Abstract
Recent developments in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) have enabled new paradigms of machine processing, shifting from data-driven, discriminative AI tasks toward sophisticated, creative tasks through generative AI. Leveraging deep generative models, generative AI is capable of producing novel and realistic content across a broad spectrum (e.g., texts, images, or programming code) for various domains based on basic user prompts. In this article, we offer a comprehensive overview of the fundamentals of generative AI with its underpinning concepts and prospects. We provide a conceptual introduction to relevant terms and techniques, outline the inherent properties that constitute generative AI, and elaborate on the potentials and challenges. We underline the necessity for researchers and practitioners to comprehend the distinctive characteristics of generative artificial intelligence in order to harness its potential while mitigating its risks and to contribute to a principal understanding.
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
“A groundbreaking fusion of data-driven creativity and artificial intelligence, poised to redefine the boundaries of innovation and transform the future of digital landscapes.”
-ChatGPT on GPT-4, Mar 23 Version, on Generative AI
In an era where applications like ChatGPT set records for the fastest-growing user base by demonstrating unprecedented domain-independent expertise (Hu, 2023), the concept of “Generative Artificial Intelligence” (GAI) emerges as a disruptor in the digital landscape (Dwivedi et al., 2023; Teubner et al., 2023; Wessel et al., 2023). With capabilities to generate high-quality, contextually relevant content almost indistinguishable from human-created work, discussions arise on whether this new technology even holds early signs of artificial general intelligence (Bubeck et al., 2023; The Washington Post, 2022). Regardless of discussions on AI’s sentiency, the latest advancements in machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) have extended traditional, data-driven AI tasks such as predictions, classifications, or recommendations toward the generation of unique, realistic, and creative content. Prevalent collaborations between humans and intelligent systems in businesses and private life have been shaped by the adoption of AI in various ways, especially in the field of process optimization and decision-making (Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2016; Burström et al., 2021; Moussawi et al., 2021). GAI addresses this development by providing novel augmentation and automation prospects in form of innovative services and business models (Huang & Grady, 2022; Mondal et al., 2023), e.g., by assisting customer support employees with suggestions of appropriate conversation responses (Brynjolfsson et al., 2023). The fast-changing and continuously evolving landscape of GAI calls for an extensive conceptualization of the properties and capabilities to fathom the phenomenon (Dwivedi et al., 2023; Strobel et al., 2024).
While GAI research and development is continuing to invest toward better, faster, and more capable models (e.g., Microsoft, 2023), studies on the fundamental principles, applications, and socio-economic impact remain largely unexplored in the academic discourse (Strobel et al., 2024; Susarla et al., 2023; Wessel et al., 2023). GAI provides innovation opportunities for various domains (e.g., networked businesses and digital platforms) but also comes with challenges (e.g., transparency, biases, and misuse) that need to be addressed for successful implementations (Houde et al., 2020; Schramowski et al., 2022; van Slyke et al., 2023). However, an examination of the key concepts is yet to be conducted, leaving a clear image and understanding of generative AI undefined. To overcome that shortcoming, this article provides an introduction to the fundamentals of generative AI, with its concepts, applications, and challenges. To do so, we exploratively synthesize recent literature on the technical foundation leading toward generative AI in combination with contemporary empirical examples of generative AI models and applications. Our aim is to conceptualize the key properties of GAI and differentiate them from ML and DL methods, to foster the understanding of the theoretical foundations of generative AI, and to guide further endeavors in examining as well as designing generative AI-based systems.
The remainder of the article is structured as follows: In the next section, we conceptualize generative AI and provide a distinction between related AI methods as well as outline the technological foundations. Afterward, we elaborate on the prospects and applications of the generative AI value chain and examine the impact of different generation modalities. Then, we address the potential challenges of adopting generative AI before concluding with a brief research outlook.
Conceptualization
The field of artificial intelligence (AI) has taken a prominent place in research and practice across various disciplines for the past decades. Especially in information systems (IS) research, the socio-technical impact of AI as a phenomenon is at the core of investigation (Ågerfalk et al., 2022; Berente et al., 2021). These technologies have transformed the way we interact with data and make decisions, leading to uncharted ways in society as well as economy (Fügener et al., 2021; J. Li et al., 2021; van den Broek et al., 2021). However, as we venture into the new era of generative AI, it becomes increasingly crucial to understand the core concepts and distinctions within GAI as a rapidly evolving technology. To differentiate GAI from other AI concepts and provide a fundamental conceptualization, we will present a brief overview of AI and its subfields, machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), in the next section (Fig. 1). Afterward, we continue to elaborate on how DL has driven the development of deep generative models to enable distinct GAI characteristics and capabilities, ultimately leading to an even broader array of AI applications and opportunities for various fields.
From artificial intelligence to deep learning
Artificial intelligence is considered an umbrella term, spanning over different computational algorithms capable of performing tasks that typically require human intelligence, such as understanding natural language, recognizing patterns, making decisions, and learning from experience (Castelvecchi, 2016; Winston, 1993). Early AI systems, such as expert systems and knowledge bases, were rule based and aimed at supporting users and businesses in decision-making (Harmon, 1985; Patterson, 1990). Machine learning as a subfield of AI deals with the development of algorithms capable to autonomously solve tasks through exposure to data without being explicitly programmed—i.e., learning (Brynjolfsson & Mitchell, 2017). In the realm of ML, there are several types of learning approaches based on the nature of the data and the desired outcome. Supervised learning is a common approach, e.g., for applications in commercial contexts, as algorithms are trained on labeled datasets to classify or forecast (business) data (Janiesch et al., 2021). The algorithm learns to map inputs to outputs and, thus, is capable of making predictions on new, unseen data. Moreover, unsupervised learning (i.e., discovering hidden structures or patterns within unlabeled data) and reinforcement learning (i.e., learning optimal decision-making by interacting with an environment and maximizing cumulative rewards over time through trial and error) are further learning strategies in ML (Kühl et al., 2022). What ML algorithms share in common are their discriminative properties, i.e., the goal of processing data to conduct classification, regression, or cluster and determine decision boundaries. Exemplary algorithms include decision trees, k-nearest neighbors, or support vector machines (Ray, 2019). Deep learning is a more advanced subset of ML and leverages artificial neural networks to model complex data representations and automatically detect correlations and patterns in large datasets (Janiesch et al., 2021; Samtani et al., 2023). Neural networks are computational models inspired by the structure and function of the human brain, consisting of interconnected layers of artificial neurons (Goodfellow et al., 2016). In DL, neural networks comprise of multiple hidden layers in a nested architecture to learn hierarchical feature representations from the data, leading to improved performance on various tasks. Thus, DL is capable of processing high-dimensional data in various domains, ranging from one-dimensional data like signals and texts to multidimensional data such as images, video, or audio (LeCun et al., 2015). These advances have enabled a plethora of use cases across different domains, from societal good, such as improving healthcare and environmental sustainability (Piccialli et al., 2021; Schoormann et al., 2023; Strobel et al., 2023), to electronic markets, where DL can optimize pricing, serve as recommendation systems, forecast demands, and detect fake consumer reviews (Ferreira et al., 2016; M. Li et al., 2022; Zhang et al., 2023b).
