Category Archives: Language

Loading
loading...

International Building Code Definitions: Chapter 2

“The Tower of Babel” 1563 | Pieter Bruegel the Elder

Widely accepted definitions (sometimes “terms of art”) are critical in building codes because they ensure clarity, consistency, and precision in communication among architects, engineers, contractors, and regulators.  Ambiguity or misinterpretation of terms like “load-bearing capacity,” “fire resistance,”  “egress” or “grounding and bonding”  could lead to design flaws, construction errors, or inadequate safety measures, risking lives and property.
“Standardized” definitions — by nature unstable — create a shared language that transcends local practices or jargon, enabling uniform application and enforcement across jurisdictions.  Today at the usual hour we explore the nature and the status of the operational language that supports our raison d’être of making educational settlements safer, simpler, lower-cost and longer-lasting.  

 

2021 IBC Chapter 2: Definitions

2024/2025/2026 ICC CODE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE

Group B Documents

Complete Monograph (2650 pages) | Note our proposal on Page 754

Standards Curricula Program

NIST Standards Coordination Office Curricula Development Cooperative Agreement Program.

How to Apply | Awardees 2012-2025 | News Items

NIST Headquarters (Click on image)

 

NIST continues its Standards Curriculum program through the Standards Coordination Office Curricula Development Cooperative Agreement Program (SCO CD CAP), formerly known as the Standards Services Curricula Development Cooperative Agreement Program.  This ongoing initiative, started in 2012 (initially as Education Challenge Grants), funds U.S. colleges and universities to develop and integrate undergraduate and/or graduate-level curricula on documentary standards, standards development, and standardization into courses, modules, seminars, and learning resources.  The University of Michigan is a past recipient of a standards education award through this program.

The most recent funding round was for Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25):

  • The Notice of Federal Funding Opportunity (NOFO) was released on January 14, 2025.
  • Applications were due by April 14, 2025.
  • NIST anticipated awarding up to 8 grants, each up to $100,000, with project periods of up to 3 years (potentially extending into 2027–2028).

Projects funded under FY25 involve curriculum development and implementation that may continue into 2026 and beyond, including required workshops.

As of early 2026, no new Notice of Federal Funding Opportunity (NOFO) has been announced for FY2026. The program has historically issued funding rounds annually or near-annually, with recent awards in prior years (e.g., 2024 awards totaling over $1.1 million to 8 universities). However, due to proposed budget reductions for NIST in FY2026, future rounds may be impacted or delayed.


2024 Update: NIST Awards Funding to 8 Universities to Advance Standards Education


The Standards Coordination Office of the National Institute of Standards and Technology conducts standards-related programs, and provides knowledge and services that strengthen the U.S. economy and improve the quality of life.  Its goal is to equip U.S. industry with the standards-related tools and information necessary to effectively compete in the global marketplace. 

Every year it awards grants to colleges and universities through its Standards Services Curricula Cooperative Agreement Program  to provide financial assistance to support curriculum development for the undergraduate and/or graduate level. These cooperative agreements support the integration of standards and standardization information and content into seminars, courses, and learning resources. The recipients will work with NIST to strengthen education and learning about standards and standardization. 

The 2019 grant cycle will require application submissions before April 30, 2019 (contingent upon normal operation of the Department of Commerce).  Specifics about the deadline will be posted on the NIST and ANSI websites.  We will pass on those specifics as soon as they are known.

The winners of the 2018 grant cycle are Bowling Green State University, Michigan State University,  Oklahoma State University, and Texas A&M University. (Click here)

The University of Michigan received an award during last year’s grant cycle (2017).   An overview of the curriculum — human factors in automotive standards  — is linked below:

NIST Standards Curricula INTRO Presentation _ University of Michigan Paul Green

Information about applying for the next grant cycle is available at this link (Click here) and also by communicating with Ms. Mary Jo DiBernardo (301-975-5503; maryjo.dibernardo@nist.gov)

LEARN MORE:

Click here for link to the previous year announcement.

Technical Requirements for Weighing & Measuring Devices

Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent

 

Conan O’Brian

HOME

 

Charlie Kirk (August 12, 2025): “Has U.S. President Donald Trump gone too far?”

Timon of Athens

Swing State Pronunciation

This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.

Design Standard Readability

Fry readability formula

How Consistent Are the Best-Known Readability Equations in Estimating the Readability of Design Standards?

