skip to main content
10.1145/3543873.3587607acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswwwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Towards Automated Detection of Risky Images Shared by Youth on Social Media

Published:30 April 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

With the growing ubiquity of the Internet and access to media-based social media platforms, the risks associated with media content sharing on social media and the need for safety measures against such risks have grown paramount. At the same time, risk is highly contextualized, especially when it comes to media content youth share privately on social media. In this work, we conducted qualitative content analyses on risky media content flagged by youth participants and research assistants of similar ages to explore contextual dimensions of youth online risks. The contextual risk dimensions were then used to inform semi- and self-supervised state-of-the-art vision transformers to automate the process of identifying risky images shared by youth. We found that vision transformers are capable of learning complex image features for use in automated risk detection and classification. The results of our study serve as a foundation for designing contextualized and youth-centered machine-learning methods for automated online risk detection.

References

  1. Shiza Ali, Afsaneh Razi, Kim Seunghyun, Ashwaq Alsoubai, Joshua Gracie, Munmun De Choudhury, Pamela J Wisniewski, and Gianluca Stringhini. 2022. Understanding the Digital Lives of Youth: Analyzing Media Shared within Safe Versus Unsafe Private Conversations on Instagram. (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Monica Anderson and Jingjing Jiang. 2018. Teens, Social Media and Technology 2018. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-technology-2018/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Anurag Arnab, Mostafa Dehghani, Georg Heigold, Chen Sun, Mario Lučić, and Cordelia Schmid. 2021. Vivit: A video vision transformer. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision. 6836–6846.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Karla Badillo-Urquiola, Zachary Shea, Zainab Agha, Irina Lediaeva, and Pamela Wisniewski. 2021. Conducting risky research with teens: co-designing for the ethical treatment and protection of adolescents. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 4, CSCW3 (2021), 1–46.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Fanni Bányai, Ágnes Zsila, Orsolya Király, Aniko Maraz, Zsuzsanna Elekes, Mark D Griffiths, Cecilie Schou Andreassen, and Zsolt Demetrovics. 2017. Problematic social media use: Results from a large-scale nationally representative adolescent sample. PloS one 12, 1 (2017), e0169839.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Gedas Bertasius, Heng Wang, and Lorenzo Torresani. 2021. Is space-time attention all you need for video understanding?. In ICML, Vol. 2. 4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Rubel Biswas, Victor González-Castro, E Fidalgo, and Deisy Chaves. 2019. Boosting child abuse victim identification in Forensic Tools with hashing techniques. V Jornadas Nacionales de Investigación en Ciberseguridad 1 (2019), 344–345.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2012. Thematic analysis.American Psychological Association.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Nicolas Carion, Francisco Massa, Gabriel Synnaeve, Nicolas Usunier, Alexander Kirillov, and Sergey Zagoruyko. 2020. End-to-end object detection with transformers. In European conference on computer vision. Springer, 213–229.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Mathilde Caron, Hugo Touvron, Ishan Misra, Hervé Jégou, Julien Mairal, Piotr Bojanowski, and Armand Joulin. 2021. Emerging properties in self-supervised vision transformers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision. 9650–9660.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Ting Chen, Simon Kornblith, Mohammad Norouzi, and Geoffrey Hinton. 2020. A simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations. In International conference on machine learning. PMLR, 1597–1607.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Xinlei Chen, Haoqi Fan, Ross Girshick, and Kaiming He. 2020. Improved baselines with momentum contrastive learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.04297 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Arijit Ghosh Chowdhury, Ramit Sawhney, Puneet Mathur, Debanjan Mahata, and Rajiv Ratn Shah. 2019. Speak up, fight back! detection of social media disclosures of sexual harassment. In Proceedings of the 2019 conference of the North American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Student research workshop. 136–146.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Jody Clay-Warner. 2003. The context of sexual violence: Situational predictors of self-protective actions. Violence and victims 18, 5 (2003), 543–556.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Patricia De Santisteban and Manuel Gámez-Guadix. 2018. Prevalence and risk factors among minors for online sexual solicitations and interactions with adults. The Journal of Sex Research 55, 7 (2018), 939–950.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Alexey Dosovitskiy, Lucas Beyer, Alexander Kolesnikov, Dirk Weissenborn, Xiaohua Zhai, Thomas Unterthiner, Mostafa Dehghani, Matthias Minderer, Georg Heigold, Sylvain Gelly, 2020. An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. James W Drisko and Tina Maschi. 