Should We Go Back to Slide Rules? What Do You Think About AI in the Commissioning Space?

When I entered engineering college in 1987, the days of slide rules and punch card coding were already past. (Some of you may laugh when remembering those days.) The hot debate around AI reminds me of a time when slide rules were replaced by calculators. I believe that when calculators first came out, many engineers, scientists, mathematicians, and so on solved problems with that “newfangled” calculator first—only to back check the work with the trusty slide rule!

On a personal note, my father-in-law, an old-school WWII veteran and former ceiling-tile contractor, did everything with paper, pencil, and a calculator (and probably a slide rule before that). According to my wife, after computers were introduced, she saw him punching numbers on a calculator while looking at an early version of Microsoft Excel.

She asked, “Dad, what are you doing?”

His reply: “Checking Excel is right!”

The closing session from this year’s annual Building Commissioning Association conference featured a lively debate about the use of AI in the commissioning field. Jesse Sycuro, PE, CCP (McKinstry) and I debated with Bill McMullen (Chinook Systems) and Theophilus Aluko, PE, CEM (Willdan) on the topic of whether AI will make us better Cx providers!

While spirited and at times humorous, the debate touched on very real opportunities and challenges that our industry faces as we move into the AI world and investigate applications in commissioning.

We can leverage AI for opportunities like enhancing the design review process to confirm that elements of drawings are consistent across trades, or that all ducts passing through fire-rated walls have fire dampers. In a more advanced scenario, AI could verify that a design is updated and compliant with the latest codes and standards required by the authority having jurisdiction.

AI typically excels at number crunching in a way that exceeds the capabilities of both humans and traditional software. Jesse told the group that his firm utilizes AI to process and analyze 7.6 million data points continuously: certainly, a feat not possible for a human.  

AI comes with challenges and risks, however. Bill and Theo rightfully raised concerns about confidential client data, privacy, and nondisclosure agreements— ultimately questioning the security of entering project information in AI or machine learning models. Other significant concerns include the well-documented phenomenon of AI hallucinations, which may also give commissioning professionals serious reservations about using such platforms.

AI presents amazing opportunities, offering the ability to analyze complex data more quickly and thoroughly than humans could ever manage. Even with the challenges of security and accuracy, I believe that commissioning is well-suited to harness the power of AI. The “trust but verify” approach already serves as the foundation of the commissioning process. The commissioning provider can ensure that this approach is central to every project, while reaping the benefits of AI and incorporating the essential human judgement to address challenges. We should not feel threatened, but rather empowered, to take advantage of AI as a new tool.

Like the days when the calculator —and eventually a computer —replaced the slide rule, I challenge the industry to dream of ways to use this new tool to support and enhance existing expertise.