Author Archives: mike@standardsmichigan.com

  1. Home
  2. Articles posted by mike@standardsmichigan.com
    3. (Page 10)
Loading
loading...

Barbering & Cosmetology Academies

‘The Barber of Seville’ by Luis Alvarez Catalá

Codes, standards and licensing for barbering schools and cosmetology academies are governed by local regulations; or local adaptations of national standards-setting organizations.  

Northern Michigan University | Marquette County

Building Codes

  1. Minimum Floor Space
    • Schools must provide adequate space for instruction and practice. For example, California requires a minimum of 3,000 square feet for cosmetology schools (which often include barbering), with at least 2,000 square feet dedicated to working, practice, and classroom areas. Additional space (e.g., 30 square feet per student beyond the first 50) may be required as enrollment increases.
    • Rooms for practical work must be sized appropriately, such as at least 14 feet wide for one row of barber chairs or 20 feet for two rows (California standard).
  2. Ceiling Height
    • Practice and classroom areas often require a minimum ceiling height, such as 9 feet, to ensure proper ventilation and comfort (e.g., California Building Code).
  3. Floor Finish
    • Floors in areas like restrooms or workspaces must be made of nonabsorbent materials (e.g., tile) to facilitate cleaning and maintain hygiene.
  4. Separation from Other Uses
    • Barbering schools must be distinct entities, not combined with residential spaces or unrelated businesses (e.g., Nevada’s NAC 643.500).
  5. Compliance with Local Building and Zoning Codes
    • Facilities must adhere to local ordinances for construction, occupancy, and zoning, ensuring the building is structurally sound and legally permitted for educational use (e.g., Virginia’s 18VAC41-20-270).
  6. Accessibility
    • Buildings must comply with accessibility standards (e.g., ADA in the U.S.), providing ramps, wide doorways, and accessible restrooms.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration: Bloodborne Pathogen Safety Standards


Safety

  1. Fire Safety
    • Compliance with the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code (e.g., New York’s 19 NYCRR Parts 600-1250) or equivalent, including fire exits, extinguishers, and alarms.
    • Emergency exits must be clearly marked and unobstructed.
  2. Electrical Safety
    • All electrical equipment (e.g., clippers, dryers) must be regularly inspected (e.g., PAT testing in some regions) to prevent shocks or fires.
  3. Ventilation and Temperature Control
    • Adequate ventilation systems are required to maintain air quality and a safe working temperature, protecting students and instructors from fumes or overheating.
  4. First Aid and Emergency Preparedness
    • A stocked first aid kit must be available, and schools should have protocols for handling accidents or emergencies.
  5. Equipment Safety
    • Tools and workstations (e.g., chairs, sinks) must be maintained in good condition to prevent injuries. Hazardous tools like razor-edged implements for callus removal are often prohibited (e.g., California regulations).
  6. Occupational Safety
    • Compliance with OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) or state equivalents, such as Virginia’s Department of Labor and Industry standards, to protect against workplace hazards like chemical exposure or repetitive strain.


Hygiene

  1. Sanitation of Facilities
    • Schools must be kept clean and sanitary at all times, including floors, walls, furniture, and workstations (e.g., Virginia’s 18VAC41-20-270).
  2. Disinfection of Tools
    • Each student or instructor must have a wet disinfection unit at their station for sterilizing reusable tools (e.g., combs, shears) after each use. Disinfectants must be EPA-registered and bactericidal, virucidal, and fungicidal.
    • Single-use items (e.g., razor blades) must be discarded after each client in a labeled sharps container.
  3. Hand Hygiene
    • Practitioners must wash hands with soap and water or use hand sanitizer before services (e.g., Texas Rule 83.102).
  4. Client Protection
    • Sanitary neck strips or towels must be used to prevent capes from contacting clients’ skin directly (e.g., California regulations).
    • Services cannot be performed on inflamed, broken, or infected skin, and practitioners with such conditions on their hands must wear gloves.
  5. Product Safety
    • Cosmetic products containing FDA-banned hazardous substances are prohibited, and all products must be used per manufacturer instructions (e.g., Virginia’s 18VAC41-20-270).
  6. Waste Management
    • Proper disposal of soiled items (e.g., hair clippings) and hazardous waste (e.g., blades) is required, often daily or after each client.
  7. Health Department Compliance
    • Schools must follow state health department guidelines and report inspection results (e.g., Virginia requires reporting to the Board of Barbers and Cosmetology).
  8. Self-Inspection
    • Annual self-inspections must be documented and retained for review (e.g., Virginia mandates keeping records for five years).


