Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ghosh shook up the precast concrete industry when he set out in the 1980s to develop provisions for seismic codes and standards that supported the use of precast concrete.Thanks to his unwavering efforts, architects and builders can use precast concrete just as easily as other building materials."In this country, you can't build anything without a construction permit, and you can't get that permit unless the authorities are satisfied that your building plans are in compliance with the applicable building code," he says."Without these codes being neutral to favorable, precast concrete would not have been able to compete for these projects."Ghosh's path to precast concrete began in India, where he received a bachelor's degree in civil engineering."At that time in India, that is what you studied."A year after graduation, he began graduate studies at the University of Waterloo in Canada, where he received a master's and PhD in structural engineering.In 1974, the Portland Cement Association in Skokie, Ill., offered Ghosh a job that evolved to include responsibilities for overseeing codes and standards for the cement industry.A few years later, after leaving briefly to teach at the University of Illinois-Chicago, Ghosh returned to PCA and resumed his crusade to get precast concrete approved for seismic zones."It was my job to look after the concrete industry's interest in codes," he says, "and I found that precast was at a distinct disadvantage for no good reason."The codes and standards at the time stated that designers could use precast concrete in seismic zone construction projects only if they could prove that a precast concrete structure copied the strength and toughness of a comparable monolithic reinforced concrete structure (emulative design)."It could be done, but it created a lot of problems in getting approvals," Ghosh says.Ghosh spent the next several years championing changes in codes and standards to help level the playing field for precast concrete.In the early 1990s, he was appointed chair of the Concrete Subcommittee of the committee that updates the NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures, a document that forms the basis of seismic design provisions in U.S. codes and standards.Ghosh used this position to initiate efforts that led to the 1994 NEHRP provisions adding options in an appendix to the concrete chapter for the use of precast concrete elements in moderate to high seismic applications.The appendix eventually moved into the main body of the NEHRP provisions and the options expanded in scope.Adoption into codes and standards ensued.The most comprehensive provisions to date for the use of precast concrete structures are in Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11) and Commentary (ACI 318R-11).
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.353 | 0.225 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".