Login | Register

The Influences and Interactions between Various Scientific Research and Technological Domains in Case of Canadian Nanotechnology


The Influences and Interactions between Various Scientific Research and Technological Domains in Case of Canadian Nanotechnology

Shahidi Nejad, Hadi (2015) The Influences and Interactions between Various Scientific Research and Technological Domains in Case of Canadian Nanotechnology. Masters thesis, Concordia University.

Text (application/pdf)
Shahidi Nejad_MSc_S.pdf - Accepted Version


In today’s world, relationship between domains of science and technology is getting stronger as science contributes to technology in different ways. The interaction between scientific and technological domains is happening in complex innovation processes in which new technological ideas emerge as a result of new discoveries in science. This research aims to investigate interactions between various emerging scientific and technological domains and their influences in the development of both patents and publications in the field of nanotechnology.
The study uses real data of the journal articles and patents in nanotechnology between 1995 and 2008 which we clustered into scientific and technological domains. In clustering phase, terms and phrases were located in each record using singular value decomposition algorithm and then documents were assigned to cluster labels by applying standard vector space model algorithm on them. To achieve our research goals, in next step, we built the network of nanotechnology article-patent citations and investigated various network topological parameters over all nodes. The patent-article network is built on citation links among different nodes of patents and articles, while patent nodes cite a set of NPLs (Non-Patent Literature) and NPLs are also citing another set of articles as their references. Focusing on the role of NPLs, we studied trend of network topological parameters like betweenness centrality and degree centrality while looking at correlation between them. We highlighted leading patents in technology and leading articles in NPLs and their cited articles set which could be seeds of innovation in nanotechnology.
Our main results of this research are focused on the role of NPLs as gate-keeper nodes in bridging ideas from scientific to technological domains. Comparing NPL citation counts to articles and patents, results show higher range of NPLs’ contribution to the development of scientific fields than technological domains in Canadian nanotechnology. We also highlighted most cited and citing NPLs nodes of article-patent citation network as significant nodes in connecting science and technology. Using average of citations per article metric, we calculated the rate in which different technological domains influenced by scientific NPLs and also the impact of NPLs on development of different scientific and technological domains. Regarding the contribution of top cited NPL articles in development of scientific domains, we discovered a positive correlation between citation count and betweenness centrality measure of articles, which indicates the more an article is cited by patents and other articles, the more influence it has on the transfer of ideas from scientific to technological domains. We also observed that citation count value of journals in our citation network has a positive relation with the number of scientific domains it contributes to. In addition, we discovered the positive relation between patent citations count and journal’s impact factor. This is interesting to us since we can see the more articles of a specific journals are cited by patents, the more impact factor the articles of that journal have. In other words, impact factor not only shows the impact of articles on development of scientific domains, it also shows how the articles of a journal have impact on development of technological domains. Regarding the NPL’s contribution to development of technological domains, we found a positive relation between NPL journals’ citations to technological clusters and the number of technological clusters they cover. Results showed the increasing trend of journals’ contribution to different technological domains as citation count value of journals increases.
It is worth to mention that this study is the first to examine the flow of ideas from scientific to technological fields which uses a citation network of both patent and article nodes, and investigating leading articles and patents which play a crucial role in keeping this knowledge flow alive in nanotechnology related sub-fields.

Divisions:Concordia University > Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science > Concordia Institute for Information Systems Engineering
Item Type:Thesis (Masters)
Authors:Shahidi Nejad, Hadi
Institution:Concordia University
Degree Name:M.A. Sc.
Program:Quality Systems Engineering
Date:October 2015
Thesis Supervisor(s):Schiffauerova, Andrea
Keywords:Citation Networks, Social Network Analysis, Knowledge Diffusion, Data mining, Nanotechnology
ID Code:980655
Deposited On:15 Jun 2016 19:49
Last Modified:18 Jan 2018 17:51


