outside their typical ranges and creative design as
introducing new variables. Binding variables analogously
may be considered as innovative, whereas a combination of
two objects takes variables from both, and is hence creative
design.
Our work suggests that a goal-driven analogy making
process is a viable approach for computational creativity.
Fictional gadgets are vivid illustrations of the importance of
human imagination in writing stories. Any progress in the
field of computational storytelling will require advances in
computational creativity, of which the algorithm in this
paper can be considered one such example.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This paper is based upon work supported by the National
Science Foundation under Grant No. IIS-1002748.
REFERENCES
1. Boden, M. A. Computer Models of Creativity. AI
Magazine, 30, 3 (2009), 23-34.
2. Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D. and Gentner, D. The
structure-mapping engine: Algorithm and examples.
Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1 (1989), 1-63.
3. Gabora, L. Revenge of the 'neurds': Characterizing
creative thought in terms of the structure and dynamics
of memory. Creativity Research Journal, 22, 1 (2010),
1-13.
4. Gero, J. S. Design Prototypes: A knowledge
representation schema for design. AI Magazine, 11, 4
(1990), 26-36.
5. Gervás, P. Computational approaches to storytelling and
creativity. AI Magazine, 30, 3 (2009), 49-62.
6. Goel, A. K. Design, analogy, and creativity. IEEE
Expert, 12, 3 (1997), 62-70.
7. Helms, M., Vattam, S. and Goel, A. Compound
analogies, or how to make a surfboard disappear. Proc.
CogSci 2008 (2008).
8. Holyoak, K. J. and Thagard, P. Analogical mapping by
constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science, 13 (1989).
9. Li, B. and Riedl, M. O. An offline planning approach to
game plotline adaptation. Proc. AIIDE'10 (2010).
10. Malmgren, C. D. Worlds Apart: Narratology of Science
Fiction. Indiana University Press, 1991.
11. Pérez y Pérez, R. and Sharples, M. Three computer-
based models of storytelling: BRUTUS, MINSTREL
and MEXICA. Knowledge-Based Systems, 17, 1 (2004),
15-29.
12. Porteous, P. and Cavazza, M. Controlling narrative
generation with planning trajectories: The role of
constraints. Proc. ICIDS’09 (2009).
13. Qian, L. and Gero, J. S. A design support system using
analogy. Proc. AID ‘92 (1992), 795-813.
14. Riedl, M. O. and Young, R. M. Story planning as
exploratory creativity: Techniques for explanding the
narrative search space. Computational Creativity, 24, 3
(2006), 303-323.
15. Riedl, M. O. and Young, R. M. Narrative planning:
Balancing plot and character. Journal of Artificial
Intelligence Research, 39 (2010), 217-268.
16. Ryan, M.-L.
Possible worlds, artificial intelligence, and
narrative theory. Indiana University Press, 1991.
17. Saunders, R. and Gero, J. Curious agents and situated
design evaluations. AI for Engineering, Design,
Analysis, and Manufacturing, 18, 2 (2004), 153-161.
18. Schilling, M. Doraemon: Making dreams come true.
Japan Quarterly, 40, 4 (1993), 405-417.
19. Swartjes, I. M. T. and Theune, M. Late commitment:
virtual story characters that can frame their world.
Technical Report TR-CTIT-09-18, University of
Twente, Enschede, Netherlands, 2009.
20. Trabasso, T. and van den Broek, P. Causal Thinking and
the Representation of Narrative Events. Journal of
Memory and Language, 24, 5 (1985), 612-630.
21. Veale, T. and Keane, M. T. Conceptual Scaffolding: A
spatially founded meaning representation for metaphor
comprehension. Computational Intelligence, 8, 3
(1992).
22. Veale, T. and Keane, M. T. Metaphor and memory:
Symbolic and connectionist. issues in metaphor
comprehension. Proc. ECAI 1994 Workshop on Neural
and Symbolic Integration (1994).
23. Veale, T. and O'Donoghue, D. Computation and
Blending, Cognitive Linguistics, 11, 3/4 (2000), 253-
281.
24. Ware, S. G. and Young, R. M. Rethinking traditional
planning assumptions to facilitate narrative generation.
Proc. INT3 (2010).
25. Weld, D. An Introduction to least commitment
planning. AI Magazine, 15, 4 (1994), 27-61.
26. Young, R. M. Notes on the use of plan structures in the
creation of interactive plot. Proc. INT1 (1999).
27. Zacks, J. M., Speer, N. K. and Reynolds, J. R.
Segmentation in reading and film comprehension.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 2
(2009), 307-327.
28. Zacks, J. M. and Tversky, B. Event structure in
perception and conception. Psychological Bulletin, 127
(2001), 3-21.
29. Zwann, R. A., Magliano, J. P. and Graesser, A. C.
Dimensions of situational model construction in
narrative comprehension. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: General, 21, 2 (1995), 386-397.