Loading…
Inside the Mind of an AI: Materiality and the Crisis of Representation
The advent of Transformer architectures for neural nets and the high language proficiency of programs like GPT-3 confront us with a fundamental question. How can, or should, literary criticism proceed when the text's creator is not a human but a machine? The query shakes to its core literary cr...
Saved in:
Published in: | New literary history 2023-06, Vol.54 (1), p.635-666 |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-d2d09da3feb450e1dbc7458c6096205480901144e24e0b7e35e9a58cdf708e0f3 |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | 666 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 635 |
container_title | New literary history |
container_volume | 54 |
creator | Hayles, N. Katherine |
description | The advent of Transformer architectures for neural nets and the high language proficiency of programs like GPT-3 confront us with a fundamental question. How can, or should, literary criticism proceed when the text's creator is not a human but a machine? The query shakes to its core literary criticism, and indeed the entire enterprise of critical inquiry. This essay confronts the issue head-on, arguing that it does matter whether language is produced by humans or AIs. It provides context for the development of neural nets that process natural language, looking at competitors to GPT-3 and similar Transformer novels. It then goes into depth on GPT-3's Transformer architecture and how it processes word sequences. It compares how the AI learns language with how human children learn it, arguing that the differences result in a systemic fragility of reference for AI's language understanding. It interrogates the null strategy of assuming there is no difference between human- and machine-generated text and explores its implications, arguing for a middle position between the program understanding nothing about meaning or everything. Finally, it offers four strategies for how literary criticism can engage with machine-generated language, arguing that machine narratives can be of significant interest in themselves. The point is not to ignore the powerful capabilities of GPT-3 to generate compelling narratives and texts, but rather to devise and deploy a new kind of literary criticism that can adequately interpret its complexities. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1353/nlh.2022.a898324 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2866093266</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2866093266</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-d2d09da3feb450e1dbc7458c6096205480901144e24e0b7e35e9a58cdf708e0f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkE1LAzEQQIMoWKt3jwuet04-Npv1VoqthRbBD_AW0s0sTWl3a5Ie-u_N2qKnwOTNG3iE3FMYUV7wx3a7HjFgbGRUpTgTF2RAQUEuJf26JAMApnIJqrwmNyFsAICWUA3IdN4GZzGLa8yWrrVZ12Smzcbzp2xpInpnti4e08j-IhPvggs99IZ7jwHbaKLr2lty1ZhtwLvzOySf0-ePyUu-eJ3NJ-NFXnMqY26Zhcoa3uBKFIDUrupSFKqWUEkGhVBQAaVCIBMIqxJ5gZVJ_7YpQSE0fEgeTt69774PGKLedAffppOaKZk0nEmZKDhRte9C8NjovXc744-agu5r6VRL97X0uVZaEX_iDdZxdwj47z5B-r0v2gdljKaglPEfbQhsWQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2866093266</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Inside the Mind of an AI: Materiality and the Crisis of Representation</title><source>EBSCOhost MLA International Bibliography With Full Text</source><source>Project Muse:Jisc Collections:Project MUSE Journals Agreement 2024:Premium Collection</source><source>ProQuest One Literature</source><source>Art, Design & Architecture Collection</source><creator>Hayles, N. Katherine</creator><creatorcontrib>Hayles, N. Katherine</creatorcontrib><description>The advent of Transformer architectures for neural nets and the high language proficiency of programs like GPT-3 confront us with a fundamental question. How can, or should, literary criticism proceed when the text's creator is not a human but a machine? The query shakes to its core literary criticism, and indeed the entire enterprise of critical inquiry. This essay confronts the issue head-on, arguing that it does matter whether language is produced by humans or AIs. It provides context for the development of neural nets that process natural language, looking at competitors to GPT-3 and similar Transformer novels. It then goes into depth on GPT-3's Transformer architecture and how it processes word sequences. It compares how the AI learns language with how human children learn it, arguing that the differences result in a systemic fragility of reference for AI's language understanding. It interrogates the null strategy of assuming there is no difference between human- and machine-generated text and explores its implications, arguing for a middle position between the program understanding nothing about meaning or everything. Finally, it offers four strategies for how literary criticism can engage with machine-generated language, arguing that machine narratives can be of significant interest in themselves. The point is not to ignore the powerful capabilities of GPT-3 to generate compelling narratives and texts, but rather to devise and deploy a new kind of literary criticism that can adequately interpret its complexities.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0028-6087</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1080-661X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1080-661X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1353/nlh.2022.a898324</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press</publisher><subject>Authorship ; Back propagation ; Children ; Language ; Literary criticism ; Narratives ; Natural language ; Natural language processing ; Neural networks ; Novels</subject><ispartof>New literary history, 2023-06, Vol.54 (1), p.635-666</ispartof><rights>Copyright © <I>New Literary History</I>, The University of Virginia</rights><rights>Copyright Johns Hopkins University Press 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-d2d09da3feb450e1dbc7458c6096205480901144e24e0b7e35e9a58cdf708e0f3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2866093266?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,12861,27924,27925,34775,44200,62661,62662,62677</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hayles, N. Katherine</creatorcontrib><title>Inside the Mind of an AI: Materiality and the Crisis of Representation</title><title>New literary history</title><description>The advent of Transformer architectures for neural nets and the high language proficiency of programs like GPT-3 confront us with a fundamental question. How can, or should, literary criticism proceed when the text's creator is not a human but a machine? The query shakes to its core literary criticism, and indeed the entire enterprise of critical inquiry. This essay confronts the issue head-on, arguing that it does matter whether language is produced by humans or AIs. It provides context for the development of neural nets that process natural language, looking at competitors to GPT-3 and similar Transformer novels. It then goes into depth on GPT-3's Transformer architecture and how it processes word sequences. It compares how the AI learns language with how human children learn it, arguing that the differences result in a systemic fragility of reference for AI's language understanding. It interrogates the null strategy of assuming there is no difference between human- and machine-generated text and explores its implications, arguing for a middle position between the program understanding nothing about meaning or everything. Finally, it offers four strategies for how literary criticism can engage with machine-generated language, arguing that machine narratives can be of significant interest in themselves. The point is not to ignore the powerful capabilities of GPT-3 to generate compelling narratives and texts, but rather to devise and deploy a new kind of literary criticism that can adequately interpret its complexities.