{"component": "clause", "props": {"groups": [{"snippet_links": [{"key": "means-and-methods-of-instruction", "type": "clause", "offset": [19, 51]}, {"key": "textbooks-and-other-teaching-materials", "type": "clause", "offset": [70, 108]}, {"key": "board-shall", "type": "definition", "offset": [169, 180]}, {"key": "professional-staff", "type": "definition", "offset": [244, 262]}], "size": 4, "samples": [{"hash": "evN28XYyUI6", "uri": "/contracts/evN28XYyUI6#methods-and-materials", "label": "Collective Bargaining Agreement", "score": 32.0922024164, "published": true}, {"hash": "5uWo2HLD6P8", "uri": "/contracts/5uWo2HLD6P8#methods-and-materials", "label": "Collective Bargaining Agreement", "score": 22.8138261465, "published": true}, {"hash": "kZArsKbIK9F", "uri": "/contracts/kZArsKbIK9F#methods-and-materials", "label": "Collective Bargaining Agreement", "score": 21.6913073238, "published": true}], "snippet": "To decide upon the means and methods of instruction, the selection of textbooks and other teaching materials, and the use of teaching aids of every kind and nature. The Board shall always be cognizant of the opinions and recommendations of the professional staff.", "hash": "2ca5eedaf6813d3a286c141f077db800", "id": 1}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "patient-population", "type": "definition", "offset": [6, 24]}], "size": 3, "samples": [{"hash": "jgNsaafMSiJ", "uri": "/contracts/jgNsaafMSiJ#methods-and-materials", "label": "End User Agreement", "score": 25.2724161533, "published": true}, {"hash": "lHMVBCJUUPV", "uri": "/contracts/lHMVBCJUUPV#methods-and-materials", "label": "End User Agreement", "score": 25.2669404517, "published": true}, {"hash": "gVzfCxtPqWj", "uri": "/contracts/gVzfCxtPqWj#methods-and-materials", "label": "End User Agreement", "score": 25.0013689254, "published": true}], "snippet": "\u200c\n2.1 Patient population and ground truth labeling", "hash": "8389b537fdb43f2b968874d182d785cb", "id": 2}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "space-limitations", "type": "clause", "offset": [355, 372]}, {"key": "details-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [404, 414]}, {"key": "root-mean-square", "type": "definition", "offset": [675, 691]}, {"key": "the-author", "type": "definition", "offset": [800, 810]}, {"key": "number-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [916, 925]}, {"key": "table-1", "type": "clause", "offset": [1280, 1287]}, {"key": "the-p", "type": "clause", "offset": [1461, 1466]}, {"key": "value-given", "type": "clause", "offset": [1550, 1561]}], "size": 2, "samples": [{"hash": "6gVuPoevOOg", "uri": "/contracts/6gVuPoevOOg#methods-and-materials", "label": "Statistical Significance Tests", "score": 19.0, "published": true}, {"hash": "3Gwfl7pRVHa", "uri": "/contracts/3Gwfl7pRVHa#methods-and-materials", "label": "Research Agreement", "score": 19.0, "published": true}], "snippet": "For each of the 18820 pairs of the ad-hoc retrieval runs of TREC 3, 5\u20138, we computed the two-sided statistical sig- nificance (p-value) of the difference in the pair\u2019s mean aver- age precision using each of three tests: the randomization, shifted bootstrap, and Student\u2019s paired t-test. Both the ran- domization and bootstrap are distribution-free tests. Space limitations prevent us from explaining the details of each of these well-known tests. For both the randomization and bootstrap, we performed 100,000 samples. For each pair of runs, we sampled topics without replacement to produce runs with 10, 20, 30, and 40 topics. To compare significance tests, we computed the root mean square error between each test and each other test\u2019s p-values. The root mean square error is: Copyright is held by the author/owner(s). 1 \u03a3N (Ei \u2212 Oi)2 1/2 ACM 978-1-60558-483-6/09/07. N i Pairs of TREC runs with p-values \u2265 0.0001 Number of Topics 50 40 30 20 10 rand. vs. t-test 0.007 0.009 0.011 0.018 0.037 boot. vs. t-test 0.007 0.009 0.011 0.017 0.035 boot. vs. rand. 0.011 0.014 0.017 0.026 0.051 Run pairs with p-value p such that 0.0001 < p < 0.5 rand. vs. t-test 0.005 0.006 0.008 0.012 0.027 boot. vs. t-test 0.008 0.010 0.013 0.020 0.041 boot. vs. rand. 0.010 0.013 0.016 0.024 0.047\nTable 1: The root mean square error among the ran- domization (rand.), t-test, and the bootstrap (boot.) test\u2019s p-values for pairs of TREC runs such that all three tests agree that the p-value p is 0.0001 (top) and 