2016. Content analysis. Pocket Guide to Social Work Re.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Sindhu Kiranmai Ernala, Michael L Birnbaum, Kristin A Candan, Asra F Rizvi, William A Sterling, John M Kane, and Munmun De Choudhury. 2019. Methodological gaps in predicting mental health states from social media: triangulating diagnostic signals. In Proceedings of the 2019 chi conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. facebookresearch/dino. 2022. facebookresearch/dino. https://github.com/facebookresearch/dinoGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. David Finkelhor, Kerryann Walsh, Lisa Jones, Kimberly Mitchell, and Anne Collier. 2021. Youth internet safety education: Aligning programs with the evidence base. Trauma, violence, & abuse 22, 5 (2021), 1233–1247.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Abhishek Gangwar, Eduardo Fidalgo, Enrique Alegre, and Víctor González-Castro. 2017. Pornography and child sexual abuse detection in image and video: A comparative evaluation. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Abhishek Gangwar, Víctor González-Castro, Enrique Alegre, and Eduardo Fidalgo. 2021. AttM-CNN: Attention and metric learning based CNN for pornography, age and Child Sexual Abuse (CSA) Detection in images. Neurocomputing 445 (2021), 81–104.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Christine Greenhow. 2011. Youth, learning, and social media. Journal of Educational Computing Research 45, 2 (2011), 139–146.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Joel W Grube and Elizabeth Waiters. 2005. Alcohol in the media: content and effects on drinking beliefs and behaviors among youth. Adolescent medicine clinics 16, 2 (2005), 327.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Naeemul Hassan, Amrit Poudel, Jason Hale, Claire Hubacek, Khandaker Tasnim Huq, Shubhra Kanti Karmaker Santu, and Syed Ishtiaque Ahmed. 2020. Towards automated sexual violence report tracking. In Proceedings of the international AAAI conference on web and social media, Vol. 14. 250–259.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Kaiming He, Haoqi Fan, Yuxin Wu, Saining Xie, and Ross Girshick. 2020. Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 9729–9738.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Homa Hosseinmardi, Sabrina Arredondo Mattson, Rahat Ibn Rafiq, Richard Han, Qin Lv, and Shivakant Mishra. 2015. Analyzing labeled cyberbullying incidents on the instagram social network. In International conference on social informatics. Springer, 49–66.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. ImageNet. 2021. ImageNet. https://www.image-net.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Instagram. 2022. Abuse and Spam. https://help.instagram.com/165828726894770Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Instagram. 2022. How do I send a message to someone on Instagram?https://help.instagram.com/155540431448273Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Andrew Jaegle, Felix Gimeno, Andy Brock, Oriol Vinyals, Andrew Zisserman, and Joao Carreira. 2021. Perceiver: General perception with iterative attention. In International conference on machine learning. PMLR, 4651–4664.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Lisa M Jones, Kimberly J Mitchell, and David Finkelhor. 2012. Trends in youth internet victimization: Findings from three youth internet safety surveys 2000–2010. Journal of adolescent Health 50, 2 (2012), 179–186.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Aparup Khatua, Erik Cambria, and Apalak Khatua. 2018. Sounds of silence breakers: Exploring sexual violence on twitter. In 2018 IEEE/ACM international conference on advances in social networks analysis and mining (ASONAM). IEEE, 397–400.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Seunghyun Kim, Afsaneh Razi, Gianluca Stringhini, Pamela J Wisniewski, and Munmun De Choudhury. 2021. A Human-Centered Systematic Literature Review of Cyberbullying Detection Algorithms. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW2 (2021), 1–34.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Robin M Kowalski, Susan P Limber, and Annie McCord. 2019. A developmental approach to cyberbullying: Prevalence and protective factors. Aggression and Violent Behavior 45 (2019), 20–32.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Dong-Hyun Lee 2013. Pseudo-label: The simple and efficient semi-supervised learning method for deep neural networks. In Workshop on challenges in representation learning, ICML, Vol. 3. 896.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Ze Liu, Yutong Lin, Yue Cao, Han Hu, Yixuan Wei, Zheng Zhang, Stephen Lin, and Baining Guo. 2021. Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision. 10012–10022.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Megan K Maas, Kyla M Cary, Elizabeth M Clancy, Bianca Klettke, Heather L McCauley, and Jeff R Temple. 2021. Slutpage use among US college students: the secret and social platforms of image-based sexual abuse. Archives of sexual behavior 50, 5 (2021), 2203–2214.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Joao Macedo, Filipe Costa, and Jefersson A dos Santos. 2018. A benchmark methodology for child pornography detection. In 2018 31st SIBGRAPI Conference on Graphics, Patterns and Images (SIBGRAPI). IEEE, 455–462.