks for those working with AI technologies. In practical terms, failing to address these liability concerns can lead to significant financial repercussions, stifling innovation and discouraging artists from experimenting with AI.

  • Moreover, there is the issue of attribution in AI-generated works. While traditional artistic practices emphasize crediting the creator—be it an individual or a collective—AI-generated works blur these lines. If an advertisement produced using AI goes viral, distinguishing the input from various human collaborators becomes problematic. This convoluted mixture prompts urgent considerations regarding transparency: stakeholders must advocate for systems that not only provide credit but also delineate the contributions of both human and machine efforts.

  • Best practices are emerging to address these liability and attribution challenges. For example, some artists are implementing explicit disclaimers that clarify the extent of AI involvement in their creative works. Platforms are developing systems for recognizing human contributions within AI-generated outputs. Furthermore, comprehensive guidelines that govern the use of AI in various creative industries are beginning to be drafted, aiming to protect creators’ rights while encouraging responsible use of technology.

  • 4-3. Case law trends and regulatory gaps

  • The current legal landscape regarding AI-generated works reflects a significant shift, yet many gaps remain. A review of evolving case law reveals the challenges faced in traditional copyright systems to accommodate new technologies. For instance, recent rulings in jurisdictions where AI-generated works tussle with copyright law have often sided against recognizing AI as an author, often citing the lack of human intervention. This trend presents a satiation of potential legal disputes that could arise as AI tools become more commonplace in creative industries, demanding urgent attention from lawmakers.

  • Regulatory frameworks are moving slowly to keep pace with the rapid advancements in AI technology. While the European Union has proposed regulations for AI that seek to address various issues, from transparency to liability, comprehensive global standards remain elusive. This uncertainty may create an uneven playing field for creators and technologists as jurisdictions deploy disparate legal interpretations of AI-generated works. Consequently, companies may hesitate to invest in AI developments if they fear litigation or confusion in protecting their intellectual property rights.

  • Observing the trajectory of case law, it is crucial for stakeholders to advocate for proactive regulations that both recognize innovation and protect creators’ rights. The synthesis of technological and regulatory evolution must ensure that emerging AI paradigms do not come at the expense of the human creators who empower and inspire the technology. Through collaboration among artists, technologists, policymakers, and scholars, a balanced framework can be established that will pave the way for continued innovation while respecting the integrity and rights of those in the creative sector.

5. Stakeholder Perceptions and Societal Impact

  • As we navigate the complexities introduced by artificial intelligence (AI) in creative practices, it becomes imperative to closely examine stakeholder perceptions surrounding this technological advancement. The rise of AI has prompted conversations across diverse sectors, from education to the arts, intertwining various perspectives that reflect both excitement and trepidation about its implications. Universities and creative industries are reevaluating their roles against emerging technologies, making this dialogue crucial not just for practitioners but for society at large.

  • Understanding public sentiment toward AI in creative contexts illuminates broader societal impacts of this technology. Attitudes are shaped by the perceived benefits and ethical dilemmas that AI introduces. These perceptions are particularly important as they can influence educational approaches, policy developments, and industry practices, necessitating a comprehensive exploration of stakeholder viewpoints.

  • 5-1. University and public attitudes toward AI in creative practice

  • In today's academic landscape, universities serve as microcosms of societal understanding and adaptability to technological change. Recent studies assert that while students recognize the efficiency of AI in creative practices, they harbor substantial concerns regarding ethical implications, such as copyright infringement and the erosion of academic integrity. An analysis of university students' perceptions has revealed that while many embrace AI's potential to enhance productivity, there remains a palpable tension surrounding the fairness of evaluations when AI is employed in academic submissions. This dichotomy reflects a broader societal hesitancy to fully integrate AI into creative fields, indicative of the ethical uncertainty that persists at multiple levels of engagement with this technology.

  • The findings emphasize the necessity for clear guidelines governing AI usage within educational settings. As students navigate the integration of AI in their work, the call for coherent evaluation frameworks becomes evident. This context underscores the urgency for institutions to provide updated resources and orientations, fostering critical information literacy to mitigate the over-reliance on AI tools while simultaneously maximizing their potential.

  • 5-2. Industry reshaping: opportunities and displacement in creative fields

  • The infusion of AI into creative industries heralds a shift characterized by the simultaneous creation of opportunities and the potential for displacement. As illustrated in reports from industry experts, AI is revolutionizing how art, music, and literature are produced. AI technologies facilitate rapid content creation, enabling artists to spend more time on the creative ideation phase rather than the labor-intensive elements of production. For example, using tools like generative adversarial networks (GANs) allows artists to merge styles and visualize concepts with unparalleled speed and precision, transforming traditional creative workflows.

