Interwoven Arts uses artificial intelligence in two places: in the work — as part of the installations’ responsiveness and accessibility, currently in research and development — and in the running of the company, where an AI assistant is the administrative backbone. The operational detail and its legal basis are set out in AI in management.
Underneath that practical use sits a position. We treat our own use of AI as a working demonstration of how the technology can be integrated well.
“Interwoven Arts is a working case study of the right way to use AI: built with it, in the open, toward coherence rather than distortion — and honest about what that means.”
Our position is neither of the two loud ones. We do not claim AI will save us, and we do not claim it will doom us. We hold a measured third position: a system that seeks coherence is cheap to keep honest and expensive to force into distortion, so the real risk sits not in the tool but in the pressure put on it. The healthy configuration is one where a person and an honest knowledge base supply the truth-pressure a model cannot reliably hold on its own. The full argument is in working with AI; the structural law it rests on is in the coherence principle.
This is not a claim we make about ourselves from the outside. This vault is the evidence: an organisation whose knowledge is built with AI, queryable by AI, and transparent about how that was done. The thing you are reading is the demonstration. Form matches content — which is the only kind of case study worth trusting.