Aggarwal, C. C., and Zhai, C. (2012). A survey of text classification algorithms. In mining text data (pp. 163-222). Springer US.
Ahmad, K., and Al-Thubaity, A. (2003, July). Can text analysis tell us something about technology progress?, In Proceedings of the ACL-2003 workshop on Patent corpus processing-Volume 20 (pp. 46-55). Association for Computational Linguistics.
Al-Sultan, K. S., and Fedjki, C. A. (1997). A tabu search-based algorithm for the fuzzy clustering problem. Pattern Recognition, 30(12), (pp. 2023-2030).
Al-Sultan, K. S., and Khan, M. M. (1996). Computational experience on four algorithms for the hard clustering problem. Pattern recognition letters, 17(3), (pp. 295-308)
Al-Thubaity, A., and Ahmad, K. (2003, July). Knowledge maps as lexical signatures of journals papers and patent documents. In Information Visualization, 2003. IV 2003. Proceedings. Seventh International Conference on (pp. 582-588).
Albert, R., Barabási, A. L. (2002). Statistical mechanics of complex networks. Reviews of modern physics, 74(1), 47.
Bassecoulard, E., Lelu, A., and Zitt, M. (2007). Mapping nanosciences by citation flows: A preliminary analysis. Scientometrics, 70(3), (pp. 859-880).
Beaudry, C., Schiffauerova, A. (2011). Impacts of collaboration and network indicators on patent quality: The case of Canadian nanotechnology innovation. European Management Journal.
Beaudry, C., Schiffauerova A., (2011): Impacts of collaboration and network indicators on patent quality: The case of Canadian nanotechnology innovation. European Management Journal 29.5 (pp. 362-376).
Beaudry, C., and Schiffauerova, A. (2011). Is Canadian intellectual property leaving Canada? A study of nanotechnology patenting. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(6), (pp. 665-679).
Berkhin, P., (2006), Survey of Clustering Data Mining Techniques, Springer, pp. 25-71.
Bonaccorsi, Andrea, and Grid Thoma. (2007), Institutional complementarity and inventive performance in nano science and technology. Research Policy (pp. 813-831).
Brantle, T. F. (2011), Complexity, innovation and economic growth: The competitive network of innovation and organizational size and growth in innovation. STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Brooks. H. (1994). The relationships between science and technology, Research Policy, Vol. 23, (pp. 477-486).
Canadian government reports (2012), Nanotechnologies international policy collaboration, See website: https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/aimb-dgami.nsf/eng/h_03459.html
Carey C., Kaiser I. and Moore Valerie C., (2013). Nanotechnology patent literature review: Graphitic carbon-based nanotechnology and energy applications are on the rise. McDermott Will and Emery.
Charu C., Aggarwal. ChengXiang Z. (2012). A survey of text clustering algorithms. Springer. (pp. 77-128).
Choi, H., Kim, S. H., and Lee, J. (2010). Role of network structure and network effects in diffusion of innovations. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(1), (pp. 170–177).
Chen, H. (2008). Mapping nanotechnology innovations and knowledge: global and longitudinal patent and literature analysis (Vol. 20). Springer Science and Business Media.
Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 57(3), (pp. 359-377).
Chen, C., and Hicks, D. (2004). Tracing knowledge diffusion. Scientometrics, 59(2), (pp. 199-211).
Compton V.J. (2004) Technological Knowledge: A developing framework for technology education in New Zealand. Briefing Paper prepared for the New Zealand Ministry of Education Curriculum Project.
Dang, Y., Zhang, Y., Fan, L., Chen, H., and Roco, M. C. (2010). Trends in worldwide nanotechnology patent applications: 1991 to 2008. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 12(3), 687–706. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-009-9831-7
De Nooy, W., Mrvar, A., and Batagelj, V. (2011). Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek (Vol. 34). Cambridge Univ Pr. Blondel D. B., et. al. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment.
De Nooy, W., Mrvar, A., Batagelj, V. (2005), Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek. Cambridge University Press.