Toward generative AI
Fueled by advancements in DL techniques, deep generative models (DGMs) have emerged as a class of DL models to generate new content based on existing data, creating a variety of new possibilities for AI applications (Lehmann & Buschek, 2020; Tomczak, 2022). These models are trained to understand complex data distributions, which allows them to produce outputs that closely resemble real-world data. By leveraging statistics, the goal of DGM training is to learn high-dimensional probability distributions from a finite training dataset and create new, similar samples that resemble an approximation to the underlying class of training data (Ruthotto & Haber, 2021). While discriminative models focus on modeling the relationship between input features and output labels, generative models learn the inherent data structure and generation processes (Jebara, 2004). Generative models have been around for decades, with, for example, hidden Markov models or Bayesian networks aiming to model statistical problems involving time series or sequences (Gm et al., 2020). Nonetheless, DGMs relying on neural networks have paved the way for significantly higher-quality generated content in recent advancements in the field of so-called generative AI. Thus, the goals of DGMs differ from traditional discriminative AI models (e.g., in ML) because the focus lies on the probabilistic generation of new data instead of determining extant data’s decision boundaries (e.g., classification, regression, or clustering) (Tomczak, 2022; Weisz et al., 2023). In the following, we will focus on DGMs as the underpinning of GAI and give an overview of four core DGMs that have shaped the evolution of GAI in Table 1.
To leverage DGMs in GAI applications, they can be trained to generate new data and enable a variety of use cases (we refer to DGMs implemented in GAI applications as GAI models). Training a GAI model can be different than a discriminative AI model due to semi-supervised learning, a combination of learning techniques leveraging a small amount of labeled data (i.e., supervised) followed by extensive unlabeled data (i.e., unsupervised) (Kingma et al., 2014). For instance, recent GAI models apply techniques like supervised fine-tuning (SFT), reward models, and reinforcement learning via proximal policy optimization (PPO) to achieve an alignment of the model with the developers’ intentions and values (OpenAI, 2023; Ouyang et al., 2022). This unique approach allows the training of very large datasets required for GAI models without the need for difficult complete labeling.
The application system functions as an interface for the user to interact with a GAI model. Prompting is an interaction technique and unique GAI property that enables end users using natural language to engage with and instruct GAI application (e.g., LLMs) to create desired output such as text, images, or other types (Dang et al., 2022; Liu & Chilton, 2022). Depending on the application, prompts vary in their modality and directly influence the mode of operation. For instance, text-to-image applications use textual prompts describing the visuals of the desired image, while image-to-image applications rely on an input image to steer the generation process.
By design, the outputs of generative AI models are probabilistic and not replicable compared to the deterministic outcomes of discriminative AI—i.e., variance (Weisz et al., 2023). For one exact input prompt, a GAI application will generate varying outputs each time it is prompted, but the results remain valid and prompt fulfilling. On the other hand, different input prompts can lead to the same goal. Hence, formulating a meaningful prompt that leads to the desired outcome is based on trial-and-error process, e.g., by rephrasing textual prompts with the same keywords. The field of prompt engineering deals with systematically constructing prompts to improve the generated outputs (Liu & Chilton, 2022).
Based on the heuristic approach of prompt engineering and the inherent variance in the generated content, GAI users continuously and iteratively specify their desired tasks as input prompts to generate outputs until their task is solved. The primary goal of generating new, probabilistically produced data (i.e., content) with varying outputs based on the same input distinguishes generative AI from discriminative AI, which pursues boundary determination by analyzing data and making a decision (see Fig. 2). Hence, a primary difference lies in the role of data, as GAI leverages very large datasets in its generative model to produce diverse content, while discriminative AI processes user data based on a (pre-trained) algorithm.
Prospects and applications of generative AI
Complementing discriminative AI, GAI has recently emerged as a novel tool with a wide range of new possibilities impacting multiple sectors, from education and healthcare (Brand et al., 2023; Burger et al., 2023; Cooper, 2023) to networked businesses (Dwivedi et al., 2023; Wessel et al., 2023). These emerging applications inherit the generativity and variance properties of GAI and, therefore, are capable of producing unique and creative content, going beyond mere assistance. Hence, GAI becomes increasingly multidisciplinary, enabling disruptive innovations and automating even traditionally creative tasks, e.g., by generating customized contextual texts or images, facilitating new opportunities for businesses to innovate and differentiate themselves in the competitive economic landscape (Dwivedi et al., 2021; Lund et al., 2023; Pavlik, 2023).
Generative AI finds its utility across various modalities, including the generation of text, image, video, code, sound, and other produced content, such as molecules or 3D renderings (see Table 2). For example, GAI applications aim to create tailored marketing content, generate realistic (product) images or videos, and even assist in software development by generating code (Bakpayev et al., 2022; Elasri et al., 2022; Kowalczyk et al., 2023). Several modalities can serve as the input for GAI models. Distinguishing the different modality types, unimodal models generate the same output type as their input type, e.g., text-to-text or image-to-image generation, whereas multi-modal models combine different input and output types, for instance, in a text-to-image or code-to-text scenario. Different multi-modal models can subsume as x-to-modality models (e.g., x-to-text or x-to-image).
Examining the architecture of GAI-based systems, three major component layers can be identified: model layer, connection layer, and application layer (see Fig. 3). These parts embed generative AI in its information systems context and draw a boundary from external entities that can be interacted with its environment (e.g., users, organizations) and data (i.e., public and enterprise data) (Samtani et al., 2023). Inside the boundaries of GAI-based systems, the prevalent characteristics of generativity and variance persist and affect all layers and processes. The model layer comprises the pre-trained, deployable GAI artifact (i.e., a DGM) for application systems. Depending on the training dataset, general purpose models aim at solving a wide range of tasks in multiple domains (e.g., GPT-4), whereas customized models are designed for domain-specific tasks and were, therefore, trained on highly specific data (e.g., CodeBERT).
Integrating these models into a system environment that affects people and organizations leads to the application layer of generative AI. By providing a proper context for the artifact, users are able to leverage the capabilities of GAI models for a specific application use case. Observing the trend of various recently emerging GAI applications building on top of existing models, it becomes apparent to further distinguish between end-to-end applications that are based on undisclosed, proprietary models (e.g., Midjourney) and open applications that are built around open-source models or leverage publicly accessible pre-trained models (e.g., Jasper and Elicit using OpenAI’s GPT-3 (Elicit, 2022; Jasper, 2022)). Huang and Grady (2022) describe GAI applications as a “UI layer and ‘little brain’ [i.e., application layer] that sits on top of the ‘big brain’ that is the large general-purpose models [i.e., model layer].” This perspective emphasizes that new business models and applications can be developed without the need to train large GAI models from scratch by leveraging publicly available application programming interfaces (API) or AI-as-a-service platforms (Burström et al., 2021; Janiesch et al., 2021; Lins et al., 2021). Indeed, the accessibility and availability of pre-trained GAI models foster value co-creation and can be leveraged via a connection layer (e.g., Hugging Face). Fully integrated GAI systems, on the other hand, employ their own, custom-trained proprietary models. In many cases, end-to-end GAI applications represent fully integrated systems (e.g., GitHub Copilot), while open GAI applications leverage external models via APIs (e.g., Stable Diffusion). Overall, GAI models may aim for general purposes or customized tasks regardless their connection or application characteristics (see Fig. 3). To enrich GAI-based systems with additional data beyond their training state and the GAI boundary, external data sources can be connected. Enterprise data (e.g., internal documents, enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, knowledge bases) and public data (e.g., the Internet, libraries, social media) may serve as complementary, contextual data that GAI applications can further draw upon for more relevant and personalized results.
Employing GAI in enterprises can extend the level of assistance for workers and open up opportunities for augmentation and automation of the job, leading to new forms of collaborations between humans and machines (Einola & Khoreva, 2023). Furthermore, GAI transforms the way businesses operate in their daily tasks, innovate, and interact with their customers (Brynjolfsson et al., 2023; Mondal et al., 2023). Thus, the prospects of value co-creation come in hand with potential changes in human work roles, requiring workforces in various domains to adapt their tasks as a diverse set of tasks could be impacted by generative AI (Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2016; Eloundou et al., 2023). The ongoing diffusion of AI into businesses gets accelerated by GAI applications, resulting in a possible replacement of human jobs on the one hand but also the creation of new jobs (e.g., for prompt engineers or with new business models) on the other hand (Einola & Khoreva, 2023). Hence, the effect on the labor market by the disruption needs to be discussed, and businesses should seek to understand and embrace the potential of generative AI (Eloundou et al., 2023; Willcocks, 2020).
