FEM-Bench: A Structured Scientific Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating Code-Generating LLMs

As LLMs advance their reasoning capabilities about the physical world, the absence of rigorous benchmarks for evaluating their ability to generate scientifically valid physical models has become a critical gap. Computational mechanics, which develops and applies mathematical models and numerical methods to predict the behavior of physical systems under forces, deformation, and constraints, provides an ideal foundation for structured scientific reasoning evaluation. Problems follow clear mathematical structure, enforce strict physical and numerical constraints, and support objective verification. The discipline requires constructing explicit models of physical systems and reasoning about geometry, spatial relationships, and material behavior, connecting directly to emerging AI goals in physical reasoning and world modeling. We introduce FEM-Bench, a computational mechanics benchmark designed to evaluate the ability of LLMs to generate correct finite element method (FEM) and related code. FEM-Bench 2025 contains a suite of introductory but nontrivial tasks aligned with material from a first graduate course on computational mechanics. These tasks capture essential numerical and physical modeling challenges while representing only a small fraction of the complexity present in the discipline. Despite their simplicity, state-of-the-art LLMs do not reliably solve all of them. In a five attempt run, the best performing model at function writing, Gemini 3 Pro, completed 30/33 tasks at least once and 26/33 tasks all five times. The best performing model at unit test writing, GPT-5, had an Average Joint Success Rate of 73.8%. Other popular models showed broad performance variation. FEM-Bench establishes a structured foundation for evaluating AI-generated scientific code, and future iterations will incorporate increasingly sophisticated tasks to track progress as models evolve.

Towards Robust Surrogate Models: Benchmarking Machine Learning Approaches to Expediting Phase Field Simulations of Brittle Fracture

Data driven approaches have the potential to make modeling complex, nonlinear physical phenomena significantly more computationally tractable. For example, computational modeling of fracture is a core challenge where machine learning techniques have the potential to provide a much needed speedup that would enable progress in areas such as mutli-scale modeling and uncertainty quantification. Currently, phase field modeling (PFM) of fracture is one such approach that offers a convenient variational formulation to model crack nucleation, branching and propagation. To date, machine learning techniques have shown promise in approximating PFM simulations. However, most studies rely on overly simple benchmarks that do not reflect the true complexity of the fracture processes where PFM excels as a method. To address this gap, we introduce a challenging dataset based on PFM simulations designed to benchmark and advance ML methods for fracture modeling. This dataset includes three energy decomposition methods, two boundary conditions, and 1,000 random initial crack configurations for a total of 6,000 simulations. Each sample contains 100 time steps capturing the temporal evolution of the crack field. Alongside this dataset, we also implement and evaluate Physics Informed Neural Networks (PINN), Fourier Neural Operators (FNO) and UNet models as baselines, and explore the impact of ensembling strategies on prediction accuracy. With this combination of our dataset and baseline models drawn from the literature we aim to provide a standardized and challenging benchmark for evaluating machine learning approaches to solid mechanics. Our results highlight both the promise and limitations of popular current models, and demonstrate the utility of this dataset as a testbed for advancing machine learning in fracture mechanics research.