MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7091186806

Automating Structural Engineering Workflows with Large Language Model Agents

2025· article· en· W7091186806 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWorkflowWorkloadSoftware deploymentReliability (semiconductor)Key (lock)Core (optical fiber)Concurrent engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce $\textbf{MASSE}$, the first Multi-Agent System for Structural Engineering, effectively integrating large language model (LLM)-based agents with real-world engineering workflows. Structural engineering is a fundamental yet traditionally stagnant domain, with core workflows remaining largely unchanged for decades despite its substantial economic impact and global market size. Recent advancements in LLMs have significantly enhanced their ability to perform complex reasoning, long-horizon planning, and precise tool utilization -- capabilities well aligned with structural engineering tasks such as interpreting design codes, executing load calculations, and verifying structural capacities. We present a proof-of-concept showing that most real-world structural engineering workflows can be fully automated through a training-free LLM-based multi-agent system. MASSE enables immediate deployment in professional environments, and our comprehensive validation on real-world case studies demonstrates that it can reduce expert workload from approximately two hours to mere minutes, while enhancing both reliability and accuracy in practical engineering scenarios.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.708
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicMulti-Agent Systems and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207