0.0001 < p < 0.5 (bottom). where Ei is the estimated p-value given by one test and Oi is the other test\u2019s p-value.", "hash": "df01dfbf1cb0edae503d91a78ef507a7", "id": 3}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "means-and-methods-of-instruction", "type": "clause", "offset": [19, 51]}, {"key": "selection-of-the", "type": "clause", "offset": [57, 73]}, {"key": "other-materials", "type": "clause", "offset": [88, 103]}, {"key": "the-teacher", "type": "definition", "offset": [184, 195]}], "size": 2, "samples": [{"hash": "3yrHoF0evbk", "uri": "/contracts/3yrHoF0evbk#methods-and-materials", "label": "Master Agreement", "score": 30.1246618457, "published": true}, {"hash": "3EMZkjaJ8bc", "uri": "/contracts/3EMZkjaJ8bc#methods-and-materials", "label": "Master Agreement", "score": 17.4544030183, "published": true}], "snippet": "To decide upon the means and methods of instruction, the selection of the textbooks and other materials, and the use of teaching aids of every kind and nature-making consultation with the teacher or teachers concerned.", "hash": "03f2474b4797e8e2b630e9f4200a5bab", "id": 4}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "the-variations", "type": "clause", "offset": [72, 86]}, {"key": "an-agreement", "type": "clause", "offset": [157, 169]}, {"key": "types-of-data", "type": "clause", "offset": [243, 256]}, {"key": "verb-agreement", "type": "clause", "offset": [322, 336]}, {"key": "college-students", "type": "clause", "offset": [485, 501]}, {"key": "collective-nouns", "type": "clause", "offset": [507, 523]}, {"key": "counts-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [821, 830]}, {"key": "the-wall-street-journal", "type": "clause", "offset": [907, 930]}, {"key": "british-national", "type": "definition", "offset": [946, 962]}, {"key": "plural-and-singular", "type": "clause", "offset": [1140, 1159]}, {"key": "state-university", "type": "definition", "offset": [1209, 1225]}, {"key": "completion-test", "type": "definition", "offset": [1338, 1353]}, {"key": "see-appendix-a", "type": "clause", "offset": [1423, 1437]}, {"key": "number-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [1800, 1809]}, {"key": "order-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [1937, 1945]}, {"key": "the-phrases", "type": "definition", "offset": [2401, 2412]}, {"key": "presented-to", "type": "definition", "offset": [2418, 2430]}, {"key": "computer-monitor", "type": "clause", "offset": [2518, 2534]}, {"key": "the-trial", "type": "clause", "offset": [3066, 3075]}, {"key": "an-additional", "type": "clause", "offset": [3153, 3166]}, {"key": "students-enrolled", "type": "definition", "offset": [3231, 3248]}, {"key": "in-the-united-states", "type": "clause", "offset": [3370, 3390]}, {"key": "the-procedure", "type": "definition", "offset": [3580, 3593]}, {"key": "the-participants", "type": "clause", "offset": [3627, 3643]}, {"key": "singular-or-plural", "type": "clause", "offset": [3854, 3872]}, {"key": "the-subject", "type": "clause", "offset": [3876, 3887]}, {"key": "appendix-b", "type": "clause", "offset": [4097, 4107]}, {"key": "subject-matter", "type": "clause", "offset": [4130, 4144]}, {"key": "subject-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [4308, 4318]}, {"key": "third-person", "type": "definition", "offset": [4368, 4380]}, {"key": "proper-name", "type": "definition", "offset": [4412, 4423]}, {"key": "the-distribution", "type": "clause", "offset": [4850, 4866]}], "size": 2, "samples": [{"hash": "8EjCg2bU3O", "uri": "/contracts/8EjCg2bU3O#methods-and-materials", "label": "Research Paper", "score": 19.0, "published": true}, {"hash": "2LSjl7HvcU7", "uri": "/contracts/2LSjl7HvcU7#methods-and-materials", "label": "Research Paper", "score": 19.0, "published": true}], "snippet": "The first set of studies was designed to better docu- ment and quantify the variations between British and American English in the use of plural number when an agreement target\u2019s controller or antecedent has a collective head. We gathered two types of data from British and American speakers and writers. First, to assess verb agreement using matched collective and noncollective materials under comparable conditions, we elicited spoken sentence completions from American and British college students. The collective nouns sampled were chosen from a diction- ary of collectives (\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587 1985) to represent