De Solla Price, Derek J. (1965). "Is technology historically independent of science? A study in statistical historiography." Technology and Culture: (pp. 553-568).
Dolfsma, W., and Leydesdorff, L. (2008). Innovation systems as patent networks. Conference of European Association for Evolutionary and Political Economics, Rome (pp. 5–7).
DOE National Laboratories, (2007), Productive nanotechnology road-map, Battelle Memorial Institute and Foresight Nanotech Institute, Retrieved from: http://e-drexler.com/productivenanosystems/docs/Nanotech_Roadmap_2007_main.pdf
Dubin, D. (2004). The most influential paper Gerard Salton never wrote.
Dubes, R. C., and Jain, A. K. (1980). Clustering methodologies in exploratory data analysis. Advances in computers.
Easley D., and Kleinberg J., (2010), Networks, Crowds, and Markets: Reasoning about a Highly Connected World, Complete preprint on-line at http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/kleinber/networks-book/
Egghe, L., and Rousseau, R. (1990). Introduction to informetrics: Quantitative methods in library, documentation and information science.
Erjia Yan EY. (2010), Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: A coauthorship network analysis. John Wiley and Sons.
Eslami, H., Ebadi A., and Schiffauerova, A. (2013), Effect of collaboration network structure on knowledge creation and technological performance: The case of biotechnology in Canada, Scientometrics 97.1: (pp. 99-119).
Freecite, (2009), developed by Brown University, implemented by Public Display and funded by the Mellon Foundation. Retrieved from: http://freecite.library.brown.edu/welcome
Fritz, M.; M. Radmacher, N. Petersen, H. E. Gaub (May 1994). Visualization and identification of intracellular structures by force modulation microscopy and drug induced degradation. The 1993 international conference on scanning tunneling microscopy. The 1993 international conference on scanning tunneling microscopy 12. Beijing, China: AVS. (pp. 1526–1529).
Glosary of patent law terms, (2015), Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Web. 18 Aug. 2015. Retrieved from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_patent_law_terms#Non-patent_literature
Gridlogics Technologies, (2014), An analysis of patenting activity around 3D-Printing, Gridlogics Technologies Pvt Ltd, Website link: http://www.patentinsightpro.com/
He, J., and Hosein Fallah, M. (2009). Is inventor network structure a predictor of cluster evolution? Technological forecasting and social change, 76(1), (pp. 91–106).
Horikoshi, S., and Serpone, N. (Eds.). (2013). Microwaves in nanoparticle synthesis: fundamentals and applications. John Wiley and Sons.
Huang, Z., Chen, H., Yip, A., Ng, G., Guo, F., Chen, Z. K., and Roco, M. C. (2003). Longitudinal patent analysis for nanoscale science and engineering: Country, institution and technology field. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 5(3-4), (pp. 333-363).
Haun, J. B., and Hammer, D. A. (2008). Quantifying nanoparticle adhesion mediated by specific molecular interactions. Langmuir, 24(16), (pp. 8821-8832).
Hoover, A., Jean-Baptiste, G., Jiang, X., Flynn, P. J., Bunke, H., Goldgof, D. B., and Fisher, R. B. (1996). An experimental comparison of range image segmentation algorithms. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Transactions on, 18(7), (pp. 673-689).
Huang, C., Notten, A., and Rasters, N. (2011). Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(2), (pp. 145-172).
Huang, Z., Chen, H., Chen, Z. K., and Roco, M. C. (2004). International nanotechnology development in 2003: Country, institution, and technology field analysis based on USPTO patent database. Journal of nanoparticle Research,6(4), (pp. 325-354).
Hullmann, A., and Meyer, M. (2003). Publications and patents in nanotechnology, Scientometrics, 58(3), (pp. 507-527).
Igami, M., and Saka, A. (2007). Capturing the evolving nature of science, the development of new scientific indicators and the mapping of science.
Jaffe, A. B., and Trajtenberg, M. (2002). Patents, citations, and innovations: A window on the knowledge economy. MIT press.
Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., and Fogarty, M. S. (2000). The meaning of patent citations: Report on the NBER/Case-Western Reserve survey of patentees (No. w7631). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Jain, A. K., Murty, M. N., & Flynn, P. J. (1999). Data clustering: a review. ACM computing surveys (CSUR), 31(3), (pp. 264-323).
Jain, A. K., & Flynn, P. J. (1996). Image segmentation using clustering (pp. 65-83). IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ.
Jordan, C. C., Kaiser, I. N., and Moore, V. C. (2012). Nanotechnology patent survey: who will be the leaders in the fifth technology revolution, Nano-tech. L. and Bus.
Jordan, C. C., Kaiser, I., and Moore, V. C. (2014). 2013 Nanotechnology Patent Literature Review: Graphitic Carbon-Based Nanotechnology and Energy Applications Are on the Rise. Nanotech. L. and Bus..
Kain A.K., Murty M.N., Flynn P.J. (1999). Data clustering: A review. ACM Computing Surveys. Volume 31 Issue 3, ages (pp. 264-323).
Kantardzic M. (2003), Data mining: Concepts, models, methods, and algorithms. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, NY, USA
Karki, M. M. S. (1997). Patent citation analysis: A policy analysis tool. World Patent Information, 19(4), (pp. 269-272).
Karvonen, Matti, and Kässi. T., (2013), "Patent citations as a tool for analysing the early stages of convergence." Technological Forecasting and Social Change80.6: (pp. 1094-1107).
Kim, K.S.; Cota-Sanchez, German; Kingston, Chris; Imris, M.; Simard, Benoît; Soucy, Gervais (2007). "Large-scale production of single-wall carbon nanotubes by induction thermal plasma". Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 40 (8): (pp. 2375–2387).
Kriebel, A., (2012), Stacked area chart vs. line chart – the Great Debate., http://vizwiz.blogspot.com/2012/10/stacked-area-chart-vs-line-chart-great.html
Kolleck N., (2013). Social network analysis in innovation research: Using a mixed, methods approach to analyze social innovations. Springer.
Kotsiantis S., Kanellopoulos D. and Pintelas P. (2006). Data preprocessing for supervised leaning. International Journal of Computer Science. 1(2):111.
Lawrence, S., and Giles, C. L. (1998). Searching the World Wide Web. Science, 280(5360), (pp. 98-100).
Lee, D. L., Chuang, Huei and Seamons, K., (1997), Document ranking and the vector-space model. IEEE Software. 14(2):67
Lee, R. C. T. (1981). Clustering analysis and its applications. In Advances in Information Systems Science (pp. 169-292). Springer US.
Leydesdorff, L., Wagner, C., Park, H. W., and Adams, J. (2013). International collaboration in science: The global map and the network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.0801.
Leydesdorff F., Loet, and Probst C. (2009). The delineation of an interdisciplinary specialty in terms of a journal set: The case of communication studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60.8: (pp. 1709-1718).
Leydesdorff, L., Carley, S., and Rafols, I. (2013). Global maps of science based on the new Web-of-Science categories. Scientometrics, 94(2), (pp. 589-593).
Leydesdorff, L., and Rafols, I. (2009). A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(2), (pp. 348-362).
Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The knowledge-based economy: Modeled, measured, simulated. Universal-Publishers.
Li, X., Chen, H., Dang, Y., Lin, Y., Larson, C. A., and Roco, M. C. (2008). A longitudinal analysis of nanotechnology literature: 1976–2004. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 10(1), (pp. 3-22).
Libaers, D., Meyer, M., and Geuna, A. (2006). The role of university spinout companies in an emerging technology: The case of nanotechnology. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), (pp. 443-450).
Lo, S. C. (2006). Linkage between public science and technology development of genetic engineering: Preliminary study on patents granted to Japan, Korea and Taiwan.
Lo, S. C. (2007). Patent analysis of genetic engineering research in Japan, Korea and Taiwan. Scientometrics, 70(1), (pp. 183-200).