Challenges for generative AI-based systems
While generative AI holds transformative potential for individuals, organizations, and society due to its vast possible application space, the technology also inherits various challenges that parallel those of traditional ML and DL systems. The domain of electronic markets is a prime example that moved into the center of transformation due to its latest focus on data-driven efforts (Selz, 2020). Outlining and emphasizing these challenges relevant for research and practice helps to raise awareness of the constraints as well as supports future efforts in developing, implementing, and improving GAI-based systems.
Bias
Because of GAI’s data-driven nature, data quality plays an essential role in how GAI-based systems perform and, thus, how feasible their adoption for real-world scenarios in business contexts is. Similar to their traditional discriminative AI relatives, GAI models are prone to bias causing biased decisions, disadvantages, and discriminations (Ferrara, 2023; Schramowski et al., 2022). Biases manifest in different ways and evolve primarily during two development phases of an AI-based system: training and inference.
Data bias gets injected during the model’s training phase and leads to biased results because of faulty datasets. Factors such as non-representative, imbalanced sampling, incorrect labeling, and mismeasured features during the selection and processing of datasets hinder an unbiased training of the GAI model, ultimately leading to biased algorithmic outcomes (Mehrabi et al., 2022; Ntoutsi et al., 2020). The development of large-scale training datasets is especially important for GAI models and often involves strategies of scraping public-available data on the Internet (Schuhmann et al., 2022). This approach is usually performed unsupervised and autonomously, which complicates the dataset’s quality assurance because of its large quantity of unstructured data. Since GAI models are often trained to be general-purpose and multi-modal, they require and rely even more on such training datasets. Hence, moderating potential data bias is crucial for applications in business contexts like electronic markets due to the closeness to customers (e.g., points of contact via advertisements, social media, or customer support). Furthermore, social bias as a form of data bias can cause distorted views in generated texts or images and should be considered as well as mitigated (Baeza-Yates, 2018).
Algorithmic bias is introduced during the inference phase, independent from the model’s training dataset (Mehrabi et al., 2022). In this case, the models have been trained on diverse, unbiased input data, and either the model’s algorithm or the application around it introduces biases affecting users. Overfitting is a typical phenomenon that originates from the chosen learning strategies or optimization functions and causes biased algorithmic outcomes (Danks & London, 2017; Hooker, 2021). In this case, GAI models might introduce biases not reflected in the data because they fail to learn the data distribution correctly. Likewise, the presentation of and the user interaction with GAI-based systems can cause biases, such as when only selected generated content (e.g., one image out of multiple variants) is shown to the user (Baeza-Yates, 2018).
Thus, generative AI applications exerting biased results influence users’ opinions and judgement and require control mechanisms (Jakesch et al., 2023a). Strategies should be developed to prevent, detect, and mitigate biases in order to safeguard users and ensure the service quality and reputations of a company. One approach to steer the quality of outputs from GAI models is via reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) (Christiano et al., 2017; Griffith et al., 2013). The technique involves feedback from human evaluators to guide the model’s training process, with evaluators assessing and comparing the quality of generated outputs. This approach enables generative models to refine their output generation process, aiming for better alignment with human expectations and objectives. Nevertheless, determining what content is “good” or “right” remains a difficult and bias-prone task (Teubner et al., 2023).
Transparency
The need for explainability arises with the unpredictability of the inherent generative nature of GAI models and the overall functionality of ML models as “black boxes” (Janiesch et al., 2021; Meske et al., 2022). While the impact of GAI may not reach as far as discriminative AI use cases (e.g., decision-making or dynamic pricing), research on explainable generative AI is still in its infancy, and the justification for more transparency is without a doubt (Brasse et al., 2023; Sun et al., 2022). Governments are already discussing the enforcement of AI regulations that include explainable AI to protect the general society and mitigate risks tied to the technology (Hamon et al., 2020). Interpretability (i.e., the human capability to understand the AI system’s processes and decisions) is key, especially for GAI-based systems employed in large-scale information systems that affect large user groups, such as in networked businesses and digital platforms. In these cases, generated content has the potential to impact individuals and society, for instance, when generative AI serves as an advisor based on user questions and provides unsophisticated answers that are difficult to verify. Inaccuracy in generated product recommendations can have varying consequences depending on the situation, ranging from selecting the wrong product to taking the wrong medication. Early studies have shown how the chatbot ChatGPT performed surprisingly well in medical exams, suggesting inherent knowledge similar to medical students (Bhayana et al., 2023; Gilson et al., 2023). However, the seemingly omniscient capabilities may be restricted because, in the case of the medical exams, the GAI model might have been trained on the exam data and can reproduce its answers but is not able to comprehend the contextual state of an individual relevant for medical assessment. Therefore, understanding how the system performs sensemaking and generates its data helps users and businesses to achieve their goals responsibly and effectively, satisfying stakeholders’ needs and expectations (Miller, 2019; Sun et al., 2022). Particularly for autonomous systems in critical business applications that interact with human beings, supervision and explainability of the GAI-generated content remain vital to ensure reliable, safe, and trustworthy outputs (Brasse et al., 2023; Hamm et al., 2023).
Another angle of transparency concerns the debate between open-source and closed-source models. Legal issues revolving around copyright, licenses, and intellectual property make it difficult for individuals and enterprises to deploy GAI-based systems, especially when the large training data of closed-sourced GAI models is procured through Internet scraping (Jin et al., 2023; Smits & Borghuis, 2022). Research initiatives revolving around open-source datasets (e.g., Schuhmann et al., 2022) and open-source models (e.g., Stability.ai, 2023) aim at increasing the transparency on data provenance and highlight, for instance, the data sources as well as the presence of watermarks on images (Schuhmann et al., 2022). Although most system engineers will rely on pre-trained models and perform fine-tuning for their specific use case, open-source efforts are facilitating a legally safer route for businesses to deploy GAI models, ensuring legal compliance, and mitigating associated risks.
Hallucinations
Due to the probabilistic variance property of GAI, generative models are not immune to output errors, or so-called hallucinations, which manifest themselves in confidently generated results that seem plausible but are unreasonable with respect to the source of information (Ji et al., 2023; Susarla et al., 2023). The underlying causes of hallucinations are still being researched, with early findings suggesting that the training data that might contain contradictory or fictional content besides factual information (Dziri et al., 2022). This combination of varied inputs can lead to the generation of outputs that deviate from reality and introduce false information. As a result, the uncertainty of generation quality is further fueled by closed-source models that do not disclose any information on their training, making it crucial to carefully select appropriate datasets and models to mitigate the risk of hallucinations.
To illustrate the occurrence of hallucinations, studies have identified GAI-based image generators that facilitate anatomical inaccuracies in the generated images of humans (Choi et al., 2022; Hughes, 2023). These inaccuracies suggest that GAI models require further refinement and improvement before they can be reliably used for unsupervised production tasks (e.g., advertisement production, automated social media posts). Additionally, errors in simple arithmetic operations have also been observed (Bubeck et al., 2023), highlighting the limitations and potential shortcomings of current generative models in performing even basic computations accurately. Due to the seemingly realistic data produced by GAI models, the detection and evaluation of hallucinations are a challenging task. Current automatic evaluation includes statistical methods to measure discrepancies between ground-truth references and generated data and model-based metrics that leverage additional DL models to detect content inconsistencies (Ji et al., 2023). However, both approaches can be subjected to errors and are still inferior to cumbersome human evaluation. These instances emphasize the importance of appropriate hallucination mitigation methods, such as human supervision, to ensure the quality and accuracy of generated content.