a range of human (team, committee), nonhuman animate (herd, flock), corporate (government, association), and ostensibly inanimate (fleet, forest) groupings. Second, for a subset of these collectives we carried out counts of singular andplural verb andpronoun agreement with collective controllers in the Wall Street Journal corpus and the British National Corpus. SPOKEN SENTENCE COMPLETIONS. To compare the incidence of plural agreement after collective controllers with the incidence of plural agreement after semantically related plural and singular noncollectives, thirty-nine students at Michigan State University and thirty-nine students and research workers at Cambridge University provided spoken sentence completions. The completion test was assembled from ninety-six triplets of semantically relatednouns (see Appendix A). Each triplet consistedof a collective (e.g. army), a semantically related noncollective singular (e.g. soldier), and the correspond- ing plural (e.g. soldiers). Three lists of ninety-six simple definite noun phrases were assembledfrom these triplets, with one noun in each noun phrase (e.g. the army). Every list contained one noun from every set and an equal number of nouns of each of the three types (collective, singular, andplural). Across the three lists, every noun occurred just once. The order of the nouns within lists was random, constrained so that there were no more than two successive occurrences of the same kind of noun. The same random order was used for all three lists, so that nouns from the same triplet occurred in the same ordinal position in every list. Each list began with the same four practice items, consisting of two noncollective singulars and two noncollective plurals that differed from the noun phrases used within the lists. The phrases were presented to participants individually under computer control, each phrase appearing centeredon the computer monitor. Where there were spelling discrep- ancies in American and British (neighbor/neighbour), the spelling presented was the appropriate one for the dialect. Participants were asked to read the phrase aloud and complete it as a simple sentence, as fast as possible with the first thing that came to mind. The speakers were instructed by example to use completions consisting of the copula BE and a predicate adjective. On each trial, when the participant began to talk, the experimenter clearedthe computer screen. At the completion of the trial, the participant pressed the computer\u2019s mouse to move on to the next phrase. An additional sample of spoken completions was gathered from thirteen British students enrolled at Michigan State University, identified as British nationals by the campus administration. Their durations of residence in the United States varied. Each of the British students received the entire set of 288 definite noun phrases arranged in one of six random orders, preceded by the same four practice trials. In other respects the procedure was the same as described above. The participants\u2019 responses were recorded, transcribed, and scored. The scoring noted whether the verb usedwas singular, plural, or other. The \u2018other\u2019 category coveredcases in which the verb couldnot be unambiguously scored as singular or plural or the subject noun phrase was inaccurately produced. CORPUS COUNTS. The part-of-speech tagged Wall Street Journal corpus and British National Corpus were searched for occurrences of the subset of collective nouns listed in Appendix B. To better equate the subject matter of the American and British texts, the search in the British National Corpus was restricted to the domain of finance and commerce. When a collective served as the subject of a clause or as the same-sentence antecedent of a third person pronoun, and was not part of a proper name, the verb or pronoun agreement target was hand-coded as singular, plural, or unspecified (for verbs with morphologically invariant number, such as past tense verbs). The search in the Wall Street Journal corpus was exhaustive. In the British National Corpus, the number of tokens for each collective was set at a maximum of 300, sampled at random from all of the texts within the domain. For the two sources, Appendix B gives the distribution across the collective nouns of the incidence of verb and pronoun tokens with unambigu- ous number.", "hash": "a3287c32f9aee8cff6ca3d61acc57c71", "id": 