Amid the sweeping wave of Large Language Models (LLMs), many people’s perception of 'models' has gradually become rigid—as if a model is equivalent to a language interaction tool. In reality, however, the core positioning of LLMs has never deviated from their essential role as 'aids': Just as my slightly accented Mandarin sometimes confuses my classmates, communication with language models is inevitably limited by the form of expression. After all, LLMs are merely tools for processing linguistic information, not a universal key to solving all problems.
Let us return to a simple truth: Language proficiency and professional competence have always been two distinct things. A Chinese farmer can speak fluent Mandarin, and an American farmer can speak authentic English, but this does not mean they can directly engage in the industrial system, participate in the development of product production processes, or conduct core R&D. Language is only a carrier of communication; in-depth practice in professional fields requires industry logic, technical accumulation, and experience precipitation—areas that pure language models can never reach.
What deserves more attention is that when 'large language models' become a trending keyword, we easily overlook a truth: In the industrial sector, models have long taken on diverse forms and exist everywhere. It is not only large listed companies or foreign-funded enterprises that possess complex models; any normally operating enterprise unconsciously uses various industrial models in its daily operations. These models may be process specifications on the production line, experimental parameter systems in R&D, or judgment standards for quality control. They permeate every link, from procurement and production to quality inspection and R&D, silently supporting the efficient operation of the enterprise.
These widely used but never deliberately 'elevated' models are essentially the 'tacit knowledge' of an enterprise. As someone once said, there are three levels of awareness for any task: The lowest level is the mechanical repetition of 'chopping stones,' the middle level is 'supporting a family' to meet survival needs, and the highest level is 'building a church' to pursue value and meaning. Nobel Prize-level scientific research achievements often push a professional model to the height of 'building a church'—it not only solves specific problems but also embodies the exploration of laws and the pursuit of value.
By contrast, most industrial models treated as 'tools' in enterprises still remain at the level of 'chopping stones' or 'supporting a family.' Employees skillfully use them to handle daily work, yet rarely realize that these practices-tested processes, standards, and methods are themselves models with extractable value. They have not been endowed with theoretical height or systematically organized, but this does not prevent them from becoming a crucial part of an enterprise’s core competitiveness.
The popularity of LLMs has brought the concept of 'models' into public view, which is a good thing. However, we need to break out of the cognitive cocoon of language models. On one hand, we must clarify the auxiliary boundaries of language models and not blindly believe in their omnipotence; on the other hand, we must recognize those silent yet powerful implicit models in the industrial field. When enterprises begin to attach importance to the organization and extraction of this tacit knowledge, and when more people learn to examine the tools and methods around them from the perspective of 'building a church,' these scattered industrial models will surely unleash greater energy and become a vital force driving the progress of the industry.