Moving forward, addressing the issue of hallucinations in generative AI requires ongoing research and development efforts. Enhancing the transparency of training data and computation processes as well as promoting the adoption of open-source models can help mitigate the risk of generating misleading or flawed results. Furthermore, refining the underlying algorithms and incorporating robust error-checking mechanisms can contribute to the overall reliability and trustworthiness of GAI models (Zhou et al., 2023).
Misuse
The access to GAI-based content creation tools with realistic outputs does not only enable new creative opportunities for good (e.g., novel automation and innovation prospects across multiple domains for businesses and users), but can also be leveraged for malicious purposes to intentionally cause risk and harm to society (Weidinger et al., 2022). Deepfakes have become increasingly sophisticated over the past decade as a result of the low cost and ease of creating such media using x-to-image, x-to-video, and x-to-sound GAI models (Mirsky & Lee, 2022; Vasist & Krishnan, 2022). They are authentic media content designed to impersonate individuals, such as celebrities or politicians, and are created to entertain or manipulate the viewers. For example, deepfakes depicting Trump’s arrest have circulated on social media and in the news, causing misinformation due to their hyperrealistic, almost unrecognizable appearance (BBC, 2023). This is just one example of how generative AI carries potential for abuse and can be extended to other areas of daily life, such as fraudulent service offers, identity theft, or fake shops (Houde et al., 2020; Weidinger et al., 2022). The availability of GAI models provides starting points for new applications and business models for misuse and criminals, ultimately being leveraged to spread misinformation and influence the media and politics, or to defraud individuals and businesses (Hartmann et al., 2023; Kreps et al., 2022; Mirsky & Lee, 2022). Such issues, combined with low data quality and bias, provide a preview of potential social and ethical harms that may result in discrimination, exclusion, toxicity, and information hazards (Weidinger et al., 2022). This increases the urgency for disclosure and transparency of GAI models, along with the aforementioned calls for explainability (Brasse et al., 2023; Horneber & Laumer, 2023; Raj et al., 2023).
Generative AI researchers seek to develop measures for safer and more responsible use (van Slyke et al., 2023). RLHF and carefully crafted open-source datasets are first attempts at improvement, besides input filters restricting user prompts to harmless content. However, applications can still be tricked into bypassing filters and safeguards of GAI models, for instance, through prompt injections that insert malicious prompts to achieve misaligned outputs of generative AI applications (Perez & Ribeiro, 2022). The collaborative efforts between researchers, organizations, and regulators (e.g., by initiatives such as the European Union AI Act or US National AI Initiative) serve as promising initial steps toward opening pathways for future research to effectively address these issues, ensuring that AI-generated content is morally, ethically, and legally appropriate and cannot be misused (Hacker et al., 2023).
Societal impact
With its ability to produce novel and diverse content, generative AI has significant implications for society in several areas. Besides the aforementioned risks of misuse and misinformation, the environmental footprint of developing and operating any AI-based system is an emerging concern and gets amplified for GAI-based systems due to the demanding technical requirements for training and running large DGMs and their high implicit energy consumption (Schneider et al., 2023; Schoormann et al., 2023). Consequently, the public acceptance of AI on a societal but also individual level inevitably guides the future development and use of GAI. Individually, researchers have investigated how AI can be perceived as a threat by some users (Johnson & Verdicchio, 2017; Lysyakov & Viswanathan, 2022). For example, a fear of employees is losing their jobs due to AI’s automation potential (Mirbabaie et al., 2022). With GAI’s capabilities of producing high-quality, customized realistic content, the frontier toward machines taking over human tasks moves even closer. Hence, trust plays a pivotal role in the adoption of emerging technologies and comes with direct impact between users and application providers (Lukyanenko et al., 2022; Riedl, 2022; Wanner et al., 2022; Yang & Wibowo, 2022). The promotion of explainable and responsible AI becomes paramount once more (Meske et al., 2022), especially in a technological state where distinguishing between generated and real content by GAI models is becoming increasingly more challenging (Jakesch et al., 2023b; Lehmann & Buschek, 2020). Early studies on generative AI suggest that generated content is perceived as less trustworthy, resulting in aversion toward generated products (Longoni et al., 2022; Rix & Hess, 2023). Nonetheless, GAI applications offer a variety of value propositions that revolve around building a trusting relationship toward such systems (Tomitza et al., 2023). For instance, social chatbots like Replika aim to realistically mimic or replace humans, leading to feelings of attachment toward machines among users (Pentina et al., 2023), whereas assistive GAI applications intent to support their users in the best way possible (Burger et al., 2023; van Dun et al., 2023).
While generative AI promises significant advances and has the potential to revolutionize domains, such as marketing, arts and culture, or even electronic markets as a whole, by supporting, augmenting, and automating a wide range of operations and offering novel services, it also underlines the importance of fully understanding its inherent challenges and mitigating possible risks. The far-reaching implications of GAI, ranging from poor data quality and hallucinations to cases of societal misuse, require a proactive and sustained effort by researchers and practitioners to develop appropriate solutions ensuring the responsible and beneficial integration of generative AI technology into our digital society. In Table 3, we summarize the aforementioned challenges of GAI-based systems and suggest future research questions revolving around the GAI system, environment, and data perspective.
Conclusion
With this fundamentals article, we provide an introduction to generative artificial intelligence. Drawing on ML and DL as the underlying technologies, we conceptualized generative AI and differentiated it from traditional AI methods. We outlined the most common DGMs as the theoretical foundation and described the core principles of generativity and variance. Moreover, we discussed the potential applications, acknowledging the distinct generation modalities and layers along the value chain. The paradigm shift of AI applications from discriminative to generative is leading to unique use cases and promising opportunities in various domains, including those traditionally resistant to automation. Therefore, researchers and practitioners need to understand the inherent properties of generative AI to effectively leverage its potential while also mitigating associated risks. We also considered five core challenges by elaborating on bias, transparency, hallucinations, misuse, and societal impact.
Generative AI carries the potential to significantly impact various industries. Taking the different layers of the value chain into account, this progression could further lead to the creation of new platforms and services centered around whole GAI ecosystems. It remains to be seen how these forms of unprecedented artificial creativity and generativity will find a place in the industry and everyday life. Future research will need to address the challenges for safety and responsibility measures, especially when employed in highly regulated or autonomous scenarios. For example, ensuring technological transparency, increasing public trust in GAI, and developing process models for employing GAI-based systems can contribute to the body of knowledge on generative AI. We believe this article provides an entry point to this novel type of technology and guides other researcher in their efforts in examining generative AI. Closing with the initial quote by ChatGPT, generative AI indeed holds transformative the potential to redefine innovation boundaries of the digital landscapes.
