Vinci

Yesterday, Vinci ran ~30,000 simulations across scales from nanometers to meters. Left: ~5 µm Right: ~0.5 m Same system. Same execution. The requirement doesn’t change: - deterministic - FEA solver-accurate - manufacturing-resolution - zero-shot (no per-case setup or tuning) Most approaches break here. They simplify the geometry, constrain the problem, or retrain per domain. That doesn’t generalize. If you can’t scale, you don’t have a foundation model.

We started where physics is hardest. First: advanced memory packaging. Thermals, density, stack complexity. Then: CPUs. Full-system power maps, matching experimental data. Then: foundry workflows. Detailed package/RDL runs in seconds. No manual meshing. Now: mechanical systems. Different domain. Same requirement: - deterministic - FEA solver-accurate - manufacturing-resolution - zero-shot (no per-case setup or tuning) This is how a foundation model for physics gets built: start with the hardest constraints, validate under real engineering conditions, then expand outward.

What’s the difference between a frontier lab and production software? At Vinci, there isn’t one.