CurateXelerator: A Collaborative Human-AI Framework for Accelerating Curatorial Practice

Abstract

Curatorial texts are essential interpretive tools in art exhibitions, bridging the communication between artworks, curators, and visitors. While advancements in AI, particularly large language models (LLMs), have opened new possibilities for automating and assisting in the creation of curatorial texts, current AI models often suffer from inaccuracies and limited interpretive depth. This paper proposes “CurateXelerator”, a collaborative Human-AI framework that integrates a structured input strategy into the curatorial workflow to address these challenges. Comprehensive evaluations demonstrate that proposed method generates texts significantly superior to baseline AI prompts in narrative coherence, rhetorical style, and adherence to constraints. Crucially, in a human paired-samples study, texts by CurateXelerator earned an average quality rating of 3.17/5, achieving statistical parity with texts from human writers, which averaged 2.89/5, while significantly outperforming them in technical simplicity and logical structure. This research contributes a validated collaborative Human-AI framework that enhances curatorial efficiency and quality, a reusable dataset and benchmark for future cutorial practice, and critical insights for integrating AI into Human-centered creative practices.

Keywords

curatorship / curatorial practice / AI / LLM / human-AI collaborationsReferences

Author Contributions

Q.L.: data curation, writing—original draft preparation, reviewing and editing; J.S.: supervision, reviewing and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The related data presented in this study are openly available at: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1lwCaoK8hcOPXusLyx7nfPzqv2nGah1cf?usp=sharing.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Use of AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

During the preparation of this work, the authors used generative AI (LLM) to validate the proposed method and polish writing. After using this tool/service, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the published article.

References

[1] Smithsonian Institution. Guide to Interpretive Writing for Exhibitions. Available online: https://exhibits.si.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/SI-Guide-to-Interpretive-Writing-for-Exhibitions.pdf( accessed on 18 September 2021).

[2] Victoria and Albert Museum. Writing Gallery Text at the VA—A Ten Point Guide. Available online: https://www.vam.ac.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/VA_Gallery-Text-Writing-Guidelines_online_Web.pdf?srsltid=AfmBOootqlWDBHpmM-NgNUrmUV11pcarcMSQAU_ANeWKRk8Aer-7jBuz( accessed on 1 November 2019).

[3] Huang L.; Yu W.; Ma W.; et al. A survey on hallucination in large language models: Principles, taxonomy, challenges, and open questions. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 2025, 43, 1-55.

[4] Banerjee S.; Agarwal A.; Singla S. LLMs will Always Hallucinate, and We Need to Live with This. In Intelligent Systems Conference; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2025; pp. 624-648.

[5] Sriramanan G.; Bharti S.; Sadasivan V. S; et al. LLM-Check: Investigating detection of hallucinations in large language models. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 2024, 37, 34188-34216.

[6] Brown T.; Mann B.; Ryder N.; et al. Language models are few-shot learners. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 2020, 33, 1877-1901.

[7] Dathathri S.; Madotto A.; Lan J.; et al. Plug and Play Language Models: A simple Approach to Controlled Text Generation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations, 26 April 2020-1 May 2020; pp. 1-34.

[8] The British Columbia Museum Association. The Art of Writing for Exhibitions. Available online: https://museum.bc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/BCMA-Exhibit-Dev-The-Art-of-Writing-110.pdf( accessed on 12 December 2020).

[9] Smithsonian Institution.A Guide to Exhibit Development. Technical Report. Available online: https://share.google/uNpVuDmoa7Z042NXC( accessed on 5 April 2018).

[10] Falk J.H.; Dierking L.D. The Museum Experience Revisited; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2016.

[11] International Council of Museums. ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums. Technical Report. International Council of Museums. Available online: https://icom.museum/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/ICOM-code-En-web.pdf( accessed on 20 July 2017).

[12] Zheng C.; Yu Z.; Jiang Y.; et al. ArtMentor: AI-Assisted Evaluation of Artworks to Explore Multimodal Large Language Models Capabilities. In Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Yokohama Japan, 26 April 2025-1 May 2025; pp. 1-18.