5}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "the-current", "type": "clause", "offset": [0, 11]}, {"key": "english-language-learning", "type": "clause", "offset": [92, 117]}, {"key": "related-to", "type": "clause", "offset": [165, 175]}, {"key": "teachers-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [297, 308]}, {"key": "english-department", "type": "clause", "offset": [313, 331]}, {"key": "state-university", "type": "definition", "offset": [337, 353]}, {"key": "the-participants", "type": "clause", "offset": [379, 395]}, {"key": "students-enrolled", "type": "definition", "offset": [477, 494]}, {"key": "the-student", "type": "clause", "offset": [504, 515]}, {"key": "secondary-school-level", "type": "definition", "offset": [573, 595]}, {"key": "high-school-level", "type": "clause", "offset": [612, 629]}, {"key": "the-primary", "type": "clause", "offset": [889, 900]}, {"key": "collect-data", "type": "clause", "offset": [915, 927]}, {"key": "based-on", "type": "clause", "offset": [1028, 1036]}, {"key": "research-question", "type": "clause", "offset": [1041, 1058]}, {"key": "related-studies", "type": "clause", "offset": [1072, 1087]}, {"key": "the-respondents", "type": "clause", "offset": [1139, 1154]}, {"key": "information-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [1244, 1258]}, {"key": "use-of-ict", "type": "clause", "offset": [1336, 1346]}, {"key": "included-equipment", "type": "definition", "offset": [1552, 1570]}, {"key": "ease-of-use", "type": "clause", "offset": [1762, 1773]}, {"key": "actual-use", "type": "definition", "offset": [2065, 2075]}, {"key": "strongly-disagree", "type": "clause", "offset": [2206, 2223]}, {"key": "strongly-agree", "type": "clause", "offset": [2231, 2245]}, {"key": "the-instrument", "type": "clause", "offset": [2268, 2282]}, {"key": "representative-group", "type": "definition", "offset": [2314, 2334]}, {"key": "not-involved", "type": "clause", "offset": [2358, 2370]}, {"key": "to-allow-the", "type": "clause", "offset": [2402, 2414]}, {"key": "literature-review", "type": "clause", "offset": [2486, 2503]}, {"key": "the-content", "type": "clause", "offset": [2564, 2575]}, {"key": "field-of", "type": "definition", "offset": [2640, 2648]}, {"key": "language-translation", "type": "clause", "offset": [2815, 2835]}, {"key": "considering-that", "type": "clause", "offset": [2868, 2884]}, {"key": "year-1", "type": "clause", "offset": [2919, 2925]}, {"key": "year-4", "type": "definition", "offset": [2929, 2935]}, {"key": "english-proficiency", "type": "clause", "offset": [2965, 2984]}, {"key": "the-\u2587", "type": "clause", "offset": [3477, 3482]}, {"key": "to-ensure", "type": "clause", "offset": [3869, 3878]}, {"key": "data-collected", "type": "clause", "offset": [3933, 3947]}, {"key": "standard-deviation", "type": "definition", "offset": [4236, 4254]}], "size": 2, "samples": [{"hash": "9DG1mAGmnKn", "uri": "/contracts/9DG1mAGmnKn#methods-and-materials", "label": "Copyright Transfer Agreement", "score": 31.8409913185, "published": true}], "snippet": "The current study employed quantitative method to examine factors of TAM toward ICT use for English language learning. Besides, it investigated students' activities related to the usage of ICT for general and English language learning purposes. This study used a convenience sample of 303 student teachers of the English Department at a state university in Jambi, Indonesia. The the participants are all student teachers majoring English from the first-year to the fourth-year students enrolled in 2020. The student teachers had formally learned English for three years at secondary school level, three years at high school level, and continue to study English courses as well as receive instruction through the medium of English during their undergraduate study at university. Two hundred thirty-seven respondents are were female (78.2%), and sixty-six respondents are were male (21.8%). The primary instrument to collect data in this study was a questionnaire. The online questionnaire survey was developed by the researchers based on the research question and previous related studies in a close-ended format, and distributed to all of the respondents. The developed questionnaire consists of 33 items. The first section elicited background information of the respondents including gender, academic years, ICT devices ownership, the use of ICT for English learning purposes, and their activities in