Shixiang Zhou & Heejin Jeong
Industrial and Operations Engineering Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Transportation Research Institute Driver Interface Group
Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

 

Abstract.  Research problem: Readability equations are widely used to compute how well readers will be able to understand written materials. Those equations were usually developed for nontechnical materials, namely, textbooks for elementary, middle, and high schools. This study examines to what extent computerized readability predictions are consistent for highly technical material – selected Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and International Standards Organization (ISO) Recommended Practices and Standards relating to driver interfaces. Literature review: A review of original sources of readability equations revealed a lack of specific criteria in counting various punctuation and text elements, leading to inconsistent readability scores. Few studies on the reliability of readability equations have identified this problem, and even fewer have systematically investigated the extent of the problem and the reasons why it occurs.  Research questions:

(1) Do the most commonly used equations give identical readability scores?
(2) How do the scores for each readability equation vary with readability tools?
(3) If there are differences between readability tools, why do they occur?
(4) How does the score vary with the length of passage examined?

Method: Passages of varying lengths from 12 selected SAE and ISO Recommended Practices and Standards were examined using five readability equations (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Gunning Fog Index, SMOG Index, Coleman-Liau Index, and Automated Readability Index) implemented five ways (four online readability tools and Microsoft Word 2013 for Windows). In addition, short test passages of text were used to understand how different readability tools counted text elements, such as words and sentences. Results and conclusions: The mean readability scores of the passages from those 12 SAE and ISO Recommended Practices and Standards ranged from the 10th grade reading level to about 15th. The mean grade reading levels computed across the websites were: Flesch-Kincaid 12.8, Gunning Fog 15.1 SMOG 12.6, Coleman-Liau 13.7, and Automated Readability Index 12.3. Readability score estimates became more consistent as the length of the passage examined increased, with no noteworthy improvements beyond 900 words. Among the five readability tools, scores typically differed by two grade levels, but the scores should have been the same. These differences were due to how compound and hyphenated words, slashes, numbers, abbreviations and acronyms, and URLs were counted, as well other punctuation and text elements. These differences occurred because the sources for these equations often did not specify how to score various punctuation and text elements. Of the tools examined, the authors recommend Microsoft Word 2013 for Windows if the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level is required.

 

“Stopping By Woods on a Snowy Evening”

Randall Thompson’s “Frostiana” is a choral cycle based on the poems of Robert Frost. The cycle consists of settings for mixed chorus and piano, and it was premiered in 1959. “Frostiana” was commissioned to celebrate the bicentennial of the town of Amherst, Massachusetts, and it features seven of Frost’s poems set to music by Thompson.

“Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening” is one of the poems included in the “Frostiana” cycle. The composition captures the reflective and contemplative mood of Frost’s poem, where the narrator pauses to admire the beauty of a snowy evening in a quiet forest. Randall Thompson’s musical setting adds another layer to Frost’s words, enhancing the emotional impact of the poem.

Thompson’s approach in “Frostiana” is characterized by its accessibility and tonal clarity. His settings aim to convey the meaning and atmosphere of Frost’s poetry through the expressive power of choral music. The entire “Frostiana” cycle is a celebration of both Thompson’s skill as a composer and Frost’s enduring contribution to American literature.

Acoustics

 

Qu’est-ce qu’une nation?

Ernest Renan (1823-1892) was a French philosopher, historian, and scholar of religion. He is best known for his work on nationalism and the relationship between language, culture, and identity.  The language of technology– and the catalog of codes, standards, guidelines, recommended practices and government regulations rest upon a common understanding of how things can and should work separately.  The essay is widely cited:

Qu’est-ce qu’une nation ?

What is a Nation ?

What is a Nation ?

In our domain we routinely see technical agreement and disagreement among stakeholders resolved, or left unresolved because of definitions — even when discussion is conducted in English.  We keep the topic of language (Tamil (மொழி) — since it is one of the most widely spoken languages on earth) on our aperiodic Language colloquia.  See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.

Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne

C’est quoi ?

La Loi Ne Fait Plus Le Bonheur

Normalisation volontaire en électrotechnologie

AFNOR: Norme NF C 15-100

National Electrical Codes

English and French are the two most prominent diplomatic languages, especially in historical and international contexts. They have long been the primary languages of diplomacy due to their widespread use in international organizations and historical influence.

English: Dominates in modern diplomacy, international law, and global organizations. It is the working language in many international forums, including the United Nations, NATO, and the Commonwealth of Nations.

French: Traditionally known as the “language of diplomacy,” French was the dominant diplomatic language until the 20th century. It remains a significant language in international relations, particularly within the United Nations, the European Union, and many African nations.

While other languages like Spanish, Arabic, Russian, and Chinese are also used in diplomatic contexts and are official languages of the United Nations, English and French are the most universally recognized and utilized in diplomatic settings.

The Civilizational Crisis No One Expects

This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.

