See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/315508203

Playing Well With Others: The Social Edition and Computational Collaboration

Article in Scholarly and Research Communication · October 2015

DOI: 10.22230/src.2015v6n3a111

CITATIONS READS
3 193

3 authors, including:

Constance Crompton Ray Siemens

University of British Columbia - Vancouver University of Victoria
16 PUBLICATIONS 21 CITATIONS 108 PUBLICATIONS 718 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ray Siemens on 04 May 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Playing Well with Others: The Social Edition and Computational Scholarly and Research
Collaboration Communication
volume 6/ issue 2 / 2015
Constance Crompton & Cole Mash
University of British Columbia, Okanagan

Raymond Siemens
University of Victoria

INKE Research Group

Abstract Constance Crompton is

is article draws on the Social Edition of the Devonshire Manuscript’s RDFa Assistant Professor in the
encoding practice as a case study of how to formalize statements about entities on the Department of Critical
Studies at the University of
Web in a way that is machine-parsable. RDFa encoding allows machines to become
British Columbia, Okanagan,
collaborators with human readers in the discovery of new connections between entities 1148 Research Road, Kelowna
(people, places, and events) even between websites. e edition’s encoding is motivated BC. Email constance
by the INKE Modelling and Prototyping team’s guiding research question about the [email protected] .
implications and impact of real-time applications in relation to traditionally static
knowledge objects. e authors argue for the value of bringing texts into Cole Mash is a master’s
student in Creative Studies at
communication with other texts, through RDFa, allowing virtual collaboration even
the University of the
when the scholars behind the projects do not know one another. Okanagan, 1148 Research
Road, Kelowna BC. Email:
Keywords [email protected] .
Social knowledge creation; Social edition; Linked data; Collaboration
Raymond Siemens is
Professor in English at the
University of Victoria, 3800
Finnerty Road, Victoria BC.
Email: [email protected] .

Implementing New
Knowledge Environments
(INKE) is a collaborative
research intervention
exploring electronic text,
digital humanities, and
scholarly communication. e
international team involves
over 42 researchers, 53 GRAs,
CISP Press 4 staff, 19 postdocs, and 30
Scholarly and Research Communication partners. Website: inke.ca
Volume 6, Issue 3, Article ID 0301111, 9 pages
Journal URL: www.src-online.ca
Received June 22, 2015, Accepted July 13, 2015, Published October 23, 2015

Crompton, Constance, Mash, Cole, & Siemens, Raymond. (2015). Playing Well with Others: e Social
Edition and Conceptual Collaboration. Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(3): 0301111, 9 pp.

© 2015 Constance Crompton, Cole Mash, & Raymond Siemens. is Open Access article is
distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ca), which permits unrestricted non-commercial
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
1
Scholarly and Research Collaboration between scholars drives large research projects and can increase a
Communication project’s reach by bringing together a wider group of engaged traditional and citizen
volume 6/ issue 3 / 2015 scholars to collaborate. is article investigates the use of microdata formats to extend
that reach, with the goal of bringing in a wider group of engaged researchers and
editors. At the 2013 INKE Birds of a Feather gathering, William Bowen and Constance
Crompton made a case for selecting a publication content management system for
collaboration, based on the preferences of the community (in our case the preferences
expressed by the Social Edition of the Devonshire Manuscript advisory group).1 In
response to community preferences, the Devonshire Manuscript Editorial Group
(DMSEG)2 turned to CommentPress, a WordPress plug-in by the Institute for the
Future of the Book, which leaves the manuscript’s poems static but lets community add
commentary, in keeping with the advisory group’s preferences. is new iteration of the
Social Edition of the Devonshire Manuscript has been launched in Iter Community, a
social space and publication platform for Early Modern and Renaissance scholarship,
at http://dms.itercommunity.org .