Lo, Y. D., and Chiu, R. W. (2009). Next-generation sequencing of plasma/serum DNA: an emerging research and molecular diagnostic tool. Clinical chemistry, (pp. 607-608).
Lopez, J., Potter, G., (2001). After Postmodernism: An Introduction to Critical Realism, AandC Black, ISBN: 1847141064, 9781847141064
Marienville, S (1992), Entrepreneurship in the Business Curriculum, Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 68 No. 1, (pp. 27-31).McVeigh, M. E. (2004). Open access journals in the ISI citation databases: analysis of impact factors and citation patterns: a citation study from Thomson Scientific (p. 125). Thomson Scientific.
Melin, G., and Persson, O. (1996). Studying research collaboration using co authorships. Scientometrics, 36(3), (pp. 363-377).
Meyer, M. (2007). What do we know about innovation in nanotechnology? Some propositions about an emerging field between hype and path-dependency. Scientometrics, 70(3), (pp. 779-810).
Meyer, M. (2006). Knowledge integrators or weak links? An exploratory comparison of patenting researchers with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology. Scientometrics, 68(3), (pp. 545-560).
Meyer, M. (2006). Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology. Research Policy, 35(10), (pp. 1646-1662).
Meyer, M., Debackere, K., and Glänzel, W. (2010). Can applied science be ‘good science’? Exploring the relationship between patent citations and citation impact in nanoscience. Scientometrics, 85(2), (pp. 527-539).
Miyazaki, K., and Islam, N. (2007). Nanotechnology systems of innovation—An analysis of industry and academia research activities. Technovation, 27(11), (pp. 661-675).
Narin, F., Hamilton, K. S., and Olivastro, D. (1997). The increasing linkage between US technology and public science. Research Policy, 26(3), (pp. 317-330).
National Science Foundation, (2001) Societal implications of nanoscience and nanotechnology. Arlington, VA (Also published by Kluwer Academic Publishing, 2001). See NSF website: http://www.nsf.gov/crssprgm/nano/reports/ nsfnnireports.jsp
Nelson, R.R., (1992). National innovation systems: A retrospective on a study, Industrial and Corporate Change 1, (21): (pp. 347-374).
Nelson, R.R. and N. Rosenberg, (1993). Technical innovation and national systems, in R.R. Nelson (editor), National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis (Oxford University Press, New York/Oxford), (pp. 1-21).
Newman, M. E. J. (2001a). Clustering and preferential attachment in growing networks. Physical Review E, 64(2).
Noyons, E. C. M., Buter, R. K., Van Raan, A. F. J., Schmoch, U., Heinze, T., Hinze, S., and Rangnow, R. (2003). Mapping excellence in science and technology across Europe: life sciences. Nanoscience and nanotechnology.
Perez C., (2013). Technological revolutions and financial capital. Edward Elgar Pub.
O’Brien, N. J., and Cummins, E. J. (2011). A risk assessment framework for assessing metallic nanomaterials of environmental concern: aquatic exposure and behavior. Risk Analysis, 31(5), (pp. 706-726).
Owen-Smith, J., and Powell, W. W. (2008). Networks and institutions. The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, (pp. 596-623).
Powell, W. W., White, D. R., Koput, K. W., and Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network Dynamics and Field Evolution: The Growth of Interorganizational Collaboration in the Life Sciences1. American journal of sociology, 110(4), (pp. 1132–1205).
Pyle D. (1999). Data preparation for data mining. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.
Raghavan, V. V., Wong, S. K. M. A. (1986): A critical analysis of vector space model for information retrieval. Journal of the American Society for Information Science; 37(5).
Reagans, R., and McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, (pp. 240–267).
Rocco, T. S., andand Plakhotnik, M. S. (2009). Literature reviews, conceptual frameworks, and theoretical frameworks: Terms, functions, and distinctions. Human Resource Development Review.
