I mean, does it? The way I see it, the best LLMs have to offer is infinite patience (until they inevitably and unpredictably start to confabulate, which should be a gigantic red flag, anyhow), I don't see how LLMs can be used to explore teaching paradigms that haven't been explored before. We know pretty well from centuries of empirical experimentation how children's brains develop under different stimuli. It's not exactly something the software industry needed to "hack".

- text description to 3D geometry gap: you can't easily describe complex geometry in a language that's common and convenient to both humans and machines

- 3D geometry to physical model gap: material , geometrical constraints induced by manufacturing (machines, tools, costs, …)

- physical model to model fit for simulation gap: meshing, constraints, stress modelling, …

- simulation outcome to fitness assessment gap: now you have a high-dimensional and numerically heavy simulation to weigh against a non-rigorously defined acceptance criteria

- simulation outcome to geometry profiling gap: how do you even start to guide the LLM into the vast space of possible changes to apply to the 3D geometry and reboot that loop?

LLMs don't strike me as a particularly relevant technique to apply here, to be honest.

> Claude has been trained on high school physics textbooks, yo

The very fact that physics textbooks have little bearing in the real world is the whole damn reason why Mechanical Engineering exists as a separate discipline, yo

> It’s a problem of the human setting up the description of the problem in such a way that the model can operate.

It's a problem of defining the initial state (which is the trivial part that OpenSCAD may be a contributing element of), defining constraints and variables (what is allowed to be changed and not, for what can, in which ways, to what extent, i.e. what is the library of allowed material, fastening, machining, assembling techniques available to your very specific situation), defining evaluation and fitting criteria.

I see very little adequacy of general purpose LLMs in that

> the same way that ML has been used to produce optimal rocket engine nozzles and fuel transfer systems.

Which has nothing to do with "just use Claude, yo"

The domain of ML-driven design optimization isn't exactly new, is quite specific, and I would need convincing that Claude has anything to contribute to it.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49169515

Points: 13

# Comments: 0

Also, as a sign of our times, it hyperlinks to what might have been a Microsoft tech page/knowledge base in the past, now completely replaced by poor taste LLM advertising slop. Good work, Microsoft.

MLS stands to rise that threshold (and there's work in progress to include it in XMPP), but that certainly won't address the fact that this is just privacy theater.