A Practical Application of Code of Ethics in Failure Case Studies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several packages of failure case studies have been published by the Education Committee of the ASCE Forensic Engineering Division aiming to promote failure literacy of professionals and students in the architecture, engineering, and construction industries. This paper discusses the efforts of the committee to compile a collection of failure case studies of ethics, including design flaws of Citicorp Building (NY, US), Harbour Cay Condominium collapse (FL, US), Rana Plaza collapse (Savar Upazila, Bangladesh), Sampoong Superstore collapse (Seoul, South Korea), Versailles Wedding Hall (Israel), Hyatt Regency Walkway collapse (MO, US), Montreal Olympic project management failure (Montreal, Canada), and Flint water crisis (MI, US). The paper discusses the overview of three cases in ethics and provides guidance on using these cases to understand and interpret the code of ethics of professional engineers. Lessons learned from these cases are presented, reaffirming that all professional engineers should commit to ethical responsibilities in society, the natural and built environment, the profession with regards to their clients, employers, and peers. It concludes that the health, safety, and welfare of the public should take precedence over all other responsibilities of practicing professional engineers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it