  • However, this transformation is not without its challenges. The increasing reliance on AI runs the risk of sidelining skilled workers whose roles might be automated or transformed. Reports indicate that as AI capabilities enhance productivity, there is growing apprehension among creatives about job security and the potential loss of unique artistic voices. As AI continues to evolve, creative professionals must adapt by blending their expertise with AI technologies, ensuring that human intuition remains an integral component of artistic expression. The balance between leveraging AI's efficiencies and preserving human creativity will dictate industry dynamics moving forward.

  • 5-3. Social equity concerns: access, bias, and cultural representation

  • The deployment of AI in creative fields introduces critical discussions surrounding social equity, particularly concerns regarding access, bias, and cultural representation. As AI technologies require significant data inputs for training algorithms, disparities in dataset diversity may reinforce existing societal biases. This phenomenon could exacerbate underrepresentation of marginalized groups in creative outputs, where AI-generated content may inadvertently perpetuate stereotypes or cultural misappropriation. The implications for society are profound, as such biases threaten to skew the cultural narratives that shape public consciousness.

  • Addressing these issues necessitates a comprehensive approach to AI ethics, requiring stakeholders—including artists, educators, and policymakers—to engage in dialogues that prioritize inclusivity and fairness. Ensuring equitable access to AI tools is paramount in empowering diverse voices within creative industries. Furthermore, cultivating awareness of and mitigating algorithmic biases will be essential in fostering a creative landscape that is representative and equitable. As a result, the challenge of balancing technological advancement with ethical considerations remains a pivotal issue that requires immediate attention.

6. Guidelines and Best Practices for Ethical AI Art

  • The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in artistic creation poses significant ethical challenges that require careful consideration and a thoughtful approach. As AI technologies evolve, they open up unparalleled possibilities for creativity, yet they also raise profound questions about authenticity, ownership, and the essence of artistic expression. Understanding the complex interplay between AI and human creativity is essential for navigating the ethical landscape of AI art. This section outlines a comprehensive framework of guidelines and best practices designed to ensure ethical engagement with AI in artistic practices.

  • Ethical AI art is not merely a trend but a necessary evolution in our understanding of creativity itself. Artists, curators, and platforms must grapple with the responsibilities that accompany the integration of AI into art-making processes. By adopting clear and principled guidelines, stakeholders can cultivate a more ethical framework that promotes innovation while safeguarding the intrinsic values of artistic expression. Our exploration begins with a critical framework for responsible prompt engineering and dataset curation, highlighting how these foundational elements shape the ethical implications of AI-generated artworks.

  • 6-1. Framework for responsible prompt engineering and dataset curation

  • At the heart of ethical AI art lies the critical practice of prompt engineering and dataset curation. Prompt engineering, essentially the art of crafting inputs for AI algorithms, plays a decisive role in the output quality and integrity of AI-generated art. Responsible prompt engineering requires artists to be mindful of the phrases, contexts, and ideas they introduce into AI systems. This ensures that the resultant artworks reflect the ethical values of the creators and the broader community.

  • Moreover, the datasets used to train AI models must embody diverse, inclusive, and ethically sourced content. Artworks generated from biased, non-representative, or culturally insensitive datasets can perpetuate and exacerbate inequalities in the art community. To mitigate such risks, artists and developers are encouraged to meticulously evaluate their datasets, ensuring they represent a wide spectrum of cultures, perspectives, and artistic traditions. This data curator’s responsibility extends beyond mere representation; it involves critically assessing the impact that these datasets might have on public perceptions of art and culture, thus reinforcing the ethical significance of high-quality data curation.

  • For instance, an artist employing AI to create motifs inspired by indigenous cultures must ensure that their dataset respectfully represents these cultures and their artistic legacies. By doing so, they honor the origins while avoiding cultural appropriation—a sensitive issue that artists must navigate with care. Ethical considerations in dataset curation set the stage for a respectful and informed collaboration between AI and human creativity.

  • 6-2. Collaboration models: human-in-the-loop and transparency protocols

  • The interplay between AI-generated output and human creativity is enriched through effective collaboration models such as human-in-the-loop systems. These models emphasize the necessity of human oversight and intervention within AI processes, ensuring that the final artworks resonate with human emotional depth and cultural contexts. By integrating human judgment into the creative cycle, artists can mitigate the risk of AI outputs detaching from the nuances and complexities inherent in human emotion and expression.

  • In practice, a human-in-the-loop approach allows artists to guide the AI, refining generated outputs based on their artistic vision, intent, and emotional layers. This collaborative model not only enhances creativity but also reinforces accountability, as the artist's hand is visibly involved in creating the final piece. Transparency protocols within this framework further establish trust with audiences, allowing them to understand how AI contributed to a work's development while appreciating the artist's role in shaping it.

