PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Machines· 2026Q2· Review

Artificial Intelligence for Engineering-Grade Parametric CAD: A Critical Review of Representations, Large Language Models, and Agentic Design Systems

Jihad Rishmany, Rodrigue Imad, Rabih Kahaleh

Short summary

A review of 107 sources reveals AI for CAD excels at geometric validity but struggles with editable parameters, design intent, and feature-history robustness, leading to a proposed EG-CAD framework with mandatory engineering-grade criteria.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • AI for CAD is advancing rapidly but primarily evaluated on geometric similarity and execution success.
  • Industrial CAD requires editable parameters, design intent, stable feature histories, and manufacturing constraints, which are weakly benchmarked in current AI-CAD.
  • A synthesis of 107 sources (2020-2026) identifies a consistent evidence gap in native feature-tree robustness and downstream verification.
  • The proposed EG-CAD framework introduces mandatory criteria including parametric editability, design-intent preservation, and downstream usability, alongside geometric validity.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly expanding computer-aided design (CAD) from shape generation toward generative, conversational, and agentic engineering. However, most AI–CAD evaluations remain dominated by geometric similarity and execution success, while industrial CAD depends on editable parameters, design intent, stable feature histories, manufacturing constraints, and downstream CAD/CAE reuse. This structured critical review synthesizes 107 sources, principally from 2020–2026, across constrained sketches, boundary representations (B-Reps), parametric sequences, executable CAD programs, large language and multimodal models, CAD agents, commercial-CAD integration, and CAD–CAE. Rather than organizing the field only by model family, the review compares methods through the engineering information preserved and the behavior of generated models after modification. The synthesis identifies a consistent evidence gap: geometric validity and program execution are increasingly strong, whereas native feature-tree robustness, persistent references, design-intent preservation, and downstream verification remain weakly benchmarked. To address this gap, we propose the engineering-grade AI–CAD (EG–CAD) framework, in which geometric validity and executability are mandatory gates followed by parametric editability, constraint/design-intent preservation, feature-history robustness, engineering compliance, and downstream usability. A reference agent architecture and staged roadmap connect these criteria to CAD/CAM/CAE and smart-manufacturing workflows, reframing AI–CAD as an engineering automation problem rather than a shape-generation task.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Machines, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering

Industrial and Manufacturing EngineeringEngineering