e DMSEG, however, is not solely encoding for direct collaborators and editors
interested in adding commentary. e project not only aims to engage human readers,
but also provide readily parsable data about the content of the edition. In the interest of
serving machine readers3 (search algorithms, inferencing engines, etc.) and the human
readers who employ them, this current phase incorporates Resource Description
Framework in Attributes (RDFa) into the Social Edition of the Devonshire Manuscript
not only to allow for structured data extraction and algorithmic inferencing about the
relationships between the texts and contributors to the Devonshire Manuscript
(BL MS Add. 17, 492), but also to build new knowledge from information in both the
social edition and other digital scholarship about the sixteenth century. is article
explores another facet of collaboration in a digital age, the adoption of standards that
let machine readers disambiguate real-world entities referenced in the text from other
entities (e.g., people or places) with the same names. Motivated by the INKE Modelling
and Prototyping team’s guiding research question about the implications and impact of
real-time applications in relation to traditionally static knowledge objects, we argue
that, far from stifling creativity, adopting linked data standards, like RDFa, even at the
prototyping stage, creates the conditions to bring texts into communication with other
texts, allowing virtual collaboration across projects, even when the scholars behind the
projects do not know one another. Machine readers can extract connections between
the content in disparate RDFa encoded projects, in short allowing one project’s texts to
“play well” with other encoded texts. Following an outline of the process that led to the
selection of WordPress and CommentPress in the creation of the social edition within
Iter Community, we reflect on the promise of RDFa, describe the process of using
RDFa microdata to meet the needs of machine readers, and conclude by providing the
results of our experiments in engaging with RDFa while attempting to address the
advice of our advisory group and suggested directions for future research.

Community-informed platforms for collaboration

Devising appropriate protocols for collaboration between readers of all types requires
integration and incremental development. e DMSEG has engaged in iterative
development, creating the Social Edition of the Devonshire Manuscript in Wikibooks,

2 Crompton, Constance, Mash, Cole, & Siemens, Raymond. (2015). Playing Well with Others: e Social
Edition and Conceptual Collaboration. Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(3): 0301111, 9 pp.
seeking direction from the advisory group to work out the best ways to meet the needs Scholarly and Research
of the community of Early Modern and Renaissance scholars that the group represents Communication
(Siemens et al., 2012). e advisory group applauded both the content and uptake of volume 6/ issue 3 / 2015
the Social Edition of the Devonshire Manuscript in Wikibooks, but expressed
reservations about both the mutability of the text and, for scholars outside of the
Digital Humanities, the participation barrier created by having to learn to write
wikicode in order to contribute to the edition.

As mentioned above, in response to the advisory group’s reservations, the Devonshire

Manuscript Editorial Group turned to CommentPress, a WordPress plug-in by Bob
Stein’s Institute for the Future of the Book that leaves the manuscript’s poems static but
lets community add commentary, in keeping with the advisory group’s preferences.
CommentPress has emerged as a standard plug-in to facilitate commenting, and has
been used for peer review and commentary by the authors and teams behind
publications as diverse as the Shakespeare Quarterly, Planned Obsolescence, and Off the
Tracks (see Clement & Reside, 2011; Fitzpatrick, 2011; Rowe, 2010). Its technical
specifications aside, broad uptake of CommentPress has helped the DMSEG address
one of the concerns raised by the advisory group: since scholars are likely to have come
across CommentPress-enabled sites before, they will also likely know that comments
are welcome. e CommentPress interface itself encourages commenting. By
comparison, the process for adding comments in Wikibooks is rather opaque, and it
requires that users leave the editing environment and read documentation in
Wikibooks and Wikipedia’s special Help namespace pages. CommentPress is self-
documenting, telling contributors how to comment without leaving the edition to visit
external documentation pages. Furthermore, the plug-in uses a WYSIWYG editor, with
features familiar to anyone who has ever used Microso Word or other GUI text
editors. CommentPress also helps the DMSEG meet the advisory group’s final concern:
within WordPress the text of the Devonshire Manuscript poems and the critical
apparatus remain static, but through CommentPress readers can add commentary on
the text, facilitating what the advisory group expects will be a greater trust in the text
among readers and contemporary contributors. is is in contrast to the lack of trust
many contributors had in the Wikibooks edition as a result of validity questions raised
by the open editing practices of Wikibooks, a platform where almost anyone is able to
edit the text (even though Wikibooks meticulously records when edits were made and
which edits were made by whom).