Discussion

  • State-Specific Variations: Always consult your state’s barbering or cosmetology board for exact requirements. For instance, Texas (TDLR) emphasizes signage and licensing display, while California focuses on detailed sterilization methods.
  • Inspections: Schools are subject to regular inspections by state boards or health departments to ensure compliance.

Cosmetology (as time allows)

 

8990 Grand River Ave, Detroit

Homepage

Underground Electrotechnology

Best practice literature to be covered in our 11 AM session today are listed below.  These codes and standards ensure safety, reliability, and compliance for underground electrical and telecommunications installations:

2028 National Electrical Safety Code

  • National Electrical Code (NEC), NFPA 70
    • Relevance: The NEC, published by the National Fire Protection Association, is the primary standard for safe electrical installations in the U.S. Articles 300 (Wiring Methods), 310 (Conductors for General Wiring), and 230 (Services) cover underground wiring, including burial depths, conduit requirements, and direct-burial cables like Type UF and USE-2. For example, NEC 300.5 specifies minimum cover depths (e.g., 24 inches for direct-burial cables, 18 inches for PVC conduit).
    • Key Aspects: Rules for conductor protection, grounding, GFCI requirements, and conduit types (e.g., Schedule 80 PVC). Adopted by most U.S. jurisdictions with local amendments.

ANSI/TIA-568 Series (Commercial Building Telecommunications Cabling Standards)

  • Relevance: Governs low-voltage telecommunications cabling, including underground installations. TIA-568.2-D (Balanced Twisted-Pair) and TIA-568.3-D (Optical Fiber) specify performance requirements for cables like Cat6 and fiber optics, including maximum distances (e.g., 100 meters for twisted-pair).
  • Key Aspects: Ensures signal integrity, proper separation from high-voltage lines, and compliance for plenum or direct-burial-rated cables. Voluntary unless mandated by local codes.

IEEE 835 (Standard Power Cable Ampacity Tables)

  • Relevance: Provides ampacity ratings for underground power cables, critical for sizing conductors to prevent overheating.
  • Key Aspects: Includes data for direct-burial and ducted installations, considering soil thermal resistivity and ambient conditions. Often referenced alongside NEC for high-current applications.

UL 83 (Standard for Thermoplastic-Insulated Wires and Cables)

  • Relevance: Underwriters Laboratories standard for wires like THWN-2, commonly used in underground conduits. Ensures cables meet safety and performance criteria for wet locations.
  • Key Aspects: Specifies insulation durability, temperature ratings, and suitability for direct burial or conduit use. NEC requires UL-listed cables for compliance.

OSHA 1910.305 (Wiring Methods, Components, and Equipment)

  • Relevance: U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration standard for workplace electrical safety, including underground installations in industrial settings.
  • Key Aspects: Specifies approved wiring methods (e.g., armored cable, conduit) and enclosure requirements for underground cable trays or boxes. Focuses on worker safety during installation and maintenance.

CSA C22.1 (Canadian Electrical Code)

  • Relevance: Canada’s equivalent to the NEC, governing underground electrical installations. Similar to NEC but tailored to Canadian conditions and regulations.
  • Key Aspects: Defines burial depths, conduit types, and grounding requirements. For example, low-voltage cables (<30V) require 6-inch burial depth, like NEC.

Notes:

  • Regional Variations: Always consult local building authorities, as codes like the NEC or AS/NZS 3000 may have amendments. For example, some U.S. states reduce burial depths for GFCI-protected circuits (NEC 300.5).
  • Low-Voltage vs. High-Voltage: Standards like TIA-568 and ISO/IEC 11801 focus on low-voltage (e.g., <50V) telecommunications, while NEC and IEC 60364 cover both power and telecom.
  • Practical Compliance: Before installation, call 811 (U.S.) or equivalent to locate underground utilities, and obtain permits/inspections as required by local codes.
  • Critical Examination: While these standards are authoritative, they can lag behind technological advancements (e.g., new cable types like GameChanger exceeding TIA-568 limits). Over-reliance on minimum requirements may limit performance for cutting-edge applications.

