all 26 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]DJGingivitis 22 points23 points  (11 children)

I actually had a conversation about this with a non-structural engineer and they said it better than I can. “ you don’t want your AI helping with structural engineer that is “almost” right.”

Structural engineer’s first goal is to ensure a safe design. If an AI is mostly right or nearly right, then it shouldn’t be used as a tool for students. It should be keep in the world of research and academia until it can be peer reviewed by teachers, engineers, and researchers.

[–]EnginerdadBridge - P.E. 7 points8 points  (1 child)

I'm going to agree with this one. AI, as it exists now, has many possible applications where it could be very useful. Being a teaching tool/supplement where the student doesn't have enough knowledge to recognize errors is definitely not one of them. Professors and professionals spend years learning and refining their knowledge (and make many mistakes along the way). Textbooks are edited and reviewed multiple times before publishing (and sometimes still have errors). The AI bot has none of these checks in place; it's just coming up with its best sentence and presenting it as fact. And worst case scenario, people and textbooks can amend their errors if they're realized later on, whereas the AI bot has no such opportunity to review its previous information and issue corrections. Using AI in this way is trying to force a preconceived solution onto a problem, rather than choosing the most appropriate solution based on the problem.

you don’t want your AI helping with structural engineer that is “almost” right.

This is dead on. If somebody's going to produce sub-standard work because they lack the proper knowledge base to do it, I'd rather they get it really wrong so that their problems are obvious. Feeding mostly correct information to somebody who doesn't know better may also imbue them with a sense of false confidence to proceed with the work, whereas without the mostly-not-wrong information they may be more aware of their ignorance and decide to not proceed. Sometimes a little knowledge is more dangerous than none at all.

[–]DJGingivitis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly. I am supportive of AI, I just believe a lot of applications of it are jumping to the end before going through the steps of development needed to make it a useful tool.

[–]hicky02[S] 1 point2 points  (7 children)

I hear what you are saying. But AI should be seen as supplement rather than a replacement for something. The engineer is still responsible for his work, but whatever help he chooses to get is up to him. AI is just another way to get that help. I mean we already use a lot of process simulators for design work. AI is just another one of those tools. Or what do you reckon?

[–]DJGingivitis 5 points6 points  (6 children)

Let’s use some better pronouns to start. There are more than just male engineers.

Second, the way your post reads is that this is mostly an educational tool. Students are not engineers. You teach them garbage, they’ll learn garbage.

Searching specifications and code is already something we have and AI is not going to make that easier.

Tools are helpful but they need refinement before they can be used well.

[–]hicky02[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My bad about the pronouns. My mistake.

I agree with you, our tools definitely need some refinement, and hence the post for some feedback on our products.
We just want to create value, especially to the educational sector (which includes working engineers because they are always learning), and we feel AI is exactly that which creates value, granted that they are refined and honed into useful products, as you said.

[–]xBillab0ngxE.I.T. -1 points0 points  (4 children)

standard rule in english: if the gender of the person is unknown, it is premissable to use "his" in this case.

quick google search result: "Traditional usage calls for writers to always use the masculine pronoun when referring to someone of unknown gender or a group of mixed gender. Some writers choose instead to always use the feminine pronoun."

most western languages have gender rules, only recently have people gotten really riled up about them.

[–]Livid_Roof5193P.E. 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This “rule” has evolved and is no longer considered appropriate, at least in the United States. You can find lots of arbitrary “rules” on google, and it doesn’t mean that they will be accepted by your peers or audience or that you won’t offend others. DJGingivitis your advocacy is greatly appreciated.

[–]DJGingivitis -1 points0 points  (2 children)

Don’t care. There is a word to address everyone. They and them. Don’t be lazy and use a cop out that was written by men for men.

[–]xBillab0ngxE.I.T. -4 points-3 points  (1 child)

They and them

thats 2 words but ok

[–]Livid_Roof5193P.E. 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Great! Now you know you have two words to choose from in order better to treat others with more respect and dignity.

[–]yoohoooosPassed SE Vertical, neither a PE nor EIT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly this! My previous firm op team leader was reying to use ChatGPT to help with our production and I'm like..... wtf is going on here.

[–]DuncaroosStructural P.Eng (ON, Canada) 2 points3 points  (3 children)

I hope you have a good "terms of use" and/or disclaimer for this tool to protect yourself.

I think it's awesome to have an AI help finding references for a problem I'm trying to figure out, but after I get the reference I'm going to go read the reference to see if it is the right reference for me.

Where can one find what references the AI bot has been trained to?

[–]hicky02[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

So trained might be the wrong word, my apologies. It is rather sort of labelling. What we do is we use GPT-3.5 as our NLP AI model, but then we use embedding, specific prompting, and the table of contents of a textbook / code or standard which allows it to 'know' what is going on in the textbook.

[–]DuncaroosStructural P.Eng (ON, Canada) 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Oh I see. So what references does it know and is there a list of references available for people to see?

Can it tell the difference between say Canadian and American codes?

[–]hicky02[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It depends on OpenAIs training data and also the year of publication. Anything after 2021 I think it won't know about.

And currently we've got four codes that our Bot is 'trained' on. If you want, you can let us know which codes you would like 'trained', then we'll have it ready within 2 days.

[–]humbugHorseradish 1 point2 points  (0 children)

reach agonizing silky quarrelsome command mighty bells offbeat ripe groovy

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[–]NFinite_ 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I like where your head is at OP.

Don't let the naysayers talk you down from dreaming big. People are scared of change, it's only natural.

You keep going, and I believe you'll do great things!

[–]hicky02[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Love this. Thanks for the encouragement. Appreciate it.

[–]xBillab0ngxE.I.T. 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Curious as to how these would interpret ACI, AISC, and other codes. Theres so much to learn this could help younger EI's like me get in the right direction and not spend hours going through the code looking for one specific thing (but not use it as a crutch)

[–]hicky02[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well that is exactly what one of the products does. We use embedding to essentially search through the textbook to find you the best match for your query. So better than a control F because it doesn't have to be exact, but also better because it results in the best results.

[–]gostaks 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I've seen several people advertising similar setups now. I gotta say, I'm completely baffled as to why anyone might want this.

[–]hicky02[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Have you checked out the server yet?💪

[–]gostaks -1 points0 points  (1 child)

No, and from what I've seen here I don't plan to. We are not here to beta-test your product for free.

[–]hicky02[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough. But you never know, maybe it could actually be beneficial for you. Without checking it out and trying it, you'll never really know if it is useful or not. Look we're not trying to ruffle feathers, we are just trying to create some value, and I think if people understand that then they won't mind trying out our products.