The promise of RDFa

e CommentPress version of the Social Edition of the Devonshire Manuscript is a
born-digital edition, housed on servers at the University of Toronto Scarborough
(Siemens et al., 2015). While the distribution of born-digital projects across servers,
connected via hyperlinks, constituted a revolution in information distribution and
access in the 1990s, the early Web was (and is) more concerned with the appearance of
HTML documents to end users than with the consistency and interoperability of Web
data. As a result, as Dean Allemang and James Hendler note, “the web oen feels like it
is ‘a mile wide but an inch deep,’” which motivates them to ask, “[H]ow can we build a
more integrated, consistent, deep web experience” for web application users?” (2011,
p. 2). Encoding for the semantic Web, using systems such as RDFa, is one way to make

Crompton, Constance, Mash, Cole, & Siemens, Raymond. (2015). Playing Well with Others: e Social 3
Edition and Conceptual Collaboration. Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(3): 0301111, 9 pp.
Scholarly and Research sure that machine readers can aggregate information about real-world entities from
Communication various locations on the Web (people, places, and events, in the case of the Social
volume 6/ issue 3 / 2015 Edition, the sixteenth-century contributors to the Devonshire Manuscript) (Berners-
Lee, Hendler, & Lassila, 2001). RDFa encoding is conceptually well suited to digital
academic projects, since RDF’s purpose is reminiscent of traditional scholarship. As
Allemang and Hendler remind their readers,

when two (or more!) viewpoints come together in a web of knowledge, there
will typically be overlap, disagreement, and confusion before there is synergy,
cooperation, and collaboration. If the infrastructure of the Web is to help us to
find our way through the wild stage of information sharing, an informal notion
of how things fit together, or should fit together, will not suffice. (2011, p. 22)

Allemang and Hendler recommend the use of RDF to formalize statements about
entities on the Web in a way that machine readers can parse, allowing them to become
collaborators with human readers in the discovery of new connections between
entities, even when the RDFa encoded information about those entities is on different
websites. Following Allemang and Hendler’s lead, the UBC Okanagan team has taken
up the RDFa standard, with its formal modelling principles and ready crosswalks
between ontologies, as a prototype for digital publishing that continues to serve
computer and machine readers in pursuit of what scholars do best: discovering,
comparing, evaluating, annotating, and, in a digital publishing context, collaborating
(Unsworth, 2000).

Encoding for the semantic Web is the means of building that integrated, consistent,
deep Internet through the use of Web standard languages. e user experience of the
semantic Web may already be familiar to those who have seen the information boxes in
the upper-right-hand corner of Google search results, or who have used research tools
and portals such as Europeana, Out of the Trenches, or Linked Jazz. However, as John
Simpson noted at the 2014 INKE Birds of a Feather gathering, semantic data makes up
only 1% of the Web (Simpson & Brown, 2014). And yet, as the Web grows, the need for
semantic data grows. In order to address this demand, “search engines have started to
provide richer search results by extracting fine-grained structured details from the Web
pages they crawl” and “publishers are producing increasing amounts of structured data
within their Web content to improve their standing with search engines” (Herman,
2010). One of the “key enabling technologies” in this rich result production domain is
RDFa (Resource Description Framework in Attributes), markup that adds structured
data directly to HTML pages in the form of ontology declarations and specific HTML
attributes (Herman, 2010).

Adding invisible ink for computational readers

e DMSEG committed to use the Institute for the Future of the Book’s CommentPress
plug-in to meet the stated needs of our advisory group, which anchors us to the
WordPress platform, leaving us with the challenge of adding RDFa to soware built
primarily for human readers. Parsers and other machine readers, including search
engines, may ignore CDATA content, which includes the microdata we are inserting
into the HTML tags on each page of the edition. To solve this problem, we turned to