</description><subject>Authorship</subject><subject>Back propagation</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Literary criticism</subject><subject>Narratives</subject><subject>Natural language</subject><subject>Natural language processing</subject><subject>Neural networks</subject><subject>Novels</subject><issn>0028-6087</issn><issn>1080-661X</issn><issn>1080-661X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkE1LAzEQQIMoWKt3jwuet04-Npv1VoqthRbBD_AW0s0sTWl3a5Ie-u_N2qKnwOTNG3iE3FMYUV7wx3a7HjFgbGRUpTgTF2RAQUEuJf26JAMApnIJqrwmNyFsAICWUA3IdN4GZzGLa8yWrrVZ12Smzcbzp2xpInpnti4e08j-IhPvggs99IZ7jwHbaKLr2lty1ZhtwLvzOySf0-ePyUu-eJ3NJ-NFXnMqY26Zhcoa3uBKFIDUrupSFKqWUEkGhVBQAaVCIBMIqxJ5gZVJ_7YpQSE0fEgeTt69774PGKLedAffppOaKZk0nEmZKDhRte9C8NjovXc744-agu5r6VRL97X0uVZaEX_iDdZxdwj47z5B-r0v2gdljKaglPEfbQhsWQ</recordid><startdate>20230601</startdate><enddate>20230601</enddate><creator>Hayles, N. Katherine</creator><general>Johns Hopkins University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CLO</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PAF</scope><scope>PPXUT</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQLNA</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PROLI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230601</creationdate><title>Inside the Mind of an AI: Materiality and the Crisis of Representation</title><author>Hayles, N. Katherine</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-d2d09da3feb450e1dbc7458c6096205480901144e24e0b7e35e9a58cdf708e0f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Authorship</topic><topic>Back propagation</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Literary criticism</topic><topic>Narratives</topic><topic>Natural language</topic><topic>Natural language processing</topic><topic>Neural networks</topic><topic>Novels</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hayles, N. Katherine</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Literature Online Core (LION Core) (legacy)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Art, Design & Architecture Collection</collection><collection>One Literature (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Learning: Literature</collection><collection>Literature Online Premium (LION Premium) (legacy)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>Literature Online (LION) - US Customers Only</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Literature Online (LION eBooks)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>New literary history</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hayles, N. Katherine</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Inside the Mind of an AI: Materiality and the Crisis of Representation</atitle><jtitle>New literary history</jtitle><date>2023-06-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>54</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>635</spage><epage>666</epage><pages>635-666</pages><issn>0028-6087</issn><issn>1080-661X</issn><eissn>1080-661X</eissn><abstract>The advent of Transformer architectures for neural nets and the high language proficiency of programs like GPT-3 confront us with a fundamental question. How can, or should, literary criticism proceed when the text's creator is not a human but a machine? The query shakes to its core literary criticism, and indeed the entire enterprise of critical inquiry. This essay confronts the issue head-on, arguing that it does matter whether language is produced by humans or AIs. It provides context for the development of neural nets that process natural language, looking at competitors to GPT-3 and similar Transformer novels. It then goes into depth on GPT-3's Transformer architecture and how it processes word sequences. It compares how the AI learns language with how human children learn it, arguing that the differences result in a systemic fragility of reference for AI's language understanding. It interrogates the null strategy of assuming there is no difference between human- and machine-generated text and explores its implications, arguing for a middle position between the program understanding nothing about meaning or everything. Finally, it offers four strategies for how literary criticism can engage with machine-generated language, arguing that machine narratives can be of significant interest in themselves. The point is not to ignore the powerful capabilities of GPT-3 to generate compelling narratives and texts, but rather to devise and deploy a new kind of literary criticism that can adequately interpret its complexities.</abstract><cop>Baltimore</cop><pub>Johns Hopkins University Press</pub><doi>10.1353/nlh.2022.a898324</doi><tpages>32</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0028-6087 |
ispartof | New literary history, 2023-06, Vol.54 (1), p.635-666 |
issn | 0028-6087 1080-661X 1080-661X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2866093266 |
source | EBSCOhost MLA International Bibliography With Full Text; Project Muse:Jisc Collections:Project MUSE Journals Agreement 2024:Premium Collection; ProQuest One Literature; Art, Design & Architecture Collection |
subjects | Authorship Back propagation Children Language Literary criticism Narratives Natural language Natural language processing Neural networks Novels |
title | Inside the Mind of an AI: Materiality and the Crisis of Representation |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T00%3A30%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Inside%20the%20Mind%20of%20an%20AI:%20Materiality%20and%20the%20Crisis%20of%20Representation&rft.jtitle=New%20literary%20history&rft.au=Hayles,%20N.%20Katherine&rft.date=2023-06-01&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=635&rft.epage=666&rft.pages=635-666&rft.issn=0028-6087&rft.eissn=1080-661X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1353/nlh.2022.a898324&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2866093266%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-d2d09da3feb450e1dbc7458c6096205480901144e24e0b7e35e9a58cdf708e0f3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2866093266&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |