Test-Time Scaling for CAD Generation via Verifier-Free Consensus Selection

Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) and Vision-Language Models (VLMs) enable the automatic generation of parametric 3D designs from natural-language specifications. This chapter presents an empirical study of foundation models for automatic Computer-Aided Design (CAD) generation of mechanical parts, using a unified evaluation pipeline and a curated benchmark of 97 engineering design problems. We introduce LLMForge, a multi-model text-to-CAD framework integrating JSON-schema validation, analytic feature scoring, mesh synthesis, and multi-round iterative refinement, studied under two critique regimes. IterTracer uses a Phong-shaded ray-trace renderer with analytic visual metrics (silhouette IoU, hole visibility, edge clearance, aspect-ratio conformance) for lightweight geometry-aware feedback across rounds. IterVision replaces the analytic scorer with a VLM semantic critic (Qwen2.5-VL-72B) that evaluates rendered views via chain-of-thought visual reasoning, assessing spatial coherence and design intent. On a benchmark spanning four canonical geometry families (plates with holes and bolt circles, multi-feature boxes, flanged cylinders, and L-brackets), we evaluate seven foundation models: DeepSeek-V3.2, Qwen3-235B-A22B, Llama-3.3-70B, Gemma-3-27B, GLM-4.5, MiniMax-M2.1, and INTELLECT. Under IterTracer, the four highest-ranked models form a tight cluster (overall mean in [0.885, 0.890]) with 98.97% mesh success, showing that compact instruction-tuned models can match substantially larger systems. VLM-based critique in IterVision yields 100% watertight mesh generation on the leading model while surfacing systematic difficulty on rotationally symmetric geometries such as cylinders, where visual and semantic scoring diverge most. We discuss benchmark design, failure modes, CAD-oriented prompting, and implications for industrial workflows and scalable automated mechanical design.

Text-to-CAD has recently emerged as an important task with the potential to substantially accelerate design workflows. Despite its significance, there has been surprisingly little work on Text-to-CAD evaluation, and assessing CAD model generation performance remains a considerable challenge. In this work, we introduce a new evaluation perspective for Text-to-CAD based on automated testing. We propose CADTestBench, the first test-based benchmark for Text-to-CAD, based on CADTests, executable software tests that verify whether a generated CAD model satisfies the geometric and topological requirements of the input prompt. Using CADTestBench, we conduct comprehensive benchmarking of recent Text-to-CAD methods and further demonstrate that CADTests can also guide CAD model generation, yielding simple baselines that surpass performance of current methods. CADTestBench code and data are available at GitHub and Hugging Face dataset.

Industrial Computer-Aided Design (CAD) code generation requires models to produce executable parametric programs from visual or textual inputs. Beyond recognizing the outer shape of a part, this task involves understanding its 3D structure, inferring engineering parameters, and choosing CAD operations that reflect how the part would be designed and manufactured. Despite the promise of Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) for this task, they are rarely evaluated on whether these capabilities jointly hold in realistic industrial CAD settings. We present BenchCAD, a unified benchmark for industrial CAD reasoning. BenchCAD contains 17,900 execution-verified CadQuery programs across 106 industrial part families, including bevel gears, compression springs, twist drills, and other reusable engineering designs. It evaluates models through visual question answering, code question answering, image-to-code generation, and instruction-guided code editing, enabling fine-grained analysis across perception, parametric abstraction, and executable program synthesis. Across 10+ frontier models, BenchCAD shows that current systems often recover coarse outer geometry but fail to produce faithful parametric CAD programs. Common failures include missing fine 3D structure, misinterpreting industrial design parameters, and replacing essential operations such as sweeps, lofts, and twist-extrudes with simpler sketch-and-extrude patterns. Fine-tuning and reinforcement learning improve in-distribution performance, but generalization to unseen part families remains limited. These results position BenchCAD as a benchmark for measuring and improving the industrial readiness of multimodal CAD automation.