4 Crompton, Constance, Mash, Cole, & Siemens, Raymond. (2015). Playing Well with Others: e Social
Edition and Conceptual Collaboration. Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(3): 0301111, 9 pp.
the RDFa Content Editor (RDFaCE), a WordPress plug-in that allows us to add RDFa to Scholarly and Research
WordPress pages and direct parsers to attend to the RDFa within CDATA, rather than Communication
ignore it. RDFaCE was developed and is maintained by the AKSW research group at the volume 6/ issue 3 / 2015
University of Leipzig, by Ali Khalili and Sören Auer. e purpose of the plug-in is to
support “different views for semantic content authoring and [using] existing semantic
Web APIs to facilitate annotating and editing of RDFa contents” (RDFaCE, n.d.). Built
on the TinyMCE rich text editor, it enables users to annotate blog posts with RDFa and
microdata through a series of user-friendly GUI fields. In adopting RDFaCE, we hoped
to offer editors and commenters an interface as easy to use as CommentPress, allowing
content experts outside of the Digital Humanities to contribute their expertise to the
semantic Web. Ideally, editors and commenters using RDFaCE can highlight the parts of
the text they wish to mark up with RDFa, and, with the click of a button, open a list of
optional RDF attributes to add to the text. is allows users to classify the selected text
as a type of entity (e.g., person, place) and mark it up with metadata about that entity
(e.g., parents, siblings, birth and death date). e RDFaCE plug-in then adds the
annotations directly into the page’s code, and most importantly, exposes the RDFa to
machine readers, resolving the parsing problems that may be introduced by CDATA.

Although our final goal is to mark up all the poem commentary in the Social Edition
of the Devonshire Manuscript in such a way that would let us trace contemporary
citation networks as well as sixteenth-century authoring and annotating habits, we
started with a test markup of the edition’s biography page. With so many familial
relations and overlapping names in Henry VIII’s court (omas Howard, Devonshire
Manuscript contributor, ought not, for example, be confused with his uncle omas
Howard or his half-brother omas Howard), we had a modelling challenge suitable to
semantic Web markup, designed, as it is, to disambiguate Web content and connect to
existing ontologies and authorities.

On our first experimental pass we encoded person entities and their relations,
disambiguated using schema.org’s ontology and Ian Davis’ relationship ontology in
combination with the URIs provided by the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF),
the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (ODNB), and GeoNames. Schema.org’s
Person, for example, offered us the following attributes: @name; @uri, which we pointed to
each person’s Virtual International Authority File; @sameAs, which included their Oxford
Dictionary of National Biography permalink; @affiliations; @birthDate; @deathDate;
@children; @nationality, which we pointed to GeoNames; @parent; @sibling; and finally,
@spouse, which we pointed to URIs and permalinks. Finally we used Ian Davis’
relationship ontology, also pointing to ODNB and VIAF URIs and permalinks, to clarify
the relationships between affiliated Devonshire Manuscript contributors. For example
<span resource=“http://viaf.org/viaf/29521340” class=“r_person r_entity_h r_entity”
typeof=“schema:Person”>Anne Boleyn</span> makes it clear to a machine reader that the
letters A-n-n-e B-o-l-e-y-n refer to a person entity as defined by schema.org at
https://schema.org/Person and that this particular person is Anne Boleyn as defined at
http://viaf.org/viaf/29521340 and not some other woman of the same name.

As part of the team’s test markup, DMSEG research assistant Cole Mash marked up a
private, purpose-built sample page that had examples of all the entity types, fields, and

Crompton, Constance, Mash, Cole, & Siemens, Raymond. (2015). Playing Well with Others: e Social 5
Edition and Conceptual Collaboration. Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(3): 0301111, 9 pp.
Scholarly and Research relationships in the manuscript. His goal was to test the RDFaCE plug-in, still in beta,
Communication to assess whether it would be suitable for long-term use by the social edition project.
volume 6/ issue 3 / 2015 RDFaCE was supposed to mark up the sample page with all of the RDFa for Cole,
saving him from having to enter each piece of code himself; however, the plug-in did
not work as planned. He found that RDFaCE would not save all of the attribute values
he entered. e only property that RDFaCE would preserve was the URI field.
Furthermore, RDFaCE would also not let him cross-reference the entities already
entered. Each time he came across an entity RDFaCE would treat it as a completely
new one, failing to offer a list of entities he had already entered. Fortunately, of all the
things that RDFaCE could have saved, @uri is the most important, connecting the
entity to an authority record. Not being able to record anything other than a URI is
suitable provided that the authority the @uri points to contains all information the
encoder wants to reference. e DMSEG, however, wants to record affiliations that are
central to the Devonshire Manuscript’s production and circulation, but which are not
captured by the VIAF or ODNB.

RDFaCE also allowed Cole to add a person’s relationship to a spouse or to children.

ough the plug-in failed to save the information he added about the spouse or
children, it saved the fact that the person has relationships to others. In the final
analysis Cole used RDFaCE to point from each
Figure 1: Macro that creates RDFa for people’s names Devonshire Manuscript contributor to their VIAF or
ODNB ID, and then give them the ability to have a
spouse, children, or relationships. is way, the
RDFaCE recorded the fact of the person’s relationship
using schema.org attributes, leaving him to add the
URIs by hand. RDFaCE is a plug-in that promises to
put RDFa directly into a WordPress site without going
into the raw code, but as a beta product, at the time of
writing, does not offer that full functionality.

To complete the markup, Cole used a program called

Figure 2: Macro that creates an RDFa attribute connecting Keyboard Maestro to build a series of macros that
the named entity to a VIAF record offered him user-friendly fields to enter an entity’s
data and output RDFa (see Figures 1 and 2). Rather
than having to enter each line by hand, paying
particular attention to opening and closing quotation
marks, missing carets, or misspelled attribute names,
the macro automated the encoding that is common to
each entity, leaving the human encoder with the sole
responsibility of accurately entering the data that is
specific to that entity. For example, when Cole entered
in the VIAF for each person, he would click a hotkey
that would open the macro, then there would be an
empty field where he would copy and paste the VIAF
URI, then press a “complete” GUI button. e macro
would then wrap that VIAF URI in the necessary
RDFa and enter it into the WordPress page’s HTML.

6 Crompton, Constance, Mash, Cole, & Siemens, Raymond. (2015). Playing Well with Others: e Social
Edition and Conceptual Collaboration. Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(3): 0301111, 9 pp.
He designed a macro for each attribute. Using macros and working from a spreadsheet Scholarly and Research
containing all the known Devonshire Manuscript contributors sped up his encoding Communication
process considerably. volume 6/ issue 3 / 2015

RDFa allowed the project to define the manuscript’s sixteenth-century contributors as

people and relate them to other people in the manuscript based on their connections as
parents, children, siblings, and spouses. It also allowed us to include biographical
information such as birthdates, death dates, and nationality. We could also affiliate
contributors to other important people not directly involved in the manuscript based
on connections such as employee/employer and enemy/ally relationships; however,
formalizing these affiliations proved challenging. As with all regularization, the process
of defining relationships was slightly lossy. Many of the contributors had complex
relationships: friendships and rivalries changed over the course of contributors’
lifetimes. In the end, we were able to indicate when someone was employed by
someone else, or when someone was the enemy of someone else, or if someone knew
someone else. At the level of code we marked these affiliations, letting the prose of the
social edition’s biographies page fill in any more specific information about
contributors’ relationships over time (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: e biography of Anne Boleyn, showing which stretches of text are augmented with RDFa

We invite readers to visit the WordPress-based edition at http://dms.itercommunity.org.

We anticipate that the Social Edition of the Devonshire Manuscript, enhanced with
RDFa to help machine readers aggregate data from all projects that point to VIAF and
ODNB URIs, will help scholars develop new research questions and generate new
knowledge about the culture and contexts of the Tudor court and a deeper
understanding of the networked scholarship through which we come to engage it.

Crompton, Constance, Mash, Cole, & Siemens, Raymond. (2015). Playing Well with Others: e Social 7
Edition and Conceptual Collaboration. Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(3): 0301111, 9 pp.
Scholarly and Research Notes
Communication 1. Members of the advisory group: Robert E. Bjork (Director, Arizona Center for
volume 6/ issue 3 / 2015 Medieval and Renaissance Studies; Arizona State University); William R. Bowen,
chair (Director, Iter; University of Toronto Scarborough); Michael Ullyot
(University of Calgary); Diane Jakacki (Georgia Institute of Technology); Jessica
Murphy (University of Texas at Dallas); Jason Boyd (Ryerson University); Elizabeth
Heale (University of Reading); Steven W. May (Georgetown College); Arthur F.
Marotti (Wayne State University); Jennifer Summit (Stanford University); Jonathan
Gibson (Queen Mary, University of London); John Lavignino (King’s College
London); and Katherine Rowe (Bryn Mawr College).