Underground Electrotechnology General Conditions and Standard Details

Related:

1793-2012 – IEEE Guide for Planning and Designing Transition Facilities between Overhead and Underground Transmission Lines

The effect of an underground to overhead transition point on the specification of sheath voltage limiters in underground networks

Channel Characteristics Analysis of Medium Voltage Overhead and Mixed Overhead/Underground Cable Power Network

P81/D4, Jan 2025 – IEEE Draft Guide for Measuring Earth Resistivity, Ground Impedance, and Earth Surface Potentials of a Grounding System

Cambridge Center for Smart Infrastructure & Construction

“No village or individual shall be compelled to make bridges at river banks,

except those who from of old are legally bound to do so.”

— Magna Cara Clause 23 (Limiting forced labor for infrastructure) 

“Clare Hall and King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, from the Banks of the River Cam” / Joseph Mallord William Turner (1793)

 

Smart Infrastructure: Getting More From Strategic Assets

Dr Jennifer Schooling, Director of CSIC

Dr Ajith Parlikad, CSIC Co-Investigator and Senior Lecturer

Mark Enzer, Global Water Sector Leader

Mott MacDonald; Keith Bowers, Principal Tunnel Engineer, London Underground

Ross Dentten, Asset Information and Configuration Manager, Crossrail

Matt Edwards, Asset Maintenance and Information Manager, Anglian Water Services

Jerry England, Group Digital Railway Director, Network Rail

Volker Buscher, Director, Arup Digital

 

Smart Infrastructure is a global opportunity worth £2trn-4.8trn. The world is experiencing a fourth industrial revolution due to the rapid development of technologies and digital abundance.

Smart Infrastructure involves applying this to economic infrastructure for the benefit of all stakeholders. It will allow owners and operators to get more out of what they already have, increasing capacity, efficiency and resilience and improving services.

It brings better performance at lower cost. Gaining more from existing assets is the key to enhancing service provision despite constrained finance and growing resource scarcity. It will often be more cost-effective to add to the overall value of mature infrastructure via digital enhancements than by physical enhancements – physical enhancements add `more of the same’, whereas digital enhancements can transform the existing as well.

Smart Infrastructure will shape a better future. Greater understanding of the performance of our infrastructure will allow new infrastructure to be designed and delivered more efficiently and to provide better whole-life value.

Data is the key – the ownership of it and the ability to understand and act on it. Industry, organisations and professionals need to be ready to adjust in order to take advantage of the emerging opportunities. Early adopters stand to gain the most benefit. Everyone in the infrastructure sector has a choice as to how fast they respond to the changes that Smart Infrastructure will bring. But everyone will be affected.

Change is inevitable. Progress is optional. Now is the time for the infrastructure industry to choose to be Smart.

 

LEARN MORE:

Cambridge Centre for Smart Infrastructure and Construction

Perspective: Since this paper is general in its recommendations, we provide examples of specific campus infrastructure data points that are difficult, if not impossible, to identify and “make smart” — either willfully, for lack of funding, for lack of consensus, for lack of understanding or leadership:

    1. Maintenance of the digital location of fire dampers in legacy buildings or even new buildings mapped with BIM.  Doors and ceiling plenums are continually being modified and the As-Built information is usually not accurate.  This leads to fire hazard and complicates air flow and assuring occupant temperature preferences (i.e. uncontrollable hot and cold spots) 
    2. Ampere readings of feeder breakers downstream from the electric service main.  The power chain between the service substation and the end-use equipment is a “no-man’s land” in research facilities that everyone wants to meter but few ever recover the cost of the additional metering.
    3. Optimal air flow rates in hospitals and commercial kitchens that satisfies both environmental air hazards and compartmentalized air pressure zones for fire safety.
    4. Identification of students, staff and faculty directly affiliated with the campus versus visitors to the campus.
    5. Standpipe pressure variations in municipal water systems
    6. Pinch points in municipal sewer systems in order to avoid building flooding.
    7. How much of university data center cost should be a shared (gateway) cost, and how much should be charged to individual academic and business units?
    8. Should “net-zero” energy buildings be charged for power generated at the university central heating and electric generation plant?
    9. How much staff parking should be allocated to academic faculty versus staff that supports the healthcare delivery enterprises; which in many cases provides more revenue to the university than the academic units?
    10. Finally, a classical conundrum in facility management spreadsheets: Can we distinguish between maintenance cost (which should be covered under an O&M budget) and capital improvement cost (which can be financed by investors)

 

 

Telecommunications Service Point

Today we get down in the weeds to examine the point of common coupling between a building and a telecommunication service provider.

Education facilities often require a more diverse approach to designing and implementing ICT systems than that of a typical commercial building.  First of all, educational settlements are frequently one building. That means not only does the ICT infrastructure need to meet the varying demands of a specific building, but multiple buildings must all be integrated into one cohesive design.