[13] Chakrabarty T.; Laban P.; Wu C.S. Can AI Writing be Salvaged? Mitigating Idiosyncrasies and Improving Human-AI Alignment in the Writing Process Through Edits. In Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Yokohama Japan, 26 April 2025-1 May 2025; pp. 1-33.

[14] Laban P.; Vig J.; Hearst M.; et al. Beyond the Chat: Executable and Verifiable Text-Editing with LLMS. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 13-16 October 2024; pp. 1-23.

[15] Bin Y.; Shi W.; Ding Y.; et al. Gallerygpt: Analyzing Paintings with Large Multimodal Models. In Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia, Melbourne, Australia, 28 October-1 November 2024; pp. 7734-7743.

[16] Dhillon P.S.; Molaei S.; Li J.; et al. Shaping Human-AI collaboration: Varied Scaffolding Levels in Co-Writing with Language Models. In Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Honolulu, HI, USA, 11-16 May 2024; pp. 1-18.

[17] Mirowski P.; Mathewson K.W.; Pittman J.; et al. Co-Writing Screenplays and Theatre Scripts with Language Models: Evaluation by Industry Professionals. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Hamburg, Germany, 23-28 April 2023; pp. 1-34.

[18] Anderson B.R.; Shah J.H.; Kreminski M. Homogenization Effects of Large Language Models on Human Creative Ideation. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Creativity & Cognition, Chicago, IL, USA, 23-26 June 2024; pp. 413-425.

[19] Lee M.; Gero K.I.; Chung J.J.Y.; et al. A design space for intelligent and interactive writing assistants. In Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Honolulu, HI, USA, 11-16 May 2024; pp. 1-35.

[20] Song G. Cross-cultural exchange of heritage in museums: A study of Dunhuang art in the Hong Kong Heritage Museum from the perspective of cultural translation. Crit. Arts 2023, 37, 85-99.

[21] Guillot M.N. Cross-Cultural Pragmatics and Translation:The case of Museum Texts as Interlingual Representation. In Translation: A Multidisciplinary Approach;Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 73-95.

[22] Sakib S.K.; Das A.B. Challenging fairness: A Comprehensive Exploration of Bias in LLM-Based Recommendations. In Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData), Washington, DC, USA, 15-18 December 2024; pp. 1585-1592.

[23] Tao Y.; Viberg O.; Baker R.S.; et al. Cultural bias and cultural alignment of large language models. PNAS Nexus 2024,3, gae346.

[24] Jiang N. The “Outline, Subject, Form” Curatorial Trilogy—Taking the Robot-themed Exhibition as an Example. Available online:https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/296ahrrAzLEzVb_jgcjz8g( accessed on 28 March 2024).

[25] Ravelli L.J. Making language accessible: Successful text writing for museum visitors. Linguist. Educ. 1996, 8, 367-387.

[26] Perego E. Into the language of museum audio descriptions: A corpus-based study. Perspectives 2019, 27, 333-349.

[27] Serrell B. Judging Exhibitions: A Framework for Assessing Excellence; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2017.

[28] OpenAI. GPT-4o. Technical Report. Available online: https://openai.com/index/gpt-4o/( accessed on 8 August 2024).

[29] Comanici G.; Bieber E.; Schaekermann M.; et al. Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilities. arXiv 2025, arXiv:2507.06261.

[30] Liu A.; Feng B.; Wang B.; et al. DeepSeek-V2: A Strong, Economical, and Efficient Mixture-of-Experts Language Model. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2405.04434.

[31] Pan S.; She J. Tanka Heritage Revived: AI-Generated Artworks in Three Chinese Art Styles. In Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium on Visual Information Communication and Interaction, Hsinchu, Taiwan, 11-13 December 2024; pp. 1-2.

[32] Wang Y.A.; She J.; Lin T.T.; et al. AI Visual Art History: An Art Movement with Expanded Artistic Horizon. ACM Trans. Multimed. Comput. Commun. Appl. 2025, 21, 1-16.