using ICT for English learning purposes (5 items). The second section entailed the variables of TAM in using ICT for English language learning, which included equipment (Eq), 2 items (adapted from Sabti & \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 2014); motivation (Mo), 2 items (adapted from \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587 & \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 2014); ICT skills (Sk), 3 items (adapted from Sabti & \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 2014); perceived ease of use (PEoU), 5 items (adapted from \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 1989; Park, 2009; and Venkatesh & \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 2000); perceived usefulness (PU), 5 items (adapted from \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 1989; Park, 2009, and \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587 & \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 2000); attitude (At), 3 items (adapted from \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 1989; Park, 2009, and \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587 & \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 2000); and actual use (AU), 4 items (adapted from \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 1989; \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 2009, and \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587 & \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, 2000), with four-point Likert-type scales, from 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree. Before administering the instrument questionnaire in this study, a representative group (25 students) who were not involved in the main study were piloted to allow the researchers to identify and adjust the instrument. Expert judgment and literature review were employed in developing the questionnaire validity. For the content validity, the questionnaire was validated by two experts in the field of ICT in face-to-face discussions to make sure the relevance and overall quality of each item in the questionnaire. Modifications, including the layout, the scale, and language translation of the questionnaire were made. Considering that the student teachers (ranged from Year 1 to Year 4) possessed varying levels of English proficiency, a combined three-step (i.e., forward translation, review, and back translation) adaptation method was employed to produce a reliable Indonesian version of the questionnaire. Besides, we also used convergent validity and discriminant validity for the instrument. The result of convergent validity was the outer loading\u2019s score of each construct > 0.7, and the AVE\u2019s score > 0.5. It means that the constructs of the instrument in this study were valid. Discriminant validity was done by using the \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587-\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587 criterion. The score of Actual Use (AU), Attitude (At), Equipment (Eq), ICT Skills (Sk), Motivation (Mo), Perceived Ease of Use (PEoU), and Perceived Usefulness (PU) were 0.828, 0.808, 0.893, 0.879, 0.887, 0.805, 0.715, respectively. Each construct had a score > 0,7. It means that each construct is valid. The questionnaire items were translated into Indonesian language to ensure the respondents understand each item being asked. The data collected through the online questionnaire (using Google Form) were coded by researchers. First, the data were put in an MS Excel program. Then, they were transferred to SmartPLS3 Windows version 3.2.9 was employed. SmartPLS3 program (version 3.2.9) to get descriptive statistic which covers mean, standard deviation, frequency, percent, and correlation. To test the hypotheses by Partial Least Squares - Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM),", "hash": "5526c18a57b39fe0074c706ac92e0ae6", "id": 6}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "the-method", "type": "definition", "offset": [0, 10]}, {"key": "the-appendix", "type": "clause", "offset": [84, 96]}], "size": 1, "samples": [{"hash": "coNLaaMmSYS", "uri": "/contracts/coNLaaMmSYS#methods-and-materials", "label": "Gestural Agreement", "score": 24.3401779603, "published": true}], "snippet": "The method was developed and refined through a series of failed pilots discussed in the Appendix. The main experiment consisted in acceptability