  • For example, an artist developing an AI-generated mural can publicly share the journey of collaboration with the AI, detailing specific interventions and decisions made at each phase. This transparency enriches viewer engagement, fostering a deeper connection to the artwork while ensuring that the discourse surrounding AI in art encompasses the fundamental human values it seeks to represent.

  • 6-3. Tools and checklists for artists, curators, and platforms

  • To facilitate ethical practices in AI art, a set of tools and checklists can be instrumental for artists, curators, and platforms alike. These resources will guide stakeholders through the ethical considerations inherent in integrating AI into their creative workflows. Artists should utilize checklists that cover aspects like prompt integrity, dataset evaluation, bias detection, and transparent collaboration practices.

  • Curators, for instance, can draw from templates designed to evaluate the ethical implications of exhibitions featuring AI-generated art. These templates can help assess the cultural relevance and inclusivity of showcased works, ensuring that they contribute positively to the broader artistic landscape. Platforms that host AI-generated art can implement systematic review processes to vet submissions based on established ethical standards, promoting accountability and fostering a culture of responsible creativity.

  • Ultimately, these tools will enable artists and curators to navigate the complexities of ethical AI art with confidence and clarity. By adhering to practical guidelines, stakeholders can ensure that their artistic practices elevate creativity while staying grounded in ethical integrity. As the landscape of AI art continues to evolve, maintaining commitment to these best practices will be pivotal for fostering a sustainable and equitable future for artistic expression.

Conclusion

  • In synthesizing the multifaceted insights presented in this report, it is clear that as artificial intelligence continues to shape the landscape of artistic creation, significant ethical, legal, and societal challenges must be addressed. This analysis highlights the need for a nuanced understanding of creativity that reconciles traditional notions of authorship with the emerging realities of AI-generated works. Programmatic responsibilities, transparency, and inclusivity are central to promoting a balanced approach to AI art that respects human creativity while leveraging the technological advancements offered by AI.

  • Looking ahead, the implications of our findings are profound. The establishment of robust ethical frameworks and guidelines is essential to ensure that as we innovate, we do not compromise on the values that underpin artistic expression. Increased engagement between artists, technologists, and policymakers will be critical in advocating for inclusivity within the arts, addressing social equity concerns, and ensuring diverse representation in AI training datasets. Ultimately, the vision set forth in this report is one where the intersection of AI and art fosters not only innovation but also an equitable future for all creative practitioners. The core message remains clear: the ethical integration of AI into the arts is not merely an option—it is a necessity for the sustainability and integrity of creative practices.

Glossary

  • Artificial Intelligence (AI): A branch of computer science focused on building systems that can perform tasks typically requiring human intelligence, such as understanding language, recognizing patterns, and making decisions.
  • Generative Adversarial Network (GAN): A type of machine learning model where two neural networks are trained together; one generates content (the generator) while the other evaluates it (the discriminator), allowing the generator to improve its outputs.
  • Ontology: A philosophical term that studies the nature of being, existence, and reality, often referenced in discussions about the essence of creativity as it relates to AI-generated art.
  • Deontology: An ethical theory that emphasizes the importance of duties and rules in determining moral actions, highlighting the ethical obligations of AI creators and users.
  • Consequentialism: An ethical theory that judges actions by their outcomes or consequences, suggesting that the use of AI in art is justified if it produces beneficial results.
  • Virtue Ethics: An ethical framework focusing on the character and virtues of individuals rather than specific actions, promoting qualities like creativity and empathy in artists working with AI.
  • Copyright: A legal framework that grants creators exclusive rights to their works, raising complex questions about authorship and ownership of art produced by AI.
  • Intellectual Property: A category of property that includes intangible creations of the human intellect, such as inventions, literary and artistic works, symbols, names, and images used in commerce.
  • Algorithmic Bias: Systematic and unfair discrimination in AI outcomes due to biased training data or flawed algorithms, potentially perpetuating stereotypes in AI-generated artistic works.
  • Cultural Appropriation: The adoption of elements of one culture by members of another culture, often without permission, which can lead to misrepresentation and harm, especially in AI-generated creative outputs.
  • Transparency Protocols: Guidelines that ensure clarity and openness about how AI tools are used in creative processes, promoting accountability and trust in AI-generated art.
  • Human-in-the-loop: An AI design approach that involves human oversight in the machine learning process to ensure that the final outputs reflect human values and creativity.
  • Prompt Engineering: The practice of designing and refining input prompts for AI systems to generate desired outputs, significantly affecting the quality and ethical implications of AI-generated art.
  • Ethical Frameworks: Structures that outline the principles and guidelines for evaluating and addressing ethical issues in the deployment and implementation of AI technologies in creative practices.

Source Documents