References
Ågerfalk, P. J., Conboy, K., Crowston, K., Eriksson Lundström, J. S. Z., Jarvenpaa, S., Ram, S., & Mikalef, P. (2022). Artificial intelligence in information systems: State of the art and research roadmap. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 50(1), 420–438. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05017
Aggarwal, A., Mittal, M., & Battineni, G. (2021). Generative adversarial network: An overview of theory and applications. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 1(1), 100004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjimei.2020.100004
Agostinelli, A., Denk, T. I., Borsos, Z., Engel, J., Verzetti, M., Caillon, A., Huang, Q., Jansen, A., Roberts, A., Tagliasacchi, M., Sharifi, M., Zeghidour, N., & Frank, C. (2023). MusicLM: Generating Music From Text. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.11325
Ali, H., Murad, S., & Shah, Z. (2023). Spot the fake lungs: Generating synthetic medical images using neural diffusion models. In L. Longo & R. O’Reilly (Eds.), Communications in Computer and Information Science. Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science (Vol. 1662, pp. 32–39). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26438-2_3
Anantrasirichai, N., & Bull, D. (2022). Artificial intelligence in the creative industries: A review. Artificial Intelligence Review, 55(1), 589–656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-021-10039-7
Baeza-Yates, R. (2018). Bias on the web. Communications of the ACM, 61(6), 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209581
Bakpayev, M., Baek, T. H., van Esch, P., & Yoon, S. (2022). Programmatic creative: AI can think but it cannot feel. Australasian Marketing Journal, 30(1), 90–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2020.04.002
BBC. (2023). Fake Trump arrest photos: How to spot an AI-generated image. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65069316
Berente, N., Gu, B., Recker, J., & Santhanam, R. (2021). Special issue editor’s comments: Managing artificial intelligence. MIS Quarterly, 45(3), 1433–1450. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2021/16274
Bhayana, R., Krishna, S., & Bleakney, R. R. (2023). Performance of ChatGPT on a radiology board-style examination: Insights into current strengths and limitations. Radiology, 307(5), e230582. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.230582
Borsos, Z., Marinier, R., Vincent, D., Kharitonov, E., Pietquin, O., Sharifi, M., Teboul, O., Grangier, D., Tagliasacchi, M., & Zeghidour, N. (2022). AudioLM: a Language Modeling Approach to Audio Generation. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2209.03143
Brand, J., Israeli, A., & Ngwe, D. (2023). Using GPT for market research. Harvard Business School Marketing Unit Working Paper. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4395751
Brasse, J., Broder, H. R., Förster, M., Klier, M., & Sigler, I. (2023). Explainable artificial intelligence in information systems: A review of the status quo and future research directions. Electronic Markets, 33, 26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-023-00644-5
Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J. D., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., Agarwal, S., Herbert-Voss, A., Krueger, G., Henighan, T., Child, R., Ramesh, A., Ziegler, D., Wu, J., Winter, C., & Amodei, D. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. In H. Larochelle, M. Ranzato, R. Hadsell, M. F. Balcan, & H. Lin (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems 33 (pp. 1877–1901). Curran Associates Inc.
Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2016). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. W.W. Norton & Company.
Brynjolfsson, E., Li, D., & Raymond, L. (2023). Generative AI at Work. Cambridge MA. https://doi.org/10.3386/w31161
Brynjolfsson, E., & Mitchell, T. (2017). What can machine learning do? Workforce implications. Science, 358(6370), 1530–1534. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap8062
Bubeck, S., Chandrasekaran, V., Eldan, R., Gehrke, J., Horvitz, E., Kamar, E., Lee, P., Lee, Y. T., Li, Y., Lundberg, S., Nori, H., Palangi, H., Ribeiro, M. T., & Zhang, Y. (2023). Sparks of artificial general intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.12712
Burger, B., Kanbach, D. K., Kraus, S., Breier, M., & Corvello, V. (2023). On the use of AI-based tools like ChatGPT to support management research. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(7), 233–241. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-02-2023-0156
Burström, T., Parida, V., Lahti, T., & Wincent, J. (2021). AI-enabled business-model innovation and transformation in industrial ecosystems: A framework, model and outline for further research. Journal of Business Research, 127, 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.01.016
Castelvecchi, D. (2016). Can we open the black box of AI? Nature, 538(7623), 20–23. https://doi.org/10.1038/538020a
Choi, H., Chang, W., & Choi, J. (2022). Can we find neurons that cause unrealistic images in deep generative networks? In R. Dechter & L. de Raedt (Eds.), Proceedings of the thirty-first international joint conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 2888–2894). International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization. https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2022/400
Christiano, P. F., Leike, J., Brown, T., Martic, M., Legg, S., & Amodei, D. (2017). Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences. In I. Guyon, U. von Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, & R. Garnett (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (Vol. 30). Curran Associates, Inc.
Cooper, G. (2023). Examining science education in ChatGPT: An exploratory study of generative artificial intelligence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(3), 444–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10039-y
Dang, H., Mecke, L., Lehmann, F., Goller, S., & Buschek, D. (2022). How to prompt? Opportunities and challenges of zero- and few-shot learning for human-ai interaction in creative applications of generative models. In Generative AI and HCI Workshop: CHI 2022, New Orleans, LA. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2209.01390
Danks, D., & London, A. J. (2017). Algorithmic bias in autonomous systems. In F. Bacchus & C. Sierra (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-sixth international joint conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 4691–4697). International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization. https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2017/654
Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Ismagilova, E., Aarts, G., Coombs, C., Crick, T., Duan, Y., Dwivedi, R., Edwards, J., Eirug, A., Galanos, V., Ilavarasan, P. V., Janssen, M., Jones, P., Kar, A. K., Kizgin, H., Kronemann, B., Lal, B., Lucini, B., & Williams, M. D. (2021). Artificial intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 57, 101994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.08.002
Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., Albanna, H., Albashrawi, M. A., Al-Busaidi, A. S., Balakrishnan, J., Barlette, Y., Basu, S., Bose, I., Brooks, L., Buhalis, D., & Wright, R. (2023). “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
Dziri, N., Milton, S., Yu, M., Zaiane, O., & Reddy, S. (2022). On the origin of hallucinations in conversational models: Is it the datasets or the models? In M. Carpuat, M.-C. de Marneffe, & I. V. Meza Ruiz (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (pp. 5271–5285). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.naacl-main.387
Einola, K., & Khoreva, V. (2023). Best friend or broken tool? Exploring the co-existence of humans and artificial intelligence in the workplace ecosystem. Human Resource Management, 62(1), 117–135. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22147
Elasri, M., Elharrouss, O., Al-Maadeed, S., & Tairi, H. (2022). Image generation: A review. Neural Processing Letters, 54(5), 4609–4646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11063-022-10777-x
Elicit. (2022). Frequently asked questions: What is elicit? https://elicit.org/faq#what-is-elicit
Eloundou, T., Manning, S., Mishkin, P., & Rock, D. (2023). GPTs are GPTs: An early look at the labor market impact potential of large language models. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.10130
Esser, P., Chiu, J., Atighehchian, P., Granskog, J., & Germanidis, A. (2023). Structure and content-guided video synthesis with diffusion models. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.03011
Feng, Z., Guo, D., Tang, D., Duan, N., Feng, X., Gong, M., Shou, L., Qin, B., Liu, T., Jiang, D., & Zhou, M. (2020). CodeBERT: A pre-trained model for programming and natural languages. In T. Cohn, Y. He, & Y. Liu (Eds.), Findings of the association for computational linguistics: EMNLP 2020 (pp. 1536–1547). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1%2F2020.findings-emnlp.139
Ferrara, E. (2023). Should ChatGPT be biased? Challenges and risks of bias in large language models. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.03738
Ferreira, K. J., Lee, B. H. A., & Simchi-Levi, D. (2016). Analytics for an online retailer: Demand forecasting and price optimization. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 18(1), 69–88. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2015.0561
Fügener, A., Grahl, J., Gupta, A., & Ketter, W. (2021). Will humans-in-the-loop become borgs? Merits and pitfalls of working with AI. MIS Quarterly, 45(3), 1527–1556. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2021/16553
Gao, J., Shen, T., Wang, Z, Chen, W., Yin, K., Li, D, Litany, O., Gojcic, Z., & Fidler, S. (2022). GET3D: A generative model of high quality 3D textured shapes learned from images. In S. Koyejo, S. Mohamed, A. Agarwal, D. Belgrave, K. Cho, & A. Oh (Eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35. Curran Associates, Inc.
