Geometry Dependencies: Exploring Parallel Execution Beyond Command Order

A feature history records an order of modeling actions. That order can contain both necessary dependencies and choices made simply because an engineer worked on one feature at a time.

Could a geometric program expose the difference?

Consider a mounting plate with two independently defined hole patterns and a central opening. The research question is whether their definitions and checks could be processed concurrently while operations that actually depend on earlier geometry remain ordered.

Name the inputs each construction needs

Both hole patterns might depend on the plate’s mounting frame and a shared thickness. Neither pattern definition necessarily needs the completed definition of the other.

By contrast, an opening positioned from a newly created edge would depend on the construction that produces that edge. Its apparent independence in a drawing would be misleading.

A useful execution graph would represent these input relationships rather than infer independence from visual separation.

Keep shared parameters visible

Suppose the engineer changes the common hole diameter. Both patterns need to see the same intended value.

Processing the patterns at different times must not create a final object assembled from incompatible parameter states. Independent work still belongs to one defined design state.

This is a semantic condition for a proposed evaluator, not a specific implementation technique or a claim about an existing scheduler.

Preserve the construction when branches meet

Two independently prepared operands still need to participate in the intended final operation. Subtraction must retain its target and operand roles; dependent transformations must retain their order.

The combination stage may impose additional dependencies or validity checks. Identifying parallel branches does not establish that every downstream operation can also run concurrently.

The graph should therefore make both opportunities and necessary ordering explicit.

Define what a failed branch means

If one hole pattern is invalid, a result containing only the other pattern should not silently appear as the completed plate. The evaluator needs an explicit outcome for an incomplete construction.

An experiment could process the independent definitions in different permitted orders and compare the final geometry and failure behavior with a sequential reference. A second case should introduce a genuine cross-pattern dependency and verify that the graph changes accordingly.

The potential value is a clearer account of how geometric meaning constrains execution. Whether that produces a useful speedup is a separate measurement question. NeuroCAD’s research explores the graph semantics before making an end-to-end acceleration claim.

Research note: These proposed workflows do not establish current NeuroCAD feature availability, performance, or engineering qualification.