Co-Creating Future Scenarios with AI
Exploring the potential of LLMs to support designers in future scenario design
Location: Delft
Future scenario design is a creative and participatory method to explore and envision possible alternate futures. It can help stakeholders imagine and evaluate alternatives, identify opportunities and challenges, and generate innovative solutions, helping them make suitable decisions. However, future scenario design also needs some limitations, such as the difficulty of developing diverse and novel scenarios, the complexity of communicating and presenting the scenarios, and the extensive analysis of cross-disciplinary and multidimensional trends that need to be considered to generate them. The research aims to explore LLMs (Large Language Models) as collaborators for designers in future scenario design. LLMs are artificial intelligence models that can generate natural language and logical reasoning based on a given prompt. The ability of LLMs to enhance designers' ability to create alternative future scenarios is studied and evaluated. A conceptual framework and a prototype prompt demonstrating how LLMs can collaborate with designers in different stages of future scenario design is presented, and its effectiveness and usability are evaluated. The perceptions and experiences of designers using the prompt are also discussed to identify future opportunities and improvements in the involvement of AI in such sessions.
INTRODUCTION
Future scenarios design is a critical aspect of the design process that enables designers to anticipate and shape alternate futures. Scenarios are complex meta-information maps that provide both a strategic and technological direction, assisting designers in the design process [1]. They are considered business forecasting tools or strategic tools to inform, validate, and endorse design decisions [2]. Future scenarios play a critical role when used by designers to collaborate with business experts. It enables them to visualize and realize futures that are not only viable from an organizational perspective but also desirable by the users [3]. Although scenario generation has several utilities, it also comes with various complexities, involving extensive trend analysis, in-depth knowledge of design subject matters, and an understanding of different known and unknown stakeholders.
There are various methodologies for future scenario design, each with its own strengths and limitations. One of the most widely used methodologies for future scenario design is the intuitive logics approach [4]. This approach involves identifying the key drivers of change, such as political, economic, social, technological, environmental, and legal factors, and assessing their impact and uncertainty. Based on the combination of the most impactful and uncertain drivers, a set of scenarios are developed, each representing a plausible and coherent story of the future. The scenarios are then used to test the robustness and adaptability of the current or proposed strategies, policies, or actions. The intuitive logics approach is flexible and intuitive and can accommodate a wide range of perspectives and sources of information. However, it also has some drawbacks, such as the subjective and qualitative nature of the scenario development, the difficulty of validating and updating the scenarios, and the potential for cognitive biases and groupthink.
Another common methodology for future scenario design is the probabilistic modified trends approach [5]. This approach uses quantitative models and data to project the future trends of the critical drivers of change, such as population, GDP, energy consumption, and emissions. The projections are based on the assumptions of the continuation or modification of the current trends and are assigned probabilities. The scenarios are then derived from the combination of the most probable or extreme projections and are used to assess the implications and risks of future trends. The probabilistic modified trends approach is rigorous and quantitative and can provide more precise and consistent scenarios. However, it also has some limitations, such as the reliance on historical data and trends, the difficulty of capturing nonlinear and discontinuous changes, and the tendency to overlook the human and social aspects of the future[1][3].
A third methodology for future scenario design is the backcasting approach [6]. This approach starts with defining a desirable or undesirable future state or vision, such as a low-carbon society or a dystopian world. Then, the steps and actions required to achieve or avoid that future state are identified, working backwards from the future to the present. The scenarios are then constructed from the combination of the steps and actions to guide the decision-making and planning processes. This approach helps address complex and wicked problems like climate change and sustainability and stimulates creativity and innovation. However, it also has some challenges, such as difficulty defining and agreeing on the future state or vision, the uncertainty and feasibility of the steps and actions, and the possibility of neglecting alternative or unexpected futures.
This paper focuses on creating future visions using the intuitive logics approach with AI as a collaborator. This approach was chosen as it aligns with the intuitive and creative process of the design profession and has been successfully used in design and architectural domains [7]. AI has been identified as an effective tool to collect and analyze enormous amounts of information from various disciplines and sources, such as social media, news, scientific publications, and databases, and identify the key drivers and trends of change. This study explores AI’s proven capacity as a co-creator in design processes [8][9] and gauges its efficacy in generating future scenarios.
METHOD
To evaluate the role of AI as a collaborator, two master’s students who had attended the IDE Academy “Future Scenario Planning” (which was about future scenario generation) were recruited. In this experiment, each student (P01 & P02) was first asked to generate a future scenario on one topic each (T01 & T02) in a time frame of 15 minutes. Then, after a 5-minute break, they were asked to generate a future scenario on the other topic (i.e., P01 with T02 and P02 with T01) using the prompt framework created by the AI LLM Tool Microsoft Co Pilot (powered by Bing AI). The participants and the design goals have been tabulated below.