2. e DMSEG comprises Raymond Siemens, Karin Armstrong, Constance Crompton,

Barbara Bond, Terra Dickson, Johanne Paquette, Jonathan Podracky, Ingrid Weber,
Cara Leitch, Melanie Chernyk, Brett D. Hirsch, Daniel Powell, Alyssa Anne McLeod,
Alyssa Arbuckle, Jonathan Gibson, Maggie Shirley, Cole Mash, Chris Gaudet, Eric
Haswell, Arianna Ciula, Daniel Starza-Smith, James Cummings with Martin
Holmes, Greg Newton, Paul Remley, Erik Kwakkel, and Aimie Shirkie.

3. We use the term machine readers to refer to what others have productively called
the algorithmic or computer readers/reading, ever mindful, however, of Ian
Bogost’s admonition not to use the terms algorithm, machine, and computer to
obfuscate the human and material systems that produce the products of those
terms (from financial markets to server farms, from security guards union
representatives to Chinese factory labourers) (Bogost, 2015; Manovich, 2013;
Ramsay, 2011).

References
Allemang, D., & Hendler, J. A. (2011). Semantic web for the working ontologist: Modeling in RDF, RDFS
and OWL (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Elsevier.
Bogost, I. (2015, January 15). The cathedral of computation. The Atlantic. URL: http://www.theatlantic
.com/technology/archive/2015/01/the-cathedral-of-computation/384300 [April 8, 2015].
Clement, T., & Reside, D. (2011). Off the tracks: Laying new lines for digital humanities scholars.
National Endowment for the Humanities white paper. College Park, MD: Maryland Institute for
Technology in the Humanities / MediaCommons Press. URL: http://mcpress.media-commons
.org/offthetracks [April 2, 2015].
Fitzpatrick, K. (2011). Planned obsolescence: Publishing, technology, and the future of the academy. New
York, NY: New York University Press.
Herman, I. (2010). RDFa primer. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-rdfa-primer [April 8, 2015].
Manovich, L. (2013, December 16). The algorithms of our lives. Chronicle of Higher Education. URL:
https://chronicle.com/article/The-Algorithms-of-Our-Lives-/143557 [April 8, 2015].
RDFaCE. (n.d.). RDFaCE: RDFa Content Editor. URL: http://aksw.org/Projects/RDFaCE.html
[November 18, 2014].
Ramsay, S. (2011). Reading machines: Toward an algorithmic criticism. Chicago, IL: University of
Illinois Press.
Rowe, K. (Ed.). (2010). Shakespeare Quarterly. MediaCommons Press. URL: http://mcpress.media-
commons.org/ShakespeareQuarterly_NewMedia [June 2, 2015].

8 Crompton, Constance, Mash, Cole, & Siemens, Raymond. (2015). Playing Well with Others: e Social
Edition and Conceptual Collaboration. Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(3): 0301111, 9 pp.
 Siemens, R., et al. (2012).The Social Edition of the Devonshire Manuscript. URL: https://en.wikibooks Scholarly and Research
.org/wiki/The_Devonshire_Manuscript Communication
Siemens, R., et al. (2015). A social edition of the Devonshire Manuscript. URL: http://dms volume 6/ issue 3 / 2015
.itercommunity.org
Simpson, J., & Brown, S. (2014, February). Inference and linking of the humanist’s semantic Web. Paper
presented at the INKE-hosted Partner gathering, “Implementing New Knowledge Environments,”
Whistler, BC.
Unsworth, J. (2000, May). Scholarly primitives: What methods do humanities researchers have in
common, and how might our tools reflect this? Paper presented at symposium “Humanities
computing: Formal methods, experimental practice,” King’s College London. URL: http://
people.brandeis.edu/~unsworth/Kings.5-00/primitives.html [January 2, 2015].

Crompton, Constance, Mash, Cole, & Siemens, Raymond. (2015). Playing Well with Others: e Social 9
Edition and Conceptual Collaboration. Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(3): 0301111, 9 pp.

View publication stats