Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper explores the use of iterative in-context expert feedback to shape a large language model into a digital poet, without model retraining. The study demonstrates the model's ability to develop a distinctive style and coherent corpus over a seven-month workshop, supported by quantitative and qualitative analyses. A blinded authorship test revealed that participants could not reliably distinguish between poems written by the AI and those by well-known human poets, suggesting the AI achieved a level of creative competence.
Humans can't reliably tell the difference between poems written by an LLM and those by well-known poets, even when the LLM is shaped via iterative expert feedback.
Can a machine write good poetry? Any positive answer raises fundamental questions about the nature and value of art. We report a seven-month poetry workshop in which a large language model was shaped into a digital poet through iterative in-context expert feedback, without retraining. Across sessions, the model developed a distinctive style and a coherent corpus, supported by quantitative and qualitative analyses, and it produced a pen name and author image. In a blinded authorship test with 50 humanities students and graduates (three AI poems and three poems by well-known poets each), judgments were at chance: human poems were labeled human 54% of the time and AI poems 52%, with 95% confidence intervals including 50%. After the workshop, a commercial publisher released a poetry collection authored by the model. These results show that workshop-style prompting can support long-horizon creative shaping and renew debates on creativity and authorship.