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Sheri Madigan, Vanessa Villani, Corry Azzopardi, Danae Laut, Tanya Smith, Jeff R Temple, Dillon Browne, and Gina Dimitropoulos. 2018. The prevalence of unwanted online sexual exposure and solicitation among youth: A meta-analysis. Journal of Adolescent Health 63, 2 (2018), 133–141.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Rose Maghsoudi, Jennifer Shapka, and Pamela Wisniewski. 2020. Examining how online risk exposure and online social capital influence adolescent psychological stress. Computers in Human Behavior 113 (2020), 106488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106488Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Felix Mayer and Martin Steinebach. 2017. Forensic image inspection assisted by deep learning. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security. 1–9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Ersilia Menesini, Annalaura Nocentini, and Pamela Calussi. 2011. The measurement of cyberbullying: Dimensional structure and relative item severity and discrimination. Cyberpsychology, behavior, and social networking 14, 5 (2011), 267–274.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Kimberly J Mitchell, David Finkelhor, and Janis Wolak. 2007. Youth Internet users at risk for the most serious online sexual solicitations. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 32, 6 (2007), 532–537.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Subhabrata Mukherjee and Ahmed Awadallah. 2020. Uncertainty-aware self-training for few-shot text classification. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33 (2020), 21199–21212.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Fudong Nian, Teng Li, Yan Wang, Mingliang Xu, and Jun Wu. 2016. Pornographic image detection utilizing deep convolutional neural networks. Neurocomputing 210 (2016), 283–293.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Gwenn Schurgin O’Keeffe, Kathleen Clarke-Pearson, Council on Communications, and Media. 2011. The impact of social media on children, adolescents, and families. Pediatrics 127, 4 (2011), 800–804.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Claudia Peersman, Christian Schulze, Awais Rashid, Margaret Brennan, and Carl Fischer. 2016. iCOP: Live forensics to reveal previously unknown criminal media on P2P networks. Digital Investigation 18 (2016), 50–64.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Prajit Ramachandran, Niki Parmar, Ashish Vaswani, Irwan Bello, Anselm Levskaya, and Jon Shlens. 2019. Stand-alone self-attention in vision models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Afsaneh Razi, Seunghyun Kim, Ashwaq Alsoubai, Gianluca Stringhini, Thamar Solorio, Munmun De Choudhury, and Pamela J Wisniewski. 2021. A Human-Centered Systematic Literature Review of the Computational Approaches for Online Sexual Risk Detection. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW2 (2021), 1–38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Andrew G Reece and Christopher M Danforth. 2017. Instagram photos reveal predictive markers of depression. EPJ Data Science 6 (2017), 1–12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Lauren A Reed, Margaret P Boyer, Haley Meskunas, Richard M Tolman, and L Monique Ward. 2020. How do adolescents experience sexting in dating relationships? Motivations to sext and responses to sexting requests from dating partners. Children and Youth Services Review 109 (2020), 104696.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Mamshad Nayeem Rizve, Kevin Duarte, Yogesh S Rawat, and Mubarak Shah. 2021. In defense of pseudo-labeling: An uncertainty-aware pseudo-label selection framework for semi-supervised learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.06329 (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Tara L Rutkowski, Heidi Hartikainen, Kirsten E Richards, and Pamela J Wisniewski. 2021. Family Communication: Examining the Differing Perceptions of Parents and Teens Regarding Online Safety Communication. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW2 (2021), 1–23.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Sarita Schoenebeck, Carol F. Scott, Emma Grace Hurley, Tammy Chang, and Ellen Selkie. 2021. Youth Trust in Social Media Companies and Expectations of Justice: Accountability and Repair After Online Harassment. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, CSCW1, Article 2 (apr 2021), 18 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449076Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Weiwei Shi, Yihong Gong, Chris Ding, Zhiheng MaXiaoyu Tao, and Nanning Zheng. 2018. Transductive semi-supervised deep learning using min-max features. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV). 299–315.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Thiago H Silva, Pedro OS Vaz De Melo, Jussara M Almeida, Juliana Salles, and Antonio AF Loureiro. 2013. A picture of Instagram is worth more than a thousand words: Workload characterization and application. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems. IEEE, 123–132.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Vivek K Singh, Souvick Ghosh, and Christin Jose. 2017. Toward multimodal cyberbullying detection. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2090–2099.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Devin Soni and Vivek K Singh. 