In an environment of providing multifunctional spaces within one building, it is common to find a combination of commercial, industrial, data center, health care and entertainment environments within just a few buildings; hence our preference for the word “settlements” over the more widely used word “campus”.

TIA Standards

ANSI/TIA-568-C series: Telecommunications Cabling Standards.  Specifies the requirements for various aspects of structured cabling systems, including cabling components, installation, and testing.

TIA-569-B: Telecommunications Pathways and Spaces.  Provides guidelines for the design and installation of pathways and spaces for telecommunications cabling.

TIA-606-B: Administration Standard for Commercial Telecommunications Infrastructure.  Specifies administration practices for the telecommunications infrastructure of commercial buildings.

Our inquiry cuts across the catalogs of several other standards developers:

NEC (National Electrical Code).  NEC Article 800 specifically addresses the installation of communications circuits and equipment.

ISO/IEC 11801: Information technology — Generic cabling for customer premises.  Defines generic telecommunications cabling systems (structured cabling) used for various services, including voice and data.

IEEE 802.3: Ethernet Standards. Defines standards for Ethernet networks, which are commonly used for data communication in buildings.

UL 497: Protectors for Paired Conductor Communications Circuits. Addresses requirements for protectors used to safeguard communications circuits from overvoltage events.

GR-1089-CORE: Electromagnetic Compatibility and Electrical Safety. Published by Telcordia (now part of Ericsson), this standard provides requirements for the electromagnetic compatibility and electrical safety of telecommunications equipment.

FCC Part 68: Connection of Terminal Equipment to the Telephone Network. Outlines the technical requirements for connecting terminal equipment to the public switched telephone network in the United States.

Local building codes and regulations also include requirements for the installation of telecommunication service equipment.

Last update: October 12, 2019

All school districts, colleges, universities and university-affiliated health care systems have significant product, system, firmware and labor resources allocated toward ICT.   Risk management departments are attentive to cybersecurity issues.   All school districts, colleges, universities and university-affiliated health care systems have significant product, system, firmware and labor resources allocated toward ICT.

The Building Industry Consulting Service International (BICSI) is a professional association supporting the advancement of the ICT community.   This community is roughly divided between experts who deal with “outside-plant” systems and “building premise” systems on either side of the ICT demarcation point.   BICSI standards cover the wired and wireless spectrum of voice, data, electronic safety & security, project management and audio & video technologies.  Its work is divided among several committees:

BICSI Standards Program Technical Subcommittees

BICSI International Standards Program

BICSI has released for public review a new consensus document that supports education industry ICT enterprises:  BICSI N1 – Installation Practices for Telecommunications and ICT Cabling and Related Cabling Infrastructure.    You may obtain a free electronic copy from: standards@bicsi.org; Jeff Silveira, (813) 903-4712, jsilveira@bicsi.org.

Comments are due November 19th.

 

You may send comments directly to Jeff (with copy to psa@ansi.org).   This commenting opportunity will be referred to IEEE SCC-18 and the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which meets 4 times monthly in American and European time zones and will meet today.  CLICK HERE for login information.

Issue: [18-191]

Category: Telecommunications, Electrical, #SmartCampus

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Michael Hiler

Readings:

What is Grounding and Bonding for Telecommunication Systems?

 

 

Adhiyamaan College of Engineering

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Open Commission Meeting May 15

Electricity

Meeting Documents

State of Michigan Electric Service Area Map

Information & Communication Technology Cabling

Balloting on the first stage of development of the 2023 National Electrical Code is underway now and will be completed by March 26th.  We collaborate with several experts in the IEEE who are the leading voices in standards setting for ICT infrastructure present in education communities.  The issues are  many and complex and fast-moving.   We provide transcripts and a sample of the issues that will determine the substance of the 2023 Edition.

Code Making Panel No. 3 Public Input Report

A sample of concepts in play:

Temperature limitations of Class 2 and Class 3 Cables

Fire resistive cabling systems

Multi-voltage (single junction, entry, pathway or connection) signaling control relay equipment

Listing of audio/video power-limited circuits

Code Making Panel No. 16 Public Input Report

A sample of concepts in play:

Definition of “Communication Utility”

Mechanical execution of work

Listed/Unlisted cables entering buildings

Underground communication cabling coordination with the National Electrical Safety Code

Public comment on the First Draft of the 2026 revision will be received until August 24, 2024.  We collaborate with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which hosts open colloquia 4 times monthly in European and American time zones.   See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.

