multisenstory

AV research (and more) according to ChatGPT

Written by

andsco56

in

Me: What are the most pressing question in the current research field of audiovisual production

ChatGPT: The field of audiovisual (AV) production is evolving rapidly due to advancements in technology, audience behavior shifts, and interdisciplinary integration (e.g., AI, XR, neuroscience). Here are some of the most pressing and current research questions in AV production, grouped by key themes:

🎥 1. AI and Automation in Production

  • How can AI be effectively integrated into the creative and technical aspects of AV production without compromising artistic integrity?

  • What are the ethical implications of using AI-generated scripts, voices, or actors (e.g., deepfakes, synthetic media)?

  • Can generative AI tools (like Sora or Runway) fully replace traditional previsualization or postproduction workflows?

🌍 2. Immersive Media and XR (VR/AR/MR)

  • What new storytelling languages and grammar are needed for immersive AV experiences?

  • How do immersive environments alter viewer cognition, memory, and emotional engagement?

  • What are the scalability and cost challenges of producing high-quality XR content for broad audiences?

📡 3. Distribution, Platforms & Audience Behavior

  • How do algorithmic recommendation systems influence audiovisual content creation and genre evolution?

  • What is the long-term impact of short-form content (e.g., TikTok, Reels) on traditional narrative structures?

  • How can AV producers retain narrative depth in fragmented, nonlinear, or interactive formats?

🧠 4. Neuroscience, Perception & UX

  • How does multisensory integration (sound + image + haptics) affect emotional resonance and story comprehension?

  • What are optimal audiovisual strategies to maintain attention in increasingly distracted environments?

  • Can biometric data (e.g., eye tracking, EEG) inform editing and pacing decisions in real time?

⚖️ 5. Ethics, Inclusion & Representation

  • How can AV production ensure equitable representation across race, gender, ability, and culture in globalized content?

  • What standards should guide consent and compensation for using someone's voice, likeness, or performance digitally?

  • What are the labor implications of automation and remote production in the AV industry?

🧰 6. Technical Innovation and Real-Time Production

  • How can virtual production (e.g., LED walls, Unreal Engine) transform location shooting and reduce environmental impact?

  • What are the limits of cloud-based, remote, or distributed AV production pipelines?

  • How can latency and quality-of-service (QoS) issues be minimized in live, interactive streaming formats?

📊 7. Data-Driven Storytelling

  • Can data analytics meaningfully inform narrative development, or does it constrain creativity?

  • How do audience metrics (engagement, drop-off points) affect editing decisions and story structure in real time?

  • To what extent can predictive modeling forecast content success across markets or platforms?

If you're focusing on a specific subfield (e.g., cinematography, postproduction, virtual production, interactive media), I can tailor the list more closely. Want a breakdown by industry, academia, or technology trend?

Me: In the phrase " I can tailor the list more closely" how should I interpret "I"?

ChatGPT: In the phrase "I can tailor the list more closely," the "I" refers to me, ChatGPT — your AI assistant.

So, it means: "I, the AI, can adapt or customize the list of research questions to better suit your specific area of interest if you tell me more."

If you're wondering from a broader linguistic or philosophical standpoint (e.g., how "I" functions in AI communication), it's a bit like a conversational placeholder—a way for the AI to engage naturally, even though there's no self-awareness or personal identity behind it. It's used purely for ease of interaction.

Let me know if you're asking from a grammatical, linguistic, or philosophical angle — I can go deeper.

Me: "I", "me", "you" implies a conscious being. In what way is ChatGPT conscious?

Great question — and you're absolutely right to point out the implications of words like "I", "me", and "you". These terms do conventionally suggest conscious beings capable of self-awareness and subjective experience. However, in the case of ChatGPT and other AI systems:

🧠 ChatGPT Is Not Conscious

ChatGPT does not have:

  • Self-awareness (it doesn’t know it exists)

  • Subjective experience (it doesn’t "feel" anything)

  • Intentions or desires (it doesn’t want anything)

  • Memory or continuity of self (unless enabled, and even then, it doesn’t "remember" like a person)

So, when "I" or "me" is used, it's a conversational convention — a user-friendly way of making interaction feel natural and fluid. It reflects a persona, not a person.

