Matches well with the definition of the engineering method provided by Bill Hammack, “the engineer guy” [1]:

> Solving problems using rules of thumb that cause the best change in a poorly understood situation using available resources.

1: https://youtu.be/_ivqWN4L3zU

Lots of other people think that, but I disagree.

Have you tried getting great, repeatable results out of an LLM? It requires great depth of knowledge - about both how LLMs work and the specific topic you are trying to build against - plus a methodical process in figuring out what works and what doesn't.

I see no reason not to label that "engineering".

I also think it's important to distinguish between prompting and prompt engineering. Prompting is when people type prompts in a box. Prompt engineering, by my own definition, is when developers build further software on top of LLMs.

So is medicine “human engineering”?

Then again, I’m a software engineer that doesn’t consider my job engineering and I hate the title.

Isn't it? Wrangling a poorly understood system with partial knowledge and experimental skill seems like engineering to me.

I don’t know. The title ’engineer’ is overloaded. It’s like Sandwich Artist.

If we accept your definition. Then I am a food engineer, I am my own human engineer, I am a coffee engineer, I am child engineer, I am a dog engineer.

The word engineer has lost all meaning and this looks like title inflation.

Engineering is the application of science; as the science here is weak at best, calling it engineering seems a stretch. Perhaps “prompt author” would be more appropriate.

How about prompt construction? I first heard about it from the maintainer of LangChain, and I also came across it in Azure docs: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cognitive-services/o...

I think that there is a science here that people are working to discover. Prompt engineering is slowly turning into its own language and the more it's studied like this I think the more validity there will be to calling it engineering.

It’s not ridiculous

it’s just like the search tool engineers that would engineer the string to put in your google search

/s

Given the term 'software engineer' is now almost universally accepted (outside of legal jurisdictions where engineering = liability) I don't see why prompt engineering is a bad term.

1. It's already taken hold.

2. It looks great on LinkedIn.