A descriptive approach for automatic generation of visual blends is presented. The implemented system, the Blender, is composed of two components: the Mapper and the Visual Blender. The approach uses structured visual representations along with sets of visual relations which describe how the elements (in which the visual representation can be decomposed) relate among each other. Our system is a hybrid blender, as the blending process starts at the Mapper (conceptual level) and ends at the Visual Blender (visual representation level). The experimental results show that the Blender is able to create analogies from input mental spaces and produce well-composed blends, which follow the rules imposed by its base-analogy and its relations. The resulting blends are visually interesting and some can be considered as unexpected.
proposed a discursive approach to evaluate the quality of blends (although there is no evidence of an implementation). The main idea was to use Lakatosian argumentative dialogue @cite_3 to iteratively construct valuable and novel blends as opposed to a strictly combinatorial approach. To exemplify the argumentative approach, the authors focused on icon design by introducing a semiotic system for modelling computer icons. Since icons can be considered as a combination of signs that can convey multiple intended meanings to the icon, proposed argumentation to evaluate and refine the quality of the icons.
@cite_3
2464189215 198041307 2518510348 2079883067
This paper motivates the use of computational argumentation for evaluating ‘concept blends’ and other forms of combinatorial creativity. We exemplify our approach in the domain of computer icon design, where icons are understood as creative artefacts generated through concept blending. We present a semiotic system for representing icons, showing how they can be described in terms of interpretations and how they are related by sign patterns. The interpretation of a sign pattern conveys an intended meaning for an icon. This intended meaning is subjective, and depends on the way concept blending for creating the icon is realised. We show how the intended meaning of icons can be discussed in an explicit and social argumentation process modeled as a dialogue game, and show examples of these following the style of Lakatos (1976). In this way, we are able to evaluate concept blends through an open-ended and dynamic discussion in which concept blends can be improved and the reasons behind a specific evaluation are made explicit. In the closing section, we explore argumentation and the potential roles that can play at different stages of the concept blending process. This paper introduces a new approach to user interface design and other areas, called algebraic semiotics. The approach is based on a notion of sign, which allows complex hierarchical structure and incorporates the insight (emphasized by Saussure) that signs come in systems, and should be studied at that level, rather than individually. A user interface can be considered as a representation of the underlying functionality to which it provides access, and thus user interface design can be considered a craft of constructing such representations, where both the interface and the underlying functionality are considered as (structured) sign systems. In this setting, representations appear as mappings, or morphisms, between sign systems, which should preserve as much structure as possible. This motivates developing a calculus having systematic ways to combine signs, sign systems, and representations. One important mode of composition is blending, introduced by Fauconnier and Turner; we relate this to certain concepts from the very abstract area of mathematics called category theory. Applications for algebraic semiotics include not only user interface design, but also cognitive linguistics, especially metaphor theory and cognitive poetics. The main contribution of this paper is the precision it can bring to such areas. Building on an insight from computer science, that discrete structures can be described by algebraic theories, sign systems are defined to be algebraic theories with extra structure, and semiotic morphisms are defined to be mappings of algebraic theories that (to some extent) preserve the extra structure. As an aid for practical design, we show that the quality of representations is closely related to the preservation properties of semiotic morphisms; these measures of quality also provide the orderings needed by our category theoretic formulation of blending. We propose a new task in the field of computational argumentation in which we investigate qualitative properties of Web arguments, namely their convincingness. We cast the problem as relation classification, where a pair of arguments having the same stance to the same prompt is judged. We annotate a large datasets of 16k pairs of arguments over 32 topics and investigate whether the relation “A is more convincing than B” exhibits properties of total ordering; these findings are used as global constraints for cleaning the crowdsourced data. We propose two tasks: (1) predicting which argument from an argument pair is more convincing and (2) ranking all arguments to the topic based on their convincingness. We experiment with feature-rich SVM and bidirectional LSTM and obtain 0.76-0.78 accuracy and 0.35-0.40 Spearman’s correlation in a cross-topic evaluation. We release the newly created corpus UKPConvArg1 and the experimental software under open licenses. This paper presents a novel argumentation framework to support Issue-Based Information System style debates on design alternatives, by providing an automatic quantitative evaluation of the positions put forward. It also identifies several formal properties of the proposed quantitative argumentation framework and compares it with existing non-numerical abstract argumentation formalisms. Finally, the paper describes the integration of the proposed approach within the design Visual Understanding Environment software tool along with three case studies in engineering design. The case studies show the potential for a competitive advantage of the proposed approach with respect to state-of-the-art engineering design methods.