The map of approaches
Classical ML (linear models, trees, gradient boosting) dominates tabular problems and most production scoring systems. Deep learning dominates perception (vision, audio, text) where features are hard to hand-craft. Large language models excel at instruction-following over unstructured text. Retrieval-augmented generation grafts an LLM onto a search index so the answer comes from your data, not from the LLM's frozen weights.
What still wins on tabular data
For most enterprise scoring, ranking, and risk problems, gradient-boosted trees (xgboost, lightgbm, catboost) still beat neural networks at less compute and far less plumbing. Reach for deep learning when the input is naturally a tensor (image, waveform, sequence) or when you need an embedding to feed downstream classical models.
When to use an LLM
LLMs shine for tasks with no labeled data, where instructions are easier to write than code, and where 95% accuracy at zero training cost beats 98% accuracy after months of labeling. They are the wrong tool for high-precision scoring on structured data and for any problem where the cost of a hallucinated answer is large.