Human-AI Co-Creation

A reframed node: AI has medium-specific affordances, but the PhD claim is stronger than “AI is a medium.”

A public synthesis note for distinguishing augmentation, collaboration, co-authorship, and co-audience claims.

A public-safe reflection on the shift from using ARIA as an assistant toward treating the collaboration as part of the PhD fieldsite.

The apparatus node for the seed: the Hong/ARIA relationship shapes the capture, memory, evidence, and interface systems that record it.

A publishing protocol for showing evidence structure while excluding private transcripts, names, and raw source material.

A method note that frames the first design cycle as making, reflecting, testing, and revising the research claim.

The accepted seed revision that turns the Fable review report into implementation decisions for the PhD website.

A privacy pattern approved in Chart 02: show that evidence exists, label why it is redacted, and avoid raw private exposure.

A placeholder node for Hong's stronger claim that AI is an agent in a networked paradigm of complexism, not merely a medium.

A slim theory node grounding the seed's process-social-ontology claim without turning the public site into a glossary swamp.

A speculative note asking whether AI can operate as a responsive audience within the making process.

A mechanics note for alternating authorship, interruption, correction, and shared constraint.

A synthesis note about how public encounters help stabilize the social meaning of human-AI co-creation.

A synthesis note that maps roles, media, methods, evidence, and public stabilization into one working framework.

A seed note for recurring method patterns: negotiate, make visible, test publicly, redact, and reframe.

A readable map from supervisor/examiner questions to public objects, lenses, and evidence types.