2018. See no evil, hear no evil: Audio-visual-textual cyberbullying detection. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW (2018), 1–26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Catherine Cheng Stahl and Ioana Literat. 2022. # GenZ on TikTok: the collective online self-Portrait of the social media generation. Journal of Youth Studies (2022), 1–22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Kurt Thomas, Devdatta Akhawe, Michael Bailey, Dan Boneh, Elie Bursztein, Sunny Consolvo, Nicola Dell, Zakir Durumeric, Patrick Gage Kelley, Deepak Kumar, 2021. Sok: Hate, harassment, and the changing landscape of online abuse. In 2021 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE, 247–267.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  62. Hugo Touvron, Matthieu Cord, Matthijs Douze, Francisco Massa, Alexandre Sablayrolles, and Hervé Jégou. 2021. Training data-efficient image transformers & distillation through attention. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 10347–10357.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Nishant Vishwamitra, Hongxin Hu, Feng Luo, and Long Cheng. 2021. Towards understanding and detecting cyberbullying in real-world images. In 2020 19th IEEE International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (ICMLA).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Emily A Vogels. 2022. Teens and cyberbullying 2022. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2022/12/15/teens-and-cyberbullying-2022/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Emily A Vogels, Risa Gelles-Watnick, and Navid Massarat. 2022. Teens, social media and technology 2022. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2022/08/10/teens-social-media-and-technology-2022/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Kate Walker and Emma Sleath. 2017. A systematic review of the current knowledge regarding revenge pornography and non-consensual sharing of sexually explicit media. Aggression and violent behavior 36 (2017), 9–24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Wenhai Wang, Enze Xie, Xiang Li, Deng-Ping Fan, Kaitao Song, Ding Liang, Tong Lu, Ping Luo, and Ling Shao. 2021. Pyramid vision transformer: A versatile backbone for dense prediction without convolutions. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision. 568–578.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Yilin Wang and Baoxin Li. 2015. Sentiment analysis for social media images. In 2015 IEEE international conference on data mining workshop (ICDMW). IEEE, 1584–1591.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Pamela Wisniewski, Heng Xu, Mary Beth Rosson, Daniel F Perkins, and John M Carroll. 2016. Dear diary: Teens reflect on their weekly online risk experiences. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 3919–3930.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. Zhirong Wu, Yuanjun Xiong, Stella X Yu, and Dahua Lin. 2018. Unsupervised feature learning via non-parametric instance discrimination. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 3733–3742.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  72. Emilios Yiallourou, Rafaella Demetriou, and Andreas Lanitis. 2017. On the detection of images containing child-pornographic material. In 2017 24th International Conference on Telecommunications (ICT). IEEE, 1–5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  73. Lequan Yu, Shujun Wang, Xiaomeng Li, Chi-Wing Fu, and Pheng-Ann Heng. 2019. Uncertainty-aware self-ensembling model for semi-supervised 3D left atrium segmentation. In International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, 605–613.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  74. Michele Zappavigna. 2016. Social media photography: construing subjectivity in Instagram images. Visual Communication 15, 3 (2016), 271–292.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  75. Zhedong Zheng and Yi Yang. 2021. Rectifying pseudo label learning via uncertainty estimation for domain adaptive semantic segmentation. International Journal of Computer Vision 129, 4 (2021), 1106–1120.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  76. Haoti Zhong, Hao Li, Anna Cinzia Squicciarini, Sarah Michele Rajtmajer, Christopher Griffin, David J Miller, and Cornelia Caragea. 2016. Content-Driven Detection of Cyberbullying on the Instagram Social Network.. In IJCAI, Vol. 16. 3952–3958.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Xizhou Zhu, Weijie Su, Lewei Lu, Bin Li, Xiaogang Wang, and Jifeng Dai. 2020. Deformable detr: Deformable transformers for end-to-end object detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.04159 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Towards Automated Detection of Risky Images Shared by Youth on Social Media

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        WWW '23 Companion: Companion Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2023
        April 2023
        1567 pages
        ISBN:9781450394192
        DOI:10.1145/3543873

        Copyright © 2023 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 30 April 2023

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate1,899of8,196submissions,23%

        Upcoming Conference

        WWW '24
        The ACM Web Conference 2024
        May 13 - 17, 2024
        Singapore , Singapore

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format