LLM Model Evaluation & Agent Interface

IEEE sponsors two AI and ADS projects that follow ANSI standardization requirements:

Title: IEEE P3119 – Standard for the Procurement of Artificial Intelligence and Automated Decision Systems

Scope: The IEEE P3119 standard establishes a uniform set of definitions and a process model for procuring Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Automated Decision Systems (ADS). It covers government procurement, in-house development, and hybrid public-private development of AI/ADS. The standard redefines traditional procurement stages—problem definition, planning, solicitation, critical evaluation (e.g., impact assessments), and contract execution—using an IEEE Ethically Aligned Design (EAD) foundation and a participatory approach to address socio-technical and responsible innovation considerations. It focuses on mitigating unique AI risks compared to traditional technologies and applies to commercial AI products and services procured through formal contracts.

Purpose: The purpose of IEEE P3119 is to help government entities, policymakers, and technologists make transparent, accountable, and responsible choices in procuring AI/ADS. It provides a framework to strengthen procurement processes, ensuring due diligence, transparency about risks, and alignment with public interest. The standard aims to minimize AI-related risks (e.g., bias, ethical concerns) while maximizing benefits, complementing existing procurement practices and shaping the market for responsible AI solutions. It supports agencies in critically evaluating AI tools, assessing vendor transparency, and integrating ethical considerations into procurement.

Developmental Timelines:

    • September 23, 2021: The IEEE Standards Association (SA) Standards Board approved the project and established the IEEE P3119 Working Group. The Project Authorization Request (PAR) was created to define the scope.
    • 2021–Ongoing: Development continues, with no final publication date confirmed in available sources. As of July 18, 2024, the standard was still in progress, focusing on detailed process recommendations.
    • The standard is being developed as a voluntary socio-technical standard, with plans to test it against existing regulations (e.g., via regulatory sandboxes).

By Whom:

    • Working Group Chair: Gisele Waters, Ph.D., Director of Service Development and Operations at Design Run Group, co-founder of the AI Procurement Lab, and a human-centered design researcher focused on risk mitigation for vulnerable populations.
    • Working Group Vice Chair: Cari Miller, co-founder of the AI Procurement Lab and the Center for Inclusive Change, an AI governance leader and risk expert.
    • IEEE P3119 Working Group: Comprises a global network of IEEE SA volunteers from diverse industries, collaborating to develop standards addressing market needs and societal benefits. The group integrates expertise from government workers, policymakers, and technologists.
    • Inspiration: The standard was inspired by the AI and Procurement: A Primer report from the New York University Center for Responsible AI.

The IEEE P3119 standard is a collaborative effort to address the unique challenges of AI procurement, emphasizing ethical and responsible innovation for public benefit

Title: IEEE P3120 – Standard for Quantum Computing Architecture

Scope: The IEEE P3120 standard defines a general architecture for quantum computers, focusing on the structure and organization of quantum computing systems. It covers the overall system architecture, including quantum hardware components (e.g., qubits, quantum gates), control systems, interfaces with classical computing systems, and software layers for programming and operation. The standard aims to provide a framework for designing interoperable and scalable quantum computing systems, addressing both hardware and software considerations for quantum and hybrid quantum-classical architectures.

Purpose: The purpose of IEEE P3120 is to establish a standardized framework to guide the design, development, and integration of quantum computing systems. It seeks to ensure consistency, interoperability, and scalability across quantum computing platforms, facilitating innovation and collaboration in the quantum computing ecosystem. By providing clear architectural guidelines, the standard supports developers, researchers, and industry stakeholders in building reliable and efficient quantum computers, bridging the gap between theoretical quantum computing and practical implementation.

Developmental Timelines:

    • September 21, 2023: The IEEE Standards Association (SA) Standards Board approved the Project Authorization Request (PAR) for P3120, initiating the project under the IEEE Computer Society’s Microprocessor Standards Committee (C/MSC).
    • 2023–Ongoing: Development is in progress, with no confirmed publication date in available sources. As a standards development project, it involves iterative drafting, review, and consensus-building, typical of IEEE processes, which can span several years.
    • The standard is being developed as a voluntary standard, with potential for testing and refinement through industry and academic collaboration.

By Whom:

    • Sponsor: IEEE Computer Society, specifically the Microprocessor Standards Committee (C/MSC), which oversees standards related to microprocessor and computing architectures.
    • Working Group: The IEEE P3120 Working Group consists of volunteers from academia, industry, and research institutions with expertise in quantum computing, computer architecture, and related fields. Specific chairs or members are not detailed in available sources, but IEEE SA working groups typically include global experts from relevant domains.
    • Stakeholders: The development involves contributions from quantum computing researchers, hardware manufacturers, software developers, and standardization experts to ensure a comprehensive and practical standard.

The IEEE P3120 standard is a critical step toward formalizing quantum computing architectures, aiming to support the growing quantum technology industry with a robust and interoperable framework.

 

Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background
Standards Michigan
error: Content is protected !!
Skip to content