An Empirical Exploration of ChatGPT's Ability to Support Problem Formulation Tasks for Mission Engineering and a Documentation of its Performance Variability

Abstract

Systems engineering (SE) is evolving with the availability of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and the demand for a systems-of-systems perspective, formalized under the purview of mission engineering (ME) in the US Department of Defense. Formulating ME problems is challenging because they are open-ended exercises that involve translation of ill-defined problems into well-defined ones that are amenable for engineering development. It remains to be seen to which extent AI could assist problem formulation objectives. To that end, this paper explores the quality and consistency of multi-purpose Large Language Models (LLM) in supporting ME problem formulation tasks, specifically focusing on stakeholder identification. We identify a relevant reference problem, a NASA space mission design challenge, and document ChatGPT-3.5's ability to perform stakeholder identification tasks. We execute multiple parallel attempts and qualitatively evaluate LLM outputs, focusing on both their quality and variability. Our findings portray a nuanced picture. We find that the LLM performs well in identifying human-focused stakeholders but poorly in recognizing external systems and environmental factors, despite explicit efforts to account for these. Additionally, LLMs struggle with preserving the desired level of abstraction and exhibit a tendency to produce solution specific outputs that are inappropriate for problem formulation. More importantly, we document great variability among parallel threads, highlighting that LLM outputs should be used with caution, ideally by adopting a stochastic view of their abilities. Overall, our findings suggest that, while ChatGPT could reduce some expert workload, its lack of consistency and domain understanding may limit its reliability for problem formulation tasks.