Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a LLM-based visual programming copilot designed specifically for aerospace engineering tasks, leveraging a visual variant of the ReAct methodology and GPT 5.4. It includes the development of Wingbuilder, a Grasshopper plugin tailored for aerospace geometry, and the Aerospace Visual Programming Dataset (AVPD), which features 18 expert-designed tasks. User trials with aerospace engineers revealed that while the copilot generated helpful suggestions, slow inference times limited its application to more complex tasks, highlighting both its potential and current limitations in practical use.
Aerospace engineers found the LLM-based copilot's suggestions helpful, but slow inference times hindered its effectiveness for complex design tasks.
Recent advances in both Large Language Models (LLMs) and Vision Language Models (VLMs) have seen a step change in their ability to perform visual code completion, but the aerospace industry, which prioritizes safety and explainabilty over rapid LLM adoption, currently has no publicly announced LLM-based geometric design copilot systems in commercial use by aerospace Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs). This paper presents a LLM-based visual programming copilot application for aerospace engineering design tasks, using a visual programming variant of the ReAct methodology and GPT 5.4. In addition to the copilot, we describe Wingbuilder, a new Grasshopper plugin library with custom components for aerospace-specific geometry abstraction, and an associated Aerospace Visual Programming Dataset (AVPD) with 18 aerospace expert designed tasks at different levels of difficulty alongside ground truth solutions. We evaluate our copilot application with a user trial involving two experienced aerospace engineers from a large aircraft manufacturing company. We find our copilot visual programming ReAct methodology was successful in generating suggestions that participants found helpful, but slow ReAct inference times limit its usefulness to more complex time-consuming tasks where waiting for good copilot solution suggestion was worthwhile. Participants reported they liked the tool and would be willing to use it in the future.
