Can ChatGPT Generate Geotechnical Engineering Code? A Human-in-the-Loop Validation Study

Large language models are increasingly used to generate engineering code, but executable output does not establish correctness. This study examines an expert supervised workflow used to develop Python implementations for two analytical geotechnical problems: a prescribed circular slip surface calculation using the simplified Bishop method and a shallow foundation bearing capacity calculation. The workflow comprised problem decomposition, specification of geotechnical constraints, modular code generation, expert diagnosis, prompted correction, visual inspection, and comparison with independently configured reference calculations. The slope example documents implementation choices and failure modes for one prescribed slip surface. The bearing capacity study exercised five test groups and 44 calculations covering homogeneous soil, groundwater, two-layer profiles, horizontal loading, and limiting cases. The development process revealed safety-relevant failure modes, including syntax errors, unstable iterations, incorrect geometric extrapolation, and physically inadmissible failure mechanisms. These errors were not resolved reliably by autonomous model self-correction, but required expert diagnosis, modular testing, and constraint-based prompting. The results show that ChatGPT can support the development of geotechnical calculation tools for bounded analytical verification tasks, but only within a strict human-in-the-loop framework. The findings should be interpreted as a case-specific validation of one model system rather than as evidence for the reliability of large language models in general.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Geotechnics
Published
2026-07-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/geotechnics6030070
Primary Topic
Geotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can ChatGPT Generate Geotechnical Engineering Code? A Human-in-the-Loop Validation Study

Reza Taherdangkoo, Christoph Butscher, Sophia Einspänner
Geotechnics
Geotechnical Engineering and Analysis
article

Can ChatGPT Generate Geotechnical Engineering Code? A Human-in-the-Loop Validation Study

Reza Taherdangkoo, Christoph Butscher, Sophia Einspänner
article en

Abstract

Large language models are increasingly used to generate engineering code, but executable output does not establish correctness. This study examines an expert supervised workflow used to develop Python implementations for two analytical geotechnical problems: a prescribed circular slip surface calculation using the simplified Bishop method and a shallow foundation bearing capacity calculation. The workflow comprised problem decomposition, specification of geotechnical constraints, modular code generation, expert diagnosis, prompted correction, visual inspection, and comparison with independently configured reference calculations. The slope example documents implementation choices and failure modes for one prescribed slip surface. The bearing capacity study exercised five test groups and 44 calculations covering homogeneous soil, groundwater, two-layer profiles, horizontal loading, and limiting cases. The development process revealed safety-relevant failure modes, including syntax errors, unstable iterations, incorrect geometric extrapolation, and physically inadmissible failure mechanisms. These errors were not resolved reliably by autonomous model self-correction, but required expert diagnosis, modular testing, and constraint-based prompting. The results show that ChatGPT can support the development of geotechnical calculation tools for bounded analytical verification tasks, but only within a strict human-in-the-loop framework. The findings should be interpreted as a case-specific validation of one model system rather than as evidence for the reliability of large language models in general.

GeotechnicsVol. 6(3)
TU Bergakademie Freiberg (DE)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Technische Universität Bergakademie Freiberg
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Geotechnical Engineering and Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.