Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

The Human Creativity Benchmark

Modern AI evaluation frameworks treat evaluator disagreement as noise to be resolved. In creative domains, professional disagreement reflects genuine differences in taste, not measurement error. We argue that evaluating creative AI requires preserving two distinct signals: convergence, where professionals align around shared best practices, and divergence, where individual taste legitimately varies. We present the Human Creativity Benchmark (HCB), a benchmark that operationalizes this separation by collecting pairwise preferences, scalar ratings on prompt adherence, usability, and visual appeal, and qualitative rationale from domain professionals. Across 15,000 professional judgments span...

AuthorsAspen Hopkins, Allison Nulty, Alexandria Minetti et al.
Primary categorycs.AI
Published29 June 2026
Last updated at source29 June 2026
cs.AIcs.CVcs.HC
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/75f6a6de-0dcb-4a9c-86a2-d6b6a612dfe1" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.