Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in language understanding, reasoning, and generation, sparking growing interest in their creative potential. Realizing this potential requires systematic and scalable methods for evaluating creativity across diverse tasks.
arXiv:2510. 20091v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Creativity is often seen as a hallmark of human intelligence.
By Zhaoyi Joey Hou, Bowei Alvin Zhang, Yining Lu, Bhiman Kumar Baghel, Anneliese Brei, Ximing Lu, Meng Jiang, Faeze Brahman, Snigdha Chaturvedi, Haw-Shiuan Chang, Daniel Khashabi, Xiang Lorraine Li
arXiv:2608. 19437v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Many benchmarks track Large Language Model (LLM) performance on tasks with verifiable answers, but less is known about how LLM performance is evolving on open-ended tasks, where creativity, originality and diversity may matter as much as quality.
By Nirav Patel, Josiah Crossman, Eva Aggarwal, Emily Wenger
arXiv:2608. 07460v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: While post-training improves the capabilities of large language models (LLMs), it generally lowers their output diversity and creativity, negatively impacting tasks that explicitly require creativity (e.
By Ananya Sahu, Mohit Bansal, Elias Stengel-Eskin
arXiv:2605. 10574v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As artificial intelligence advances, models are not improving uniformly.
By Shray Mathur, J. Anibal Boscoboinik, Esther H. R. Tsai, Kevin G. Yager
arXiv:2608.30047v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Recent AI systems promise autonomous scientific discovery, claiming to discover algorithms and produce research papers, yet understanding whether they...
By Shitanshu Bhushan, Yunxiang Zhang, Lu Wang
The paper examines whether existing automatic methods can reliably assess creativity in text produced by large language models (LLMs). By collecting human ratings on 11 creativity dimensions for both human and AI short stories, the authors compare these judgments with automated metrics and LLM-as-a-Judge evaluations. The results show a significant misalignment: automated metrics and LLM judges favor AI-generated stories and show near-zero correlation with human assessments, revealing fundamental limitations in current computational approaches to evaluating creative text.
By Alessandro Tutone, Giorgio Franceschelli, Mirco Musolesi
The paper introduces CreaEval, an automated creativity evaluator designed for complex multi-step tasks (CGPST). It separates the evaluation process into two phases: a memory‑augmented analysis that transforms responses into structured evidence, and an evidence‑based judging step that scores without seeing raw outputs. Experiments show CreaEval outperforms existing baselines by an average of 22.74% across CGPST and two simpler creativity tasks.
By Xiangyu Wang, Jin Wu, Xiaoyu Li, Chanjin Zheng, Yifeng Zhou
arXiv:2603. 11863v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The saturation of high-quality pre-training data has shifted research focus toward evolutionary systems capable of continuously generating novel artifacts, leading to the success of AlphaEvolve.
By Zi-Han Wang, Lam Nguyen, Zhengyang Zhao, Mengyue Yang, Chengwei Qin, Yujiu Yang, Linyi Yang
arXiv:2601. 07121v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used not only for problem solving but also for creative ideation; however, generating ideas that are both novel and coherent remains challenging.
By Makoto Sato
arXiv:2607. 01433v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Divergent thinking is a crucial aspect of creativity, yet large language models (LLMs) tend to consistently generate similar responses to open-ended questions, in what has been termed the artificial hivemind effect.
By Samuel Schapiro, Core Francisco Park, Felix Sosa, Lav R. Varshney
arXiv:2606. 07226v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Human creativity has emerged as a critical competency in the era of large language models.
By Tongzhou Yu, Mingjia Li, Hong Qian, Wenkai Wang, Zongbao Zhang, Yaoyu Jiang, Xiangfeng Wang, Aimin Zhou, Jiajun Guo