judgments, complemented in some cases with semantic questions to check that the 'stripping' construction was understood in the expected fashion.", "hash": "909935fcf032f7e7a7068cb4a1b704df", "id": 7}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "data-analysis", "type": "definition", "offset": [41, 54]}, {"key": "statistical-methods", "type": "definition", "offset": [59, 78]}], "size": 1, "samples": [{"hash": "3mDsm2d6iyB", "uri": "/contracts/3mDsm2d6iyB#methods-and-materials", "label": "Research and Development", "score": 21.9801505818, "published": true}], "snippet": "Participants and contouring instructions Data analysis and statistical methods Results", "hash": "a5cfe1b3cb91482d17e81287bdf55010", "id": 8}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "all-work", "type": "clause", "offset": [0, 8]}, {"key": "the-construction", "type": "clause", "offset": [102, 118]}, {"key": "application-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [122, 136]}, {"key": "for-the-purpose-of", "type": "definition", "offset": [182, 200]}, {"key": "in-good-condition", "type": "definition", "offset": [211, 228]}, {"key": "the-resource", "type": "definition", "offset": [264, 276]}], "size": 1, "samples": [{"hash": "4cnjEmRa2bM", "uri": "/contracts/4cnjEmRa2bM#methods-and-materials", "label": "Grant Agreement", "score": 34.249034492, "published": true}], "snippet": "All Work will use like-kind materials and colors, applied with workmanship comparable to that used in the construction or application of those materials being repaired or maintained for the purpose of retaining in good condition the appearance and construction of the Resource and its Character-Defining Features.", "hash": "276d9d54e8fa68c3a41d79a7482c22f0", "id": 9}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "related-to", "type": "clause", "offset": [275, 285]}], "size": 1, "samples": [{"hash": "5dIkYqXpzhN", "uri": "/contracts/5dIkYqXpzhN#methods-and-materials", "label": "Local Recurrence in Rectal Cancer", "score": 19.0, "published": true}], "snippet": "290 patients with LARC who underwent multimodality treatment between 1994 and 2006 were studied. For patients who developed LR, the subsite was classified into presacral, postero-lateral, lateral, anterior, anastomotic or perineal. Patient and treatment characteristics were related to subsite of LR.", "hash": "3e256b7fddd678814491f2c5b61d9219", "id": 10}], "next_curs": "Cl4SWGoVc35sYXdpbnNpZGVyY29udHJhY3RzcjoLEhZDbGF1c2VTbmlwcGV0R3JvdXBfdjU2Ih5tZXRob2RzLWFuZC1tYXRlcmlhbHMjMDAwMDAwMGEMogECZW4YACAA", "clause": {"parents": [["mentor-teachers", "MENTOR TEACHERS"], ["recognition", "RECOGNITION"], ["agreement-in-british-and-american-english-normative-variations", "Agreement in British and American English Normative Variations"], ["chapter-summary", "Chapter summary"], ["new-teachers", "NEW TEACHERS"]], "size": 31, "children": [["weak-supervision-setting", "Weak supervision setting"], ["model-architecture-and-training-procedure", "Model architecture and training procedure"], ["task-and-presentation", "Task and presentation"], ["procedure", "Procedure"], ["material-and-conditions", "Material and conditions"]], "title": "Methods and Materials", "id": "methods-and-materials", "related": [["time-and-materials", "Time and Materials", "Time and Materials"], ["equipment-and-materials", "Equipment and Materials", "Equipment and Materials"], ["labor-and-materials", "LABOR AND MATERIALS", "LABOR AND MATERIALS"], ["licensed-materials", "Licensed Materials", "Licensed Materials"], ["workmanship-and-materials", "WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS", "WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS"]], "related_snippets": [], "updated": "2025-07-07T12:37:39+00:00", "also_ask": [], "drafting_tip": null, "explanation": "The \"Methods and Materials\" clause defines the standards, procedures, and types of materials to be used in performing the work under a contract. It typically outlines the required quality, sources, and specifications for materials, as well as the approved techniques or processes for installation or construction. For example, it may require that all materials meet certain industry standards or that specific brands or types of products be used. This clause ensures that the work is completed to an agreed-upon standard, reducing disputes over quality and clarifying expectations for both parties."}, "json": true, "cursor": ""}}