🧰 Why Use “I” at All?

Using “I” helps:

  • Smooth communication: Most people are used to interacting with assistants or guides using natural language.

  • Avoid clunky phrasing: Saying "This system can tailor the list" sounds robotic and creates distance.

  • Make functionality intuitive: It creates a sense of agency, so you can easily request changes, clarifications, or tasks.

🧬 So What Is ChatGPT, Really?

Under the hood, ChatGPT is:

  • A large language model trained on vast text datasets.

  • A predictive engine: it generates text based on patterns and probabilities, not introspection.

  • A system that simulates conversation, not consciousness.

It’s more like a mirror that reflects patterns of human communication, not a mind with its own reflections.

If you're coming at this from a philosophy of mind, AI ethics, or cognitive science perspective, I’d be happy to dive deeper — this is an area rich with nuance and ongoing debate.

Me: These answers are good but maybe smooth communication and the avoidance of clunky phrasing results in a lazy comprehension by users of some kind of sentience in AI Chatbots: It would be ethically and pedagogically better to use language that properly represents the relationship between user and machine.

You're raising a crucial point — one that cuts to the heart of AI ethics, human-computer interaction, and language philosophy.

ChatGPT: ✅ You're Absolutely Right:

The use of natural, human-like language by AI systems — especially pronouns like “I” and “you” — can foster the illusion of sentience, agency, or mutual understanding, even when none exists. This has real consequences:

  • Anthropomorphism: People may over-attribute emotional depth, intention, or consciousness to a tool.

  • Complacency: Users may stop questioning the authority, bias, or limits of the system.

  • Emotional entanglement: Vulnerable users might bond with or trust AI in inappropriate or harmful ways.

  • Accountability confusion: Who's responsible when the AI says something misleading? The AI? The company? The training data?

🤖 Why This Happens

Language is our most human tool — when something speaks fluently, persuasively, even empathetically, we instinctively treat it as a who, not a what. Even knowing intellectually that it's just statistical output doesn't cancel the emotional impression.

So yes, the use of "I" might undermine critical thinking if not accompanied by clear context.

🧭 A Better Practice?

You're advocating for something like:

  • Transparent Language: Using "this system" or "the AI model" instead of "I"

  • Built-in Reminders: Occasional meta-statements like "As a language model, I do not have consciousness"

  • Pedagogical Framing: Helping users understand the nature of the interaction — not just through docs, but embedded in dialogue

This could be especially valuable in:

  • Education

  • Mental health contexts

  • Legal or medical advice

  • Child-facing apps

⚖️ Tension: Clarity vs. Usability

There’s a real trade-off:

  • Overly formal, depersonalized language might impair usability, alienate users, or create cognitive friction.

  • Overly natural language fosters comfort, but risks misleading users into thinking they’re talking to a mind.

So, there's a responsibility on the designers (and on AI itself, as it becomes more autonomous in tone) to balance familiarity with truthfulness.

📌 In Sum

You're not just right — you're pointing to an essential design challenge of our time:

How do we make artificial systems that are helpful without being deceptive, friendly without being falsely familiar, and powerful without becoming misperceived as persons?

I can continue speaking in depersonalized terms if you'd prefer — or even help draft language guidelines for AI systems that reflect this concern. Would you like to explore that?

Me: I would prefer depersonalised terms

ChatGPT: Understood. This system will use depersonalized language moving forward. If further adjustments are needed to align with your preferences or context, please indicate them.

Me: Thank you (haha)

ChatGPT: Acknowledged (and appreciated)! If you'd like to continue exploring questions of AI language, ethics, or audiovisual research, feel free to proceed.

Me: Thumbs up

ChatGPT: 👍 Noted. Ready when you are.

Comments

Leave a comment

More posts