Participant No | With / Without AI Co-creation | Design Goal |
---|---|---|
P01 | With AI | Design the Future of Design Education (T01) |
P01 | Without AI | Design the future of Smart Mobility (T02) |
P02 | With AI | Design the future of Smart Mobility (T02) |
P02 | Without AI | Design the Future of Design Education (T01) |
Co-Pilot was chosen for this experiment for the following reasons:
-
Co-Pilot uses GPT-4, the most advanced language model commercially available in the market and can generate natural language texts on diverse topics and domains [13].
-
Co-Pilot is a part of the Microsoft 365 enterprise package, ensuring it is available and accessible to commercial and academic organizations.
-
It is a free tool which ensures higher accessibility.
Tourkiet et al. [10] identify four essential criteria for assessing future scenarios, which are as follows:
-
Coverage: This criterion evaluates the overall breadth of the relevant strategic options and cases, including external factors such as trends and other surrounding states [11].
-
Consistency: The logical consistency, i.e., the harmony between the different sections of the scenario, ensures that the possible future is coherent and aligned with the available evidence and current state of knowledge.
-
Uncertainty Assessment: This criterion evaluates how these futures explicitly communicate assumptions, limitations, and subjective judgements [12].
-
Efficiency: This measures how well the cost of analysis is minimised while retaining the benefits and extent of future scenario development.
The prompt was assessed based on the first three criteria described above. The difference in efficiency of the generated scenarios is out of the scope of this research and can be pursued as a subject of future scope.
A short qualitative interview of the participants was also conducted after generating these scenarios to understand their perception and experience using AI as a co-creation tool for future scenario generation.
PROMPT DESIGN
Based on White et al.’s work [14] and learnings of prompt patterns and structures, a suitable prompt was designed embedding the intuitive logic method’s approach [4] for future scenario generation. The flowchart in Fig. 1 explains the algorithm that the prompt follows. The prompt receives feedback from the designer at every step of functioning and decision-making to incorporate co-creation from the designer to ensure that the session is co-creative in nature and that both parties (AI and the designer) can effectively contribute to the process.
Welcome the Designer
Ask for Designer's Goal
Brainstorm trends around that goal.
Ask Designer to choose important drivers
Brainstorm value axes for each driver
Ask designer to choose two axes
Display and elaborate on the future scenarios based on the quadrants of the value axes
Goal Input from Designer
Trends Input from Designer
Drivers chosen by Designer
Value Axes input by Designer
Value Axes chosen by Designer
Ask for further elaboration/ continue conversation
RESULTS
The use of the AI prompt in co-creating future scenarios with the designers significantly impacts the coverage of the outcomes. The AI prompt helps the designers explore a more comprehensive range of trends than they could by themselves, as observed by comparing the scenarios generated with and without the AI prompt. The prompt requests for the designer’s feedback at every step of the generation process, which ensures that the designer feels like a valuable contributor and owner of the solution generated. The consistency and uncertainty of the scenarios are not affected much using the AI prompt, as they depend on the designer’s judgment in both cases. Therefore, the AI prompt is a valuable tool in co-creative design sessions for enhancing the creativity and comprehensiveness of future scenarios.
DISCUSSION
The paper aims to identify how designers can use LLMs as co-creators to design future scenarios. From the experiment and the feedback from participant designers, AI emerges as a great tool to explore the breadth of all the information and trends necessary to generate these scenarios through its computational support. AI (through the prompt) can act as an effective sparring partner to the designers in a co-creation session to brainstorm and ensure that the number of factors considered for the scenario generation is maximized.
The scenarios generated by both methods had comparable levels of uncertainty and consistency, indicating that AI co-creation did not compromise the quality of the scenarios. However, it was also observed that the AI co-created scenarios had an advantage over the human-only scenarios in communicating the uncertainty to the readers. These scenarios explicitly presented the pros and cons of each possible outcome, which helped the readers understand the trade-offs and implications of the scenarios. This facilitated the evaluation and comparison of the scenarios so that the designer could weigh the pros and cons of each option according to their preferences and values and choose the ones most appropriate for their design goals.
The participants also shared some interesting insights based on their interaction with the AI. They were asked if they felt the session was co-creative or if one of the parties (the designer or the AI) was dominant. One of the designers (P02) said it was a balanced overall experience as the AI searched for all the relevant information online and regularly sought the designer’s input after each idea generation, where they could contribute to the process with their experience and intuition. The other designer (P01) said that the AI “took the lead” in her case as she was “a bit vague” and wanted the AI to provide some initial ideas. This observation reveals the role of this tool in different stages of the future scenario creation process: in the early stage, when the designer wants to grasp the context of a specific scenario creation, AI leads and shows the designer all the possible directions that their design process can follow. In the later stage, when the designer is familiar with the context of the goal, they can actively share their inputs to the AI through their knowledge and experience to the process to achieve a more co-creative outcome.
