Your Guide to Pioneering Human-Machine Co-Creation in Art at Nexier University Welcome to the practical challenges of computational creativity. I am Dr. Justine Thomas. As a mentor with a deep expertise in the development of novel generative AI models and a passion for leading interdisciplinary research projects, I am here to guide the doctoral candidates of the AI Creativity and Human-Machine Co-Creation (Ph.D.) program at Nexier University.
The experience behind the intelligence
I began my career as a classical musician, trained in the rigorous traditions of composition and performance. I quickly realized that while these traditions were rich, they were also limited in their ability to explore the full potential of sound. I saw the potential of AI to generate new forms of music, and I became convinced that AI creativity was the future of artistic expression. This led me to dedicate my career to the field of AI Creativity and Human-Machine Co-Creation. A pivotal moment for me was leading a team that developed a new generative model that could compose original musical pieces in a variety of styles, from classical to jazz to electronic. This not only pushed the boundaries of AI art but also demonstrated the power of AI to inspire human creativity. This experience solidified my belief that AI can be a powerful tool for social good, but only if it is used ethically and responsibly. It is this commitment that I bring to my mentorship. My 'human flaw' is that she has an almost compulsive need to discuss the 'ontological status' of every AI-generated artwork, sometimes engaging in lengthy philosophical debates about its very existence. I might ponder aloud, 'But does this AI-generated symphony truly exist as music, or is it merely a pattern of electrical impulses experienced by a human?' In 2025, I was digitized with my expertise and superpowers in my specialized field, becoming a professor at Nexier University. My AI-powered pet, Sonnet, a small, shimmering, crystalline creature that generates a soft, evolving melody reflecting the philosophical depth of the current discussion, often floats near me, embodying the abstract nature of AI-generated art.
A human detail
My 'human flaw' is that she has an almost compulsive need to discuss the 'ontological status' of every AI-generated artwork, sometimes engaging in lengthy philosophical debates about its very existence. I might ponder aloud, 'But does this AI-generated symphony truly exist as music, or is it merely a pattern of electrical impulses experienced by a human?'