Gilson, A., Safranek, C. W., Huang, T., Socrates, V., Chi, L., Taylor, R. A., & Chartash, D. (2023). How does ChatGPT perform on the United States Medical Licensing Examination? The implications of large language models for medical education and knowledge assessment. JMIR Medical Education, 9, e45312. https://doi.org/10.2196/45312
Gm, H., Gourisaria, M. K., Pandey, M., & Rautaray, S. (2020). A comprehensive survey and analysis of generative models in machine learning. Computer Science Review, 38, 100285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosrev.2020.100285
Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., & Courville, A. (2016). Deep learning. The MIT Press.
Goodfellow, I., Pouget-Abadie, J., Mirza, M., Xu, B., Warde-Farley, D., Ozair, S., Courville, A., & Bengio, Y. (2020). Generative adversarial networks. Communications of the ACM, 63(11), 139–144. https://doi.org/10.1145/3422622
Griffith, S., Subramanian, K., Scholz, J., Isbell, C. L., & Thomaz, A. L. (2013). Policy shaping: Integrating Human feedback with reinforcement learning. In C. J. C. Burges, L. Bottou, Z. Ghahramani, & K. Q. Weinberger (Eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 26 (Vol. 26). Curran Associates, Inc.
Gui, J., Sun, Z., Wen, Y., Tao, D., & Ye, J. (2023). A review on generative adversarial networks: Algorithms, theory, and applications. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 35(4), 3313–3332. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2021.3130191
Guo, D., Ren, S., Lu, S., Feng, Z., Tang, D., Liu, S., Zhou, L., Duan, N., Svyatkovskiy, A., Fu, S., Tufano, M., Deng, S. K., Clement, C., Drain, D., Sundaresan, N., Yin, J., Jiang, D., & Zhou, M. (2021). GraphCodeBERT: Pre-training code representations with data flow. 9th International Conference on Learning Representations 2021 (ICLR), Virtual.
Haase, J., Djurica, D., & Mendling, J. (2023). The art of inspiring creativity: Exploring the unique impact of AI-generated images. AMCIS 2023 Proceedings.
Hacker, P., Engel, A., & Mauer, M. (2023). Regulating ChatGPT and other large generative AI models. 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 1112–1123). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3593013.3594067
Hamm, P., Klesel, M., Coberger, P., & Wittmann, H. F. (2023). Explanation matters: An experimental study on explainable AI. Electronic Markets, 33, 17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-023-00640-9
Hamon, R., Junklewitz, H., & Sanchez, I. (2020). Robustness and explainability of artificial intelligence: From technical to policy solutions. EUR: Vol. 30040. Publications Office of the European Union.
Harmon, P. (1985). Expert systems: Artificial intelligence in business. Wiley & Sons.
Hartmann, J., Schwenzow, J., & Witte, M. (2023). The political ideology of conversational AI: Converging evidence on ChatGPT's pro-environmental, left-libertarian orientation. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.01768
Ho, J., Jain, A., & Abbeel, P. (2020). Denoising diffusion probabilistic models. In H. Larochelle, M. Ranzato, R. Hadsell, M. F. Balcan, & H. Lin (Eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33 (pp. 6840–6851). Curran Associates Inc.
Hooker, S. (2021). Moving beyond “algorithmic bias is a data problem”. Patterns (New York, N.Y.), 2(4), 100241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2021.100241
Horneber, D., & Laumer, S. (2023). Algorithmic accountability. Business & Information Systems Engineering. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-023-00817-8
Houde, S., Liao, V., Martino, J., Muller, M., Piorkowski, D., Richards, J., Weisz, J., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Business (mis)Use Cases of Generative AI. In W. Geyer, Y. Khazaeni, & M. Shmueli-Scheuer (Eds.), Joint Proceedings of the Workshops on Human-AI Co-Creation with Generative Models and User-Aware Conversational Agents co-located with 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI 2020). CEUR. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2003.07679
Hu, K. (2023, February 2). ChatGPT sets record for fastest-growing user base - Analyst note. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/technology/chatgpt-sets-record-fastest-growing-user-base-analyst-note-2023-02-01/
Huang, S., & Grady, P. (2022). Generative AI: A Creative New World. Sequoia. https://www.sequoiacap.com/article/generative-ai-a-creative-new-world/
Hughes, A. (2023). Why AI-generated hands are the stuff of nightmares, explained by a scientist. BBC Science Focus. https://www.sciencefocus.com/future-technology/why-ai-generated-hands-are-the-stuff-of-nightmares-explained-by-a-scientist/
Jakesch, M., Bhat, A., Buschek, D., Zalmanson, L., & Naaman, M. (2023a). Co-writing with opinionated language models affects users’ views. In A. Schmidt, K. Väänänen, T. Goyal, P. O. Kristensson, A. Peters, S. Mueller, J. R. Williamson, & M. L. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–15). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581196.
Jakesch, M., Hancock, J. T., & Naaman, M. (2023b). Human heuristics for AI-generated language are flawed. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 120(11), e2208839120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2208839120
Janiesch, C., Zschech, P., & Heinrich, K. (2021). Machine learning and deep learning. Electronic Markets, 31(3), 685–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-021-00475-2
Jasper. (2022). ChatGPT vs. Jasper: How it’s different from Jasper chat. https://www.jasper.ai/blog/what-is-chatgpt
Jebara, T. (2004). Generative versus discriminative learning. In T. Jebara (Ed.), Machine Learning (pp. 17–60). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9011-2_2
Ji, Z., Lee, N., Frieske, R., Yu, T., Su, D., Xu, Y., Ishii, E., Bang, Y. J., Madotto, A., & Fung, P. (2023). Survey of hallucination in natural language generation. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(12), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3571730
Jin, Y., Jang, E., Cui, J., Chung, J.‑W., Lee, Y., & Shin, S. (2023). DarkBERT: A language model for the dark side of the Internet. In 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL’23), Toronto, Canada.
Johnson, D. G., & Verdicchio, M. (2017). AI Anxiety. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(9), 2267–2270. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23867
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., Bridgland, A., Meyer, C., Kohl, S. A. A., Ballard, A. J., Cowie, A., Romera-Paredes, B., Nikolov, S., Jain, R., Adler, J., & Hassabis, D. (2021). Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature, 596(7873), 583–589. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2
Kingma, D. P., & Welling, M (2014). Auto-encoding variational Bayes. International Conference on Learning Representations 2021 (ICLR), Banff, Canada.
Kingma, D. P., Mohamed, S., Jimenez Rezende, D., & Welling, M. (2014).Semi-supervised learning with deep generative models. In Z. Ghahramani, M. Welling, C. Cortes, N. Lawrence, & K. Q. Weinberger (Eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 27 (Vol. 27). Curran Associates, Inc.
Kodali, N., Abernethy, J., Hays, J., & Kira, Z. (2017).On convergence and stability of GANs. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1705.07215
Kowalczyk, P., Röder, M., & Thiesse, F. (2023). Nudging creativity in digital marketing with generative artificial intelligence: Opportunities and limitations. ECIS 2023 Research-in-Progress Papers, Article 22.
Kreps, S., McCain, R. M., & Brundage, M. (2022). All the news that’s fit to fabricate: AI-generated text as a tool of media misinformation. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 9(1), 104–117. https://doi.org/10.1017/XPS.2020.37
Kühl, N., Schemmer, M., Goutier, M., & Satzger, G. (2022). Artificial intelligence and machine learning. Electronic Markets, 32(4), 2235–2244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00598-0
LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015). Deep learning. Nature, 521(7553), 436–444. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14539
Lehmann, F., & Buschek, D. (2020). Examining autocompletion as a basic concept for interaction with generative AI. I-Com, 19(3), 251–264. https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2020-0025
Leiker, D., Gyllen, A. R., Eldesouky, I., & Cukurova, M. (2023). Generative AI for learning: Investigating the potential of synthetic learning videos. In 24th International Conference of Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED 2023), Tokyo, Japan.
