Author(s): Amira Anwar
Mentor(s): Ozlem Dilek, Chemistry & Biochemistry
AbstractAuthor(s): Amira Anwar
Mentor(s): Ozlem Dilek, Chemistry & Biochemistry
AbstractAuthor(s): Trinity Lavenhouse
Mentor(s): Changwoo Ahn, Environmental Science and Policy Department
AbstractAuthor(s): Reva Hirave
Mentor(s): Antonios Anastasopoulos, Computer Science
AbstractThe first rule of the internet: don’t forget the comments. Wreck-It Ralph wasn’t really wrong. Comment sections are chaotic, often toxic, and sometimes considered the worst parts of the internet. But they’re also where some of the most honest and unfiltered public discourse can happen. So instead of ignoring the comments, this project combs through thousands of them.
News sites and social media platforms host ideologically distinct communities. Commenters on The New York Times don’t necessarily talk anything like those on Fox News. Comments can reveal more than just interactions between strangers—they can reflect how online communities construct, challenge, or echo narratives around ongoing social issues.
But right now, existing tools for studying discourse fall short. They usually focus on one platform or treat comments as isolated utterances rather than parts of larger conversations. They also rarely combine toxicity metrics with network structure, which means they don’t fully capture complex social relationships.
This project addresses those gaps. These insights led us to two research questions:
How do different online communities talk about the news, and do they talk across ideological lines?
How can we measure the health of these discussions in ways that go beyond just likes or shares?
To answer these questions, we built a lightweight tool that scrapes and standardizes comments from three platforms: The New York Times, Fox News, and political subreddits. The tool unifies this data into a common format, adding metadata like reply structure and timestamps. This makes it easy to analyze both the content and the shape of these discussions—like who’s replying to whom, and how toxic the exchanges are.
So far, we’ve collected about 4,000 comments from The New York Times, another 4,000 from Reddit, and around 1,000 from Fox News. That’s just under 9,000 posts total, and while it’s not enough yet, it’s already yielded some compelling visualizations.
These are reply networks for Fox News, and you’ll also see one for The New York Times. Each node is a comment