mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A Misleading Gallery of Fluid Motion by Generative Artificial Intelligence

arXiv 2405.15406 ↗First posted 24 May 2024physics.flu-dyn cs.LGcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In this technical report, we extensively investigate the accuracy of outputs from well-known generative artificial intelligence (AI) applications in response to prompts describing common fluid motion phenomena familiar to the fluid mechanics community. We examine a range of applications, including Midjourney, Dall-E, Runway ML, Microsoft Designer, Gemini, Meta AI, and Leonardo AI, introduced by prominent companies such as Google, OpenAI, Meta, and Microsoft. Our text prompts for generating images or videos include examples such as "Von Karman vortex street", "flow past an airfoil", "Kelvin-Helmholtz instability", "shock waves on a sharp-nosed supersonic body", etc. We compare the images generated by these applications with real images from laboratory experiments and numerical software. Our findings indicate that these generative AI models are not adequately trained in fluid dynamics imagery, leading to potentially misleading outputs. Beyond text-to-image/video generation, we further explore the transition from image/video to text generation using these AI tools, aiming to investigate the accuracy of their descriptions of fluid motion phenomena. This report serves as a cautionary note for educators in academic institutions, highlighting the potential for these tools to mislead students. It also aims to inform researchers at these renowned companies, encouraging them to address this issue. We conjecture that a primary reason for this shortcoming is the limited access to copyright-protected fluid motion images from scientific journals.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 43 of its 148 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 May 2024.

Builds on

43 of 148 references.

References · 43

  1. 2021High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Modelscited by 18,863
  2. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
  3. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
  4. 2023Improved Baselines with Visual Instruction Tuningcited by 4,418
  5. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,374
  6. 2024Scaling Rectified Flow Transformers for High-Resolution Image Synthesiscited by 4,181
  7. 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 3,019
  8. 2023Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Codecited by 2,139
  9. 2022Imagen Video: High Definition Video Generation with Diffusion Modelscited by 1,778
  10. 2023Video-LLaMA: An Instruction-tuned Audio-Visual Language Model for Video Understandingcited by 1,471
  11. 2023Video-LLaVA: Learning United Visual Representation by Alignment Before Projectioncited by 1,402
  12. 2023LLaVA-Med: Training a Large Language-and-Vision Assistant for Biomedicine in One Daycited by 1,305
31 more
  1. 2023A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Modelscited by 1,242
  2. 2022On Distillation of Guided Diffusion Modelscited by 725
  3. 2022A Systematic Evaluation of Large Language Models of Codecited by 363
  4. 2015A note on the evaluation of generative modelscited by 292
  5. 2023A Comprehensive Survey of AI-Generated Content (AIGC): A History of Generative AI from GAN to ChatGPTcited by 224
  6. 2023G-LLaVA: Solving Geometric Problem with Multi-Modal Large Language Modelcited by 210
  7. 2023LLaVA-Plus: Learning to Use Tools for Creating Multimodal Agentscited by 193
  8. 2023Generative AIcited by 120
  9. 2023Foundation Models and Fair Usecited by 116
  10. 2021Deep Generative Models in Engineering Design: A Reviewcited by 105
  11. 2023In-Context Operator Learning with Data Prompts for Differential Equation Problemscited by 101
  12. 2024CyberSecEval 2: A Wide-Ranging Cybersecurity Evaluation Suite for Large Language Modelscited by 89
  13. 2024I-Design: Personalized LLM Interior Designercited by 87
  14. 2023ChatGPT is not all you need. A State of the Art Review of large Generative AI modelscited by 86
  15. 2023ChatGPT Asks, BLIP-2 Answers: Automatic Questioning Towards Enriched Visual Descriptionscited by 86
  16. 2022A very preliminary analysis of DALL-E 2cited by 82
  17. 2023MechAgents: Large language model multi-agent collaborations can solve mechanics problems, generate new data, and integrate knowledgecited by 63
  18. 2022Generated Faces in the Wild: Quantitative Comparison of Stable Diffusion, Midjourney and DALL-E 2cited by 55
  19. 2020A Point-Cloud Deep Learning Framework for Prediction of Fluid Flow Fields on Irregular Geometriescited by 44
  20. 2024Copyright Protection in Generative AI: A Technical Perspectivecited by 38
  21. 2022DALL-E 2 Fails to Reliably Capture Common Syntactic Processescited by 31
  22. 2023BioinspiredLLM: Conversational Large Language Model for the Mechanics of Biological and Bio-inspired Materialscited by 30
  23. 2023ChatGPT for Programming Numerical Methodscited by 26
  24. 2024From GPT-4 to Gemini and Beyond: Assessing the Landscape of MLLMs on Generalizability, Trustworthiness and Causality through Four Modalitiescited by 19
  25. 2023From Google Gemini to OpenAI Q* (Q-Star): A Survey of Reshaping the Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Research Landscapecited by 18
  26. 2023How Generative AI models such as ChatGPT can be (Mis)Used in SPC Practice, Education, and Research? An Exploratory Studycited by 16
  27. 2024ChatGPT vs Gemini vs LLaMA on Multilingual Sentiment Analysiscited by 13
  28. 2022What Does DALL-E 2 Know About Radiology?cited by 7
  29. 2023Physics-informed PointNet: On how many irregular geometries can it solve an inverse problem simultaneously? Application to linear elasticitycited by 7
  30. 2024NutePrune: Efficient Progressive Pruning with Numerous Teachers for Large Language Modelscited by 7
  31. 2024AutoGenesisAgent: Self-Generating Multi-Agent Systems for Complex Taskscited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

3 papers.