How hidden information in artwork may trigger attractivness of art

I found a very interesting posting about art in arstechnica.com roundup of cool science stories:

Taste in art is highly subjective, and understanding why some works resonate with the public more than others has long fascinated researchers. Mathematicians think they have identified a hidden “golden rule” of abstract art that might account for why we gravitate toward a Jackson Pollock while lesser works leave us cold

Author Summary in the referenced paper PLOS Computational Biology. Art’s hidden topology: A window into human perception states following:

For decades, scientists have tried to understand why certain works of art move us more than others. Yet, directly connecting what is in an image to how it makes us feel has proven elusive. Since shapes and visual patterns play such a central role in both art and how we see the world, we explored a new angle: using advanced mathematical tools from topology to reveal hidden structures in images. ... We also reveal that artists appear to be following a type of ‘golden rule’ when it comes to framing their compositions using shapes.

When we look at my abstract definition of the term art first published in 2002 it comes clear, why hidden layers or - let say - additional visual and/or sensual information in pieces of art may trigger human perception as art or not.

I introduced the definition of art as follows:

An art object is an object that within a limited period of time (where the opinion of the perceiving person does not change, e.g., due to a change in the object's context) induces various associations within the perceiving person that go beyond the simple understanding of the type of object, its purpose and use.

Art is the process or activity of the creation of art objects.

Very often it is not the obvious information in the first place, that let us perceive a piece or object as an object of art. It's almost always the hidden, additional sensual information, the additional context and/or the metadata associated with an art object, that distinguishes it from an ordinary object.

When we look at an simple ordinary black square on a white background nothing makes us think about it as art.

But when we look at the "Black Square" from Kazimir Maletich in a museum or read about it in a book or paper, a lot of this hidden, additional sensual information and the additional context and metadata is present, induces various associations within the perceiving person that go beyond the simple understanding of the type of object, its purpose and use.

For me it sounds logically, that the two following things rise the probability to induce various associations within the perceiving person that go beyond the simple understanding of the type of object, its purpose and use:

1. more layers of sensual information should simply statistically result in more chances for associations, that go behind the ordinary understanding of an objects purpose

2. and often only the combination of different information streams and/or sensual information layers will result in complex enough context, which is needed for perceiving an object as an object of art.

Final discussion:
How could the newly published research and the reasoning above affect the human way of perceiving art?

• Is it possible for a newly trained AI system to read this research and this posting and to learn, how to make objects of art, which also are perceived as objects of art by humans? - YES, of course, at least in theory, at least for a time.
• Would it affect my abstract definition of the term art? - NO, because the definition is adaptive, because it has humans in mind first and humans can always adjust their viewing.
• Would people be able to distinguish human created peaces of art from AI generated in the near future? - Probably YES because of the adjustable human viewing, probably NO because the AI can became in parts human like. We will see 😉
• Would we be of the same kind of intelligence with AI, when we will share really the same understanding of art and the same way of perceiving it? - ... 🍀