Version 1
: Received: 26 July 2024 / Approved: 26 July 2024 / Online: 29 July 2024 (10:45:26 CEST)
How to cite:
Lin, F.; Xu, W.; Li, Y.; Song, W. Exploring the Influence of Object, Subject, and Context on Aesthetic Evaluation through Computational Aesthetics and Neuroaesthetics. Preprints2024, 2024072203. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202407.2203.v1
Lin, F.; Xu, W.; Li, Y.; Song, W. Exploring the Influence of Object, Subject, and Context on Aesthetic Evaluation through Computational Aesthetics and Neuroaesthetics. Preprints 2024, 2024072203. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202407.2203.v1
Lin, F.; Xu, W.; Li, Y.; Song, W. Exploring the Influence of Object, Subject, and Context on Aesthetic Evaluation through Computational Aesthetics and Neuroaesthetics. Preprints2024, 2024072203. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202407.2203.v1
APA Style
Lin, F., Xu, W., Li, Y., & Song, W. (2024). Exploring the Influence of Object, Subject, and Context on Aesthetic Evaluation through Computational Aesthetics and Neuroaesthetics. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202407.2203.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Lin, F., Yan Li and Wu Song. 2024 "Exploring the Influence of Object, Subject, and Context on Aesthetic Evaluation through Computational Aesthetics and Neuroaesthetics" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202407.2203.v1
Abstract
Background: In recent years, computational aesthetics and neuroaesthetics have provided novel insights into understanding beauty. Building upon the findings of traditional aesthetics, this study aims to combine these two research methods to explore an interdisciplinary approach to studying aesthetics; Method: Abstract artworks were used as experimental materials. Based on traditional aesthetics and in combination, features of composition, tone, and texture were selected. Computational aesthetic methods were then employed to correspond these features to physical quantities: blank space, gray histogram, GLCM, LBP, and Gabor filters. An EEG experiment was carried out, in which participants conducted aesthetic evaluations of the experimental materials in different contexts (genuine, fake), and their EEG data was recorded to analyze the impact of various feature classes in the aesthetic evaluation process. Finally, a SVM was utilized to model the feature data, EEG data, context data, and subjective aesthetic evaluation data; Result: Behavioral data revealed that higher aesthetic ratings in the genuine context. EEG data indicated that genuine contexts elicited more negative deflections in the prefrontal lobes between 200-1000ms. Class II compositions demonstrated more positive deflections in the parietal lobes at 50-120ms, while Class I tones evoked more positive amplitudes in the occipital lobes at 200-300ms. Gabor features showed significant variations in the parieto-occipital area at an early stage. Class II LBP elicited a prefrontal negative wave with a larger amplitude. The results of the SVM models indicated that the model incorporating aesthetic subject and context data (ACC=0.76866) outperforms the model using only parameters of the aesthetic object (ACC=0.68657); Conclusion: A positive context tends to provide participants with a more positive aesthetic experience, but abstract artworks may not respond to this positivity. During aesthetic evaluation, the ERP data activated by different features show a trend from global to local. The SVM model based on multimodal data fusion effectively predicts aesthetics, further demonstrating the feasibility of the combined research approach of computational aesthetics and neuroaesthetics.
Keywords
Aesthetics; Computational Aesthetics; Neuroaesthetics; EEG; ERP; Support Vector Machine
Subject
Arts and Humanities, Art
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