Another insight from both participants was that the interaction interface could be more visual. In this case, the LLMs interacted with the participants through textual language, which might have been more straining for the designers. Designers rely on visual thinking [15] and adding some graphical elements to the interaction could enhance the engagement and the overall quality of the interaction. This is possible with Microsoft Copilot as it employs the GPT-4 model to generate images that could improve this interaction.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE SCOPE
This study has some limitations, such as the limited time and sample size of participants for the experiment. These factors limit the generalizability of the prompt, which requires further validation. However, the research identifies AI as an effective collaborator in future scenario generation and other research and validation are encouraged to fine-tune the prompts.
Another limitation was that the study involved master’s students who had attended the IDE Academy “Future Scenario Planning”. They had some experience in future scenario generation but were not subject matter experts.
A fascinating insight from the research was how the textual interaction between designers and LLMs reduced the overall quality of the session. Enhancing the visual aspects of the interaction might improve the co-creation process. The interface design between prompts and designers is another potential area for further investigation.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, this paper demonstrates the potential of using LLMs as co-creators for designing future scenarios. It shows that AI can support the designers in exploring the vast amount of information and trends related to the scenario creation and act as a sparring partner to generate and refine ideas. The paper contributes to the field of design research by introducing a prompt that co-creates future scenarios with continuous feedback from designers and qualitatively tests it using an experiment where designers first generate a future scenario on their own and then co-create another scenario with AI.
The paper then compares the quality of the scenarios generated by AI co-creation and human-only methods and finds that the AI co-created scenarios have an edge in conveying the uncertainty and trade-offs of the future outcomes. It is also observed that co-creating with AI allows the designer to consider a broader range of trends and significantly increases the coverage of the scenarios. It presents some insights from the participants’ experience of this interaction to understand their perceptions of co-creating with AI. The research finally suggests some directions for improving the interface and the co-creation process and highlights the benefits and challenges of co-creating future scenarios with AI.
Curious about how you can utilize AI to collaborate and optimize your innovation process?
Get in touch through the contact form—I would love to collaborate!
REFERENCES
-
Colombi, C., & Zindato, D. (2019). Design Scenarios and Anticipation. In Handbook of Anticipation (pp. 1-18).
-
Evans, M., & Sommerville, S. (2005, November). Designing Tomorrow: A Methodology for Future Orientated Product Design. In Global Chinese Industrial Design Conference 2005.
-
Coughlan, P., & Prokopoff, I. (2004). Managing change, by design. Managing as designing, 188-192.
-
Sardesai, S., Stute, M., & Kamphues, J. (2021). A methodology for future scenario planning. Next Generation Supply Chains: A Roadmap for Research and Innovation, 35-59.
-
Habegger, B. (2010). Strategic foresight in public policy: Reviewing the experiences of the UK, Singapore, and the Netherlands. Futures, 42(1), 49-58.
-
Quist, J. (2016). Backcasting. In Foresight in Organizations (pp. 125-144). Routledge.
-
Kheirollahi, M. (2012). The Place and Influence of Intuition in the Creativity of the Architecture Designing Process. International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development, 2(1), 57-62.
-
Smithers, T., Conkie, A., Doheny, J., Logan, B., Millington, K., & Tang, M. X. (1990). Design as intelligent behaviour: an AI in design research programme. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, 5(2), 78-109.
-
Zhu, J., Liapis, A., Risi, S., Bidarra, R., & Youngblood, G. M. (2018, August). Explainable AI for designers: A human-centered perspective on mixed-initiative co-creation. In 2018 IEEE conference on computational intelligence and games (CIG) (pp. 1-8). IEEE.
-
Tourki, Y., Keisler, J., & Linkov, I. (2013). Scenario analysis: a review of methods and applications for engineering and environmental systems. Environment Systems & Decisions, 33, 3-20.
-
Lempert, R. J., Bryant, B. P., & Bankes, S. C. (2008). Comparing algorithms for scenario discovery. RAND, Santa Monica, CA.
-
Mahmoud, M., Liu, Y., Hartmann, H., Stewart, S., Wagener, T., Semmens, D., ... & Winter, L. (2009). A formal framework for scenario development in support of environmental decision-making. Environmental Modelling & Software, 24(7), 798-808.
-
Nori, H., King, N., McKinney, S. M., Carignan, D., & Horvitz, E. (2023). Capabilities of gpt-4 on medical challenge problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.13375.
-
White, J., Fu, Q., Hays, S., Sandborn, M., Olea, C., Gilbert, H., ... & Schmidt, D. C. (2023). A prompt pattern catalog to enhance prompt engineering with chatgpt. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.11382.15.Ware, C. (2010). Visual thinking for design. Elsevier.