Mathematicians Find 0.4 Asymmetry Rule in Abstract Art, Separating Human Works From AI
Updated
Updated · Scientific American · May 14
Mathematicians Find 0.4 Asymmetry Rule in Abstract Art, Separating Human Works From AI
4 articles · Updated · Scientific American · May 14
A 0.4 asymmetry ratio emerged across abstract works by Lidia Kot, Mark Rothko, Wassily Kandinsky, Kazimir Malevich, Jackson Pollock and Maria Jarema, suggesting human artists place shapes near canvas edges in a consistent way.
Using persistent homology, the researchers converted color layers into topological 'barcodes' and showed that human abstract art systematically breaks Alexander duality, while AI-generated images matching Kot's color intensity did not.
In tests with 58 participants, human art won higher lab ratings and held viewers' gaze longer on screens, but in a gallery both human and AI images drew similar ratings and AI images held attention about twice as long.
The team said the setting likely changes perception because gallery lighting and movement can make color-gradient shapes stand out differently than static images on a computer, pointing to context as a key limit on AI-versus-human comparisons.
Published in PLOS Computational Biology, the study offers a mathematical candidate for why abstract art can feel compelling and opens the question of whether non-Western art follows the same hidden pattern.
If AI learns art's 'golden rule,' can it create works that truly move us?
Is this secret formula for beauty unique to abstract art, or does it hide in all forms of creation?