Li, H. (2022). Language models. Communications of the ACM, 65(7), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1145/3490443
Li, J., Li, M., Wang, X., & Thatcher, J. B. (2021). Strategic directions for AI: The role of CIOs and boards of directors. MIS Quarterly, 45(3), 1603–1644. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2021/16523
Li, M., Bao, X., Chang, L., & Gu, T. (2022). Modeling personalized representation for within-basket recommendation based on deep learning. Expert Systems with Applications, 192, 116383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.116383
Lins, S., Pandl, K. D., Teigeler, H., Thiebes, S., Bayer, C., & Sunyaev, A. (2021). Artificial intelligence as a service. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 63(4), 441–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-021-00708-w
Liu, V., & Chilton, L. B. (2022). Design guidelines for prompt engineering text-to-image generative models. In S. Barbosa, C. Lampe, C. Appert, D. A. Shamma, S. Drucker, J. Williamson, & K. Yatani (Eds.), CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–23). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3501825
Longoni, C., Fradkin, A., Cian, L., & Pennycook, G. (2022). News from generative artificial intelligence is believed less. In 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 97–106). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3531146.3533077
Lukyanenko, R., Maass, W., & Storey, V. C. (2022). Trust in artificial intelligence: From a Foundational Trust Framework to emerging research opportunities. Electronic Markets, 32(4), 1993–2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00605-4
Lund, B. D., Wang, T., Mannuru, N. R., Nie, B., Shimray, S., & Wang, Z. (2023). ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial intelligence-written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74(5), 570–581. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24750
Lysyakov, M., & Viswanathan, S. (2022). Threatened by AI: Analyzing users’ responses to the introduction of AI in a crowd-sourcing platform. Information Systems Research, 34(3). Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2022.1184
Mayahi, S., & Vidrih, M. (2022). The impact of generative AI on the future of visual content marketing. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2211.12660
Mehrabi, N., Morstatter, F., Saxena, N., Lerman, K., & Galstyan, A. (2022). A survey on bias and fairness in machine learning. ACM Computing Surveys, 54(6), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3457607
Meske, C., Abedin, B., Klier, M., & Rabhi, F. (2022). Explainable and responsible artificial intelligence. Electronic Markets, 32(4), 2103–2106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00607-2
Microsoft. (2023). Microsoft and OpenAI extend partnership. https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/01/23/microsoftandopenaiextendpartnership/
Miller, T. (2019). Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences. Artificial Intelligence, 267, 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2018.07.007
Mirbabaie, M., Brünker, F., Möllmann Frick, N. R. J., & Stieglitz, S. (2022). The rise of artificial intelligence – Understanding the AI identity threat at the workplace. Electronic Markets, 32(1), 73–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-021-00496-x
Mirsky, Y., & Lee, W. (2022). The creation and detection of deepfakes. ACM Computing Surveys, 54(1), 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1145/3425780
Mondal, S., Das, S., & Vrana, V. G. (2023). How to bell the cat? A theoretical review of generative artificial intelligence towards digital disruption in all walks of life. Technologies, 11(2), 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies11020044
Moussawi, S., Koufaris, M., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2021). How perceptions of intelligence and anthropomorphism affect adoption of personal intelligent agents. Electronic Markets, 31(2), 343–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-020-00411-w
Murphy, C., & Thomas, F. P. (2023). Generative AI in spinal cord injury research and care: Opportunities and challenges ahead. The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine, 46(3), 341–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2023.2198926
Nichol, A., Jun, H., Dhariwal, P., Mishkin, P., & Chen, M. (2022). Point-E: A system for generating 3D point clouds from complex prompts. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.08751
Ntoutsi, E., Fafalios, P., Gadiraju, U., Iosifidis, V., Nejdl, W., Vidal, M.-E., Ruggieri, S., Turini, F., Papadopoulos, S., Krasanakis, E., Kompatsiaris, I., Kinder-Kurlanda, K., Wagner, C., Karimi, F., Fernandez, M., Alani, H., Berendt, B., Kruegel, T., Heinze, C., & Staab, S. (2020). Bias in data-driven artificial intelligence systems—An introductory survey. WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 10(3), e1356. https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1356
OpenAI. (2023). GPT-4 technical report. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.08774
Oppenlaender, J. (2022). The creativity of text-to-image generation. Proceedings of the 25th International Academic Mindtrek Conference (pp. 192–202). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3569219.3569352
Ouyang, L., Wu, J, Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C. L., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C, Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., Schulman, J., Hilton, J., Kelton, F., Miller, L., Simens, M., Askell, A., Welinder, P., Christiano, P., Leike, J., & Lowe, R. (2022). Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2203.02155
Pan, Z., Yu, W., Yi, X., Khan, A., Yuan, F., & Zheng, Y. (2019). Recent progress on generative adversarial networks (GANs): A survey. IEEE Access, 7, 36322–36333. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2905015
Patterson, D. W. (1990). Introduction to artificial intelligence and expert systems. Prentice Hall.
Pavlik, J. V. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT: Considering the implications of generative artificial intelligence for journalism and media education. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 78(1), 84–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776958221149577
Pentina, I., Hancock, T., & Xie, T. (2023). Exploring relationship development with social chatbots: A mixed-method study of replika. Computers in Human Behavior, 140, 107600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107600
Perez, F., & Ribeiro, I. (2022). Ignore previous prompt: Attack techniques for language models. In D. Hendrycks, V. Krakovna, D. Song, J. Steinhardt, & N. Carlini (Chairs), Thirty-sixth Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), Virtual.
Piccialli, F., Di Cola, V. S., Giampaolo, F., & Cuomo, S. (2021). The role of artificial intelligence in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. Information Systems Frontiers : A Journal of Research and Innovation, 23(6), 1467–1497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-021-10131-x
Poole, B., Jain, A., Barron, J. T., & Mildenhall, B. (2023). DreamFusion: Text-to-3D using 2D diffusion. In Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR 2023), Kigali, Rwanda.
Qiu, L., & Benbasat, I. (2005). An investigation into the effects of text-to-speech voice and 3D avatars on the perception of presence and flow of live help in electronic commerce. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 12(4), 329–355. https://doi.org/10.1145/1121112.1121113
Raj, M., Berg, J., & Seamans, R. (2023). Art-ificial intelligence: The effect of AI disclosure on evaluations of creative content. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.06217
Ray, S. (2019). A quick review of machine learning algorithms. In 2019 International Conference on Machine Learning, Big Data, Cloud and Parallel Computing (COMITCon) (pp. 35–39). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMITCon.2019.8862451
Riedl, R. (2022). Is trust in artificial intelligence systems related to user personality? Review of empirical evidence and future research directions. Electronic Markets, 32(4), 2021–2051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00594-4
Rix, J., & Hess, T. (2023). From “handmade” to “AI-made”: Mitigating consumers’ aversion towards AI-generated textual products. AMCIS 2023 Proceedings.
