Enzymind Labs

Panel Summary

The project proposes to design and implement an Internet based system for organizing and browsing multi-media content to promote creativity in a communal environment. They will integrate several existing tools to create the so-called Virtual Workbench.

II. Intellectual merit
- Strengths
The panelists agreed that the PI did an excellent literature review of creative cognition. They seem to have a good understanding of processes that facilitate creativity.They have some experience in developing IT tools. The combination of IT and creative cognition is synergistic and in line with the aims of the CreativeIT program.

- Weaknesses
If viewed as a finished product their tool would be unsatisfactory. Unless you have discipline specific information at some minimum level, the tool will not provide much use. However, if viewed as a toolkit or shell that could be customized it would be very useful. In that respect it would be good if the PI establishes some type of collaboration with particular disciplines or professional groups that engage in idea generation.
There is no specific mechanism that will assure that preparation and incubation will actually take place and no plans for verifying if this is happening. Several panelists were intrigued by the idea of using fractals for finding patterns but this is described at a very superficial level.
- Suggestions
Collaborate with academic researchers.

III. Broader impacts, including education and enhancing diversity
- Strengths
Available for download to anyone over the Internet.
- Weaknesses
No plans in place for how this will be publicized and how end users will be motivated to try it.
- Suggestions
Establish connections with potential end users in particular application areas.

IV. Additional review criteria:
1. Will this research improve our understanding of creative processes in the context of a specific problem in computer science, information technology, science or engineering?

Perhaps indirectly - others could build new tools to study creative processes.

2. Will the research lead to the development of new technologies to support human creativity?

Yes

3. Will the research lead to transformational research in computer science, information technology, science or engineering through the use of creative practitioners?

Probably not

4. Will the research lead to innovative teaching in computer science, science, or engineering that rewards creativity?

No

V. International collaboration: If the proposal includes international collaboration, comment on the added value of the collaboration.

none

VI. A summary statement to support one of the following recommendations:

The panel rated this proposal as Synergistic. It brings IT and creative cognition together.

The summary was read by the panel, and the panel concurred that the summary accurately reflects the panel discussion.

Panel Recommendation: Synergistic
=-=-=-=-
Review #1

Rating:
Fair
REVIEW:

What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?

Strengths: According to the PI, this work integrates Internet information technologies, creativity research and complex systems science towards the development of a cohesive system of tools and theory for facilitating creative work. There is expected to be significant new opportunities for synergistic activity between these disciplines in the process of conducting this research and utilizing its products. This project will accelerate disciplinary convergence and thus assist in maximizing productivity across diverse domains of knowledge.

Weaknesses:
The PI for this work has the technical background to complete the proposed development, but lacks the evidence of a research record that would provide confidence that the work would be grounded in good research methods. His record of scholarly publication is also very sparse so that it is unlikely that research findings would be disseminated widely.

Suggestions: Having a collaborator with a strong research and methods record is advisable.

What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?

Strengths: According to the PI, the proposed work will produce tools which will be available for anyone to use via the Internet for the purpose of supporting creative activities and generating new ideas. Creativity has been hypothesized as being a key to economic growth and social transformation and the tools and theory proposed in this work relate to these issues by providing new methods for enhancing creativity in general learning, scientific research and abstract artistic work. The proposed tools require only minimal Internet connectivity and will be easy to use. The low barriers to participation enable groups with limited resources to access and use advanced creativity enhancing technologies.

Weaknesses and suggestions: It seems the PI is very interested in interdisciplinary collaborations, but currently has not established these. The proposed work would have a much better chance of success if these partnerships were established before submitting a proposal.

Summary Statement

As stated by the PI, this work will develop, test and deploy Internet software that will act as a creativity support tool (CST) by structuring user information with the goal of facilitating the identification of novel patterns leading to creative insights. These creativity support tools will provide any creative practitioner with three explicit functions: (1) organization of diverse digital media as a network of content nodes in a collaborative environment; (2) graphical visualization of the user content as tag-term filtered tree or Venn diagrams which can be dynamically reconfigured to show alternate representations of the information networks at various scales; (3) linking and visualization of an individual user's network of content nodes with the information networks of other users.

=-=-=-
Review #2

Rating:
    
Fair

REVIEW:

What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?

- Strengths
The proposal claims advances in three areas: creativity support tools, creative cognition theory, and educational models. This multi-disciplinarity is appropriate to the solicitation. The proposer has done appropriate background work to appreciate the breadth of the solicitation.

- Weaknesses
The "integrative strategy" proposed in the research plan seems more focused on using "some of the most advanced available Internet software components" than it is on delivering the integrated advances. The existence of a website already under development does add some credibility that SOMETHING will be implemented, but it also makes it less clear that the system is appropriate to integrate the three areas above.
On the whole, the proposal seems to mention many potentially relevant ideas but does not show how they will be integrated: fractal algorithms, visual mathematics, scale-free, emergence.

What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?

- Strengths
A successful implementation could have an impact on many practitioners.

- Weaknesses
The proposal claims that this work will produce tools that anyone can use via the Internet, and that they will have major impacts on creativity and thus on productivity. Yet the only definite plan to test this is that the PI and "a few recruited test users" will use and test the system at the outset.

Summary Statement

The proposal does address one of the review criteria: 2. Will the research lead to the development of new technologies to support human creativity? The proposed tool, if/when developed, could be useful to support human creators. The proposal should address the research questions that would promote this end.

=-=-=
Review #3

Rating:

Very Good

REVIEW:

What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?

An Internet based system for organizing and browsing multi-media content in a communal environment is proposed. The introduction and background pages raised my expectations of this proposal. The PI has a good grasp of ideation enhancers and components, such as preparation, incubation, analogical reasoning and use of metaphors. It appeared that he was going to marry many computing technologies to support creativity but the proposal fell short of that goal. The proposal addresses the creation of what appears as a structured wiki using many existing tools for content management and structuring. To be useful in any particular domain some minimum critical mass is needed both in terms of users and information available. If there is spoaradic information on many different areas, it is not going to be much help to most people looking to come up with creative solutions to particular problems. Virtual WB could serve as a "shell" for particular discipline and interest areas to create more targeted applications.

The implementation of the UI and is constituents is discussed wel in this proposal. However, the connection to creativity relies on "faith". The Pis believe that working with this system will provide preparation for some sort of creative problem solving, and the long period of use will amount to incubation. There is no evidence to that effect, or any mechanism that will assure that these effects will be present. I would have liked to see the PIs undertake some formal experiments. There is not much information on any type of ontological description of entities and relations. There is also not much on pattern finding.

What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?

The so-called Virtual Workbench will be available to everyone over the Internet, so there is a potential for wide use should the system prove to be useful.
There is no linkage to any specific discipline or problem area. They have not made any prior arrangements to get some set of test users to try out the system. It may never be discovered or used by anyone.

Summary Statement

I personally would love to have a tool like the one described. However, a great deal more needs to be done to make the tool useful in my, or any other, application area. As a seed project this may be worthwhile.