"One day ladies will take their computers for walks in the park and tell each other, "My little computer said such a funny thing this morning" - Alan Turing

Large Language Model Standards

Perhaps the World Ends Here | Joy Harjo

 

The world begins at a kitchen table. No matter what, we must eat to live.
The gifts of earth are brought and prepared, set on the table.
So it has been since creation, and it will go on.
We chase chickens or dogs away from it. Babies teethe at the corners. They scrape their knees under it.
It is here that children are given instructions on what it means to be human.
We make men at it, we make women.
At this table we gossip, recall enemies and the ghosts of lovers.
Our dreams drink coffee with us as they put their arms around our children.
They laugh with us at our poor falling-down selves and as we put ourselves back together once again at the table.
This table has been a house in the rain, an umbrella in the sun.
Wars have begun and ended at this table. It is a place to hide in the shadow of terror.
A place to celebrate the terrible victory.
We have given birth on this table, and have prepared our parents for burial here.
At this table we sing with joy, with sorrow. We pray of suffering and remorse. We give thanks.
Perhaps the world will end at the kitchen table, while we are laughing and crying, eating of the last sweet bite.

 

Standards and benchmarks for evaluating large language models (LLMs). Some of the most commonly used benchmarks and standards include:

  1. GLUE (General Language Understanding Evaluation): GLUE is a benchmark designed to evaluate and analyze the performance of models across a diverse range of natural language understanding tasks, such as text classification, sentiment analysis, and question answering.
  2. SuperGLUE: SuperGLUE is an extension of the GLUE benchmark, featuring more difficult language understanding tasks, aiming to provide a more challenging evaluation for models.
  3. CoNLL (Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning): CoNLL has historically hosted shared tasks, including tasks related to coreference resolution, dependency parsing, and other syntactic and semantic tasks.
  4. SQuAD (Stanford Question Answering Dataset): SQuAD is a benchmark dataset for evaluating the performance of question answering systems. It consists of questions posed on a set of Wikipedia articles, where the model is tasked with providing answers based on the provided context.
  5. RACE (Reading Comprehension from Examinations): RACE is a dataset designed to evaluate reading comprehension models. It consists of English exam-style reading comprehension passages and accompanying multiple-choice questions.
  6. WMT (Workshop on Machine Translation): The WMT shared tasks focus on machine translation, providing benchmarks and evaluation metrics for assessing the quality of machine translation systems across different languages.
  7. BLEU (Bilingual Evaluation Understudy): BLEU is a metric used to evaluate the quality of machine-translated text relative to human-translated reference texts. It compares n-gram overlap between the generated translation and the reference translations.
  8. ROUGE (Recall-Oriented Understudy for Gisting Evaluation): ROUGE is a set of metrics used for evaluating automatic summarization and machine translation. It measures the overlap between generated summaries or translations and reference summaries or translations.

These benchmarks and standards play a crucial role in assessing the performance and progress of large language models, helping researchers and developers understand their strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement.

Yann Lecun & Lex Fridman: Limits of LLMs

New topic for us; time only to cover the basics.  We have followed language, generally, however — every month — because best practice discovery and promulgation in conceiving, designing, building, occupying and maintaining the architectural character of education settlements depends upon a common vocabulary.  The struggle to agree upon vocabulary presents an outsized challenge to the work we do.

Large language models hold significant potential for the building construction industry by streamlining various processes. They can analyze vast amounts of data to aid in architectural design, structural analysis, and project management. These models can generate detailed plans, suggest optimized construction techniques, and assist in cost estimation. Moreover, they facilitate better communication among stakeholders by providing natural language interfaces for discussing complex concepts. By harnessing the power of large language models, the construction industry can enhance efficiency, reduce errors, and ultimately deliver better-designed and more cost-effective buildings.

Join us today at the usual hour.  Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

Related:

print(“Python”)

Standards January: Language

Standard for Large Language Model Agent Interface

 

History of the English Speaking Peoples

Michigan Central

Since so much of what we do in standards setting is built upon a foundation of a shared understanding and agreement of the meaning of words (no less so than in technical standard setting) that time is well spent reflecting upon the origin of the nouns and verbs of that we use every day.   Best practice cannot be discovered, much less promulgated, without its understanding secured with common language.

Word Counts

2024 Alumni Awards

Cambridge: English language education in the era of generative AI

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.

 

 

Welcome

Standards Michigan Group, LLC

2723 South State Street | Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI 48104 USA

888-746-3670

DIRECTIONS

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