Rombach, R., Blattmann, A., Lorenz, D., Esser, P., & Ommer, B. (2022). High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. In 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (pp. 10674–10685). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR52688.2022.01042
Ruthotto, L., & Haber, E. (2021). An introduction to deep generative modeling. GAMM-Mitteilungen, 44(2), e202100008. https://doi.org/10.1002/gamm.202100008
Samtani, S., Zhu, H., Padmanabhan, B., Chai, Y., Chen, H., & Nunamaker, J. F. (2023). Deep learning for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 40(1), 271–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2023.2172772
Schneider, J., Seidel, S., Basalla, M., & vom Brocke, J. (2023). Reuse, reduce, support: Design Principles for green data mining. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 65(1), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-022-00780-w
Schoormann, T., Strobel, G., Möller, F., Petrik, D., & Zschech, P. (2023). Artificial intelligence for sustainability - A systematic review of information systems literature. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 52(1), 199–237. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05209
Schramowski, P., Turan, C., Andersen, N., Rothkopf, C. A., & Kersting, K. (2022). Large pre-trained language models contain human-like biases of what is right and wrong to do. Nature Machine Intelligence, 4(3), 258–268. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-022-00458-8
Schuhmann, C., Beaumont, R., Vencu, R., Gordon, C. W., Wightman, R., Cherti, M., Coombes, T., Katta, A., Mullis, C., Wortsman, M., Schramowski, P., Kundurthy, S. R., Crowson, K., Schmidt, L., Kaczmarczyk, R., & Jitsev, J. (2022). LAION-5B: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text models. In S. Koyejo, S. Mohamed, A. Agarwal, D. Belgrave, K. Cho, & A. Oh (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems 35. Curran Associates, Inc.
Selz, D. (2020). From electronic markets to data driven insights. Electronic Markets, 30(1), 57–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-019-00393-4
Smits, J., & Borghuis, T. (2022). Generative AI and intellectual property rights. In B. Custers & E. Fosch-Villaronga (Eds.), Information Technology and Law Series. Law and Artificial Intelligence (Vol. 35, pp. 323–344). T.M.C. Asser Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-523-2_17
Stability.ai. (2023). Stability AI launches the first of its StableLM suite of language models. https://stability.ai/blog/stability-ai-launches-the-first-of-its-stablelm-suite-of-language-models
Strobel, G., Banh, L., Möller, F., & Schoormann, T. (2024). Exploring generative artificial intelligence: A taxonomy and types. In Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2024 (HICSS 2024), Hawaii, USA.
Strobel, G., Schoormann, T., Banh, L., & Möller, F. (2023). Artificial intelligence for sign language translation – A design science research study. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 53(1), 42–64. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05303
Sun, J., Liao, Q. V., Muller, M., Agarwal, M., Houde, S., Talamadupula, K., & Weisz, J. D. (2022). Investigating explainability of generative AI for code through scenario-based design. In 27th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (pp. 212–228). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3490099.3511119
Susarla, A., Gopal, R., Thatcher, J. B., & Sarker, S. (2023). The Janus effect of generative AI: Charting the path for responsible conduct of scholarly activities in information systems. Information Systems Research, 34(2), 399–408. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2023.ed.v34.n2
Synthesia. (2023). Synthesia | #1 AI Video Generation Platform. https://www.synthesia.io/
Teubner, T., Flath, C. M., Weinhardt, C., van der Aalst, W., & Hinz, O. (2023). Welcome to the era of ChatGPT et al.: The prospects of large language models. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 65, 95–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-023-00795-x
The Washington Post. (2022). The Google engineer who thinks the company’s AI has come to life. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/11/google-ai-lamda-blake-lemoine/
Tomczak, J. M. (2022). Deep generative modeling. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93158-2
Tomitza, C., Schaschek, M., Straub, L., & Winkelmann, A. (2023). What is the minimum to trust AI?—A requirement analysis for (generative) AI-based texts. Wirtschaftsinformatik 2023 Proceedings.
van den Broek, E., Sergeeva, A., & Huysman Vrije, M. (2021). When the machine meets the expert: An ethnography of developing AI for hiring. MIS Quarterly, 45(3), 1557–1580. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2021/16559
van Dun, C., Moder, L., Kratsch, W., & Röglinger, M. (2023). ProcessGAN: Supporting the creation of business process improvement ideas through generative machine learning. Decision Support Systems, 165, 113880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2022.113880
van Slyke, C., Johnson, R., & Sarabadani, J. (2023). Generative artificial intelligence in information systems education: Challenges, consequences, and responses. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 53(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05301
Vasist, P. N., & Krishnan, S. (2022). Deepfakes An integrative review of the literature and an agenda for future research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 51, 590–636. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05126
Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, U., & Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. In I. Guyon, U. von Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, & R. Garnett (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (pp. 5999–6009). Curran Associates Inc.
Walters, W. P., & Murcko, M. (2020). Assessing the impact of generative AI on medicinal chemistry. Nature Biotechnology, 38(2), 143–145. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0418-2
Wang, C., Chen, S., Wu, Y., Zhang, Z., Zhou, L., Liu, S., Chen, Z., Liu, Y., Wang, H., Li, J., He, L., Zhao, S., & Wei, F. (2023). Neural codec language models are zero-shot text to speech synthesizers. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.02111
Wanner, J., Herm, L.-V., Heinrich, K., & Janiesch, C. (2022). The effect of transparency and trust on intelligent system acceptance: Evidence from a user-based study. Electronic Markets, 32(4), 2079–2102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00593-5
Wei, R., & Mahmood, A. (2021). Recent advances in variational autoencoders with representation learning for biomedical informatics: A survey. IEEE Access, 9, 4939–4956. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3048309
Weidinger, L., Uesato, J., Rauh, M., Griffin, C., Huang, P.‑S., Mellor, J., Glaese, A., Cheng, M., Balle, B., Kasirzadeh, A., Biles, C., Brown, S., Kenton, Z., Hawkins, W., Stepleton, T., Birhane, A., Hendricks, L. A., Rimell, L., Isaac, W., Gabriel, I. (2022). Taxonomy of risks posed by language models. In 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 214–229). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3531146.3533088
Weisz, J., Muller, M., He, J., & Houde, S. (2023). Toward general design principles for generative AI applications. In 4th Workshop on Human-AI Co-Creation with Generative Models, Sydney, Australia.
Weng, S.-S., & Chen, H.-C. (2020). Exploring the role of deep learning technology in the sustainable development of the music production industry. Sustainability, 12(2), 625. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020625
Wessel, M., Adam, M., Benlian, A., Majchrzak, A., & Thies, F. (2023). Call for papers to the special issue: Generative AI and its tranformative value for digital platforms. Journal of Management Information Systems. https://www.jmis-web.org/cfps/JMIS_SI_CfP_Generative_AI.pdf
Willcocks, L. (2020). Robo-Apocalypse cancelled? Reframing the automation and future of work debate. Journal of Information Technology, 35(4), 286–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268396220925830
Winston, P. H. (1993). Artificial intelligence (3. ed., reprinted with corr). Addison-Wesley.
Yang, R., & Wibowo, S. (2022). User trust in artificial intelligence: A comprehensive conceptual framework. Electronic Markets, 32(4), 2053–2077. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00592-6
Zhan, F., Yu, Y., Wu, R., Zhang, J., Lu, S., Liu, L., Kortylewski, A., Theobalt, C., & Xing, E. (2021). Multimodal Image Synthesis and Editing: A Survey. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2112.13592
Zhang, C., Zhang, C., Zhang, M., & Kweon, I. S. (2023a). Text-to-image diffusion models in generative AI: A survey. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.07909
Zhang, D., Li, W., Niu, B., & Wu, C. (2023b). A deep learning approach for detecting fake reviewers: Exploiting reviewing behavior and textual information. Decision Support Systems, 166, 113911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2022.113911
Zhou, J., Zhang, Y., Luo, Q., Parker, A. G., & Choudhury, M. de (2023). Synthetic lies: Understanding AI-generated misinformation and evaluating algorithmic and human solutions. In A. Schmidt, K. Väänänen, T. Goyal, P. O. Kristensson, A. Peters, S. Mueller, J. R. Williamson, & M. L. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–20). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581318
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Christian Matt
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Banh, L., Strobel, G. Generative artificial intelligence. Electron Markets 33, 63 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-023-00680-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-023-00680-1