Poems are not just about rhymes and beauty. I've generated a couple of poems by AI, and it never hit a quality a 10-year old could not write. Tht's nowere near the artworks produced by Keats and Yeats. Indistinguishable from the work of a child - maybe. Indistinguishable from the work of a true poet - no way.
Also "Overall, our participants reported a low level of experience with poetry: 90.4% of participants reported that they read poetry a few times per year or less" WTF are we talking about?
The poems were rated on 14 factors, grouped into emotional quality, structual quality, atmosphere, and creativity.
> I've generated a couple of poems by AI, and it never hit a quality a 10-year old could not write.
A non-blind test of one person on a couple of poems doesn't mean all that much against an N=16340 study.
> Tht's nowere near the artworks produced by Keats and Yeats. Indistinguishable from the work of a true poet - no way.
The study compared to poems of "well-known human poets" - Emily Dickinson, T.S. Eliot, etc.
It's true that the study's participants are not primarily poetry experts, but it did still find "none of the effects measuring poetry experience had a significant positive effect on accuracy". Plus, for the average person to prefer AI-generated poetry in blind tests is an interesting result regardless.
Also "Overall, our participants reported a low level of experience with poetry: 90.4% of participants reported that they read poetry a few times per year or less" WTF are we talking about?