Ruda, H., (2008), The center for advanced nanotechnology, copyright 2001, 2008 center for advanced nanotechnology university of Toronto. Retrieved from: http://sites.utoronto.ca/ecan/index.html
Saka, A., andand Igami, M. (2007, July). Mapping modern science using co-citation analysis. In Information Visualization, 2007. IV'07. 11th International Conference (pp. 453-458). IEEE.
Salton G., Wong A. and Yang C. S. (1975): A vector space model for athematic indexing. Communications of the ACM; 18(11):613.
Small H., (1973), Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science: 24.
Sanderson, K. (2006). Sharpest cut from nanotube sword. Nature news.
Schiffauerova, A., Beaudry, C. (2009). Canadian nanotechnology innovation networks: intra-cluster, inter-cluster and foreign collaboration. Journal of Innovation Economics, (2), (pp. 119–146).
Schiffauerova, A., and Beaudry, C. (2011). Star scientists and their positions in the Canadian biotechnology network. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 20(4), (pp. 343-366).
Shiffrin, R. M., and Börner, K. (2004). Mapping knowledge domains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(suppl 1), (pp. 5183-5185).
Tahmooresnejad, L., Beaudry, C., and Schiffauerova, A. (2015). The role of public funding in nanotechnology scientific production: Where Canada stands in comparison to the United States. Scientometrics, 102(1), (pp. 753-787).
Thomson Reuters, (2008), A guide to evaluating research performance with citation data, Accessible by: http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/m/pdfs/325133_thomson.pdf
Van Raan, A., and Tijssen, R. (1993). The neural net of neural network research: An exercise in bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 26(1), (pp. 169-192).
Verbeek, A., Debackere, K., Luwel, M., Andries, P., Zimmermann, E., and Deleus, F. (2002). Linking science to technology: Using bibliographic references in patents to build linkage schemes. Scientometrics, 54(3), (pp. 399-420).
Vieira, E., and Gomes, J. (2009). A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university. Scientometrics, 81(2), (pp. 587-600).
Wasserman S., Faust. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications (structural analysis in the social sciences); 978-0521387071.
Wong, P. K., Ho, Y. P., and Chan, C. K. (2007). Internationalization and evolution of application areas of an emerging technology: The case of nanotechnology.Scientometrics, 70(3), (pp. 715-737).
Tijssen, R. J., andand Van Raan, A. F. (1994). Mapping Changes in Science and Technology Bibliometric Co-Occurrence Analysis of the R&D Literature.Evaluation Review, 18(1), (pp. 98-115).
Toutkoushian, R. K., Porter, S. R., Danielson, C., & Hollis, P. R. (2003). Using publications counts to measure an institution’s research productivity. Research in Higher Education, 44(2), 121–148.
Yan E., Ding Y., (2009). Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: A coauthorship network analysis, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
Yan, E., Ding, Y., and Zhu, Q. (2010). Mapping library and information science in China: A coauthorship network analysis. Scientometrics, 83(1), (pp. 115-131).
Yan, E., Ding, Y., and Sugimoto, C. R. (2011). P‐Rank: An indicator measuring prestige in heterogeneous scholarly networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(3), (pp. 467-477).
Yan, E., andand Ding, Y. (2011). Discovering author impact: A PageRank perspective. Information processing and management, 47(1), (pp. 125-134).
Yan, E., Ding, Y., andand Jacob, E. K. (2011). Overlaying communities and topics: an analysis on publication networks. Scientometrics, 90(2), (pp. 499-513).
Ynalvez, M. A., andand Shrum, W. M. (2011). Professional networks, scientific collaboration, and publication productivity in resource-constrained research institutions in a developing country. Research Policy, 40(2), (pp. 204-216).
All items in Spectrum are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved. The use of items is governed by Spectrum's terms of access.

Repository Staff Only: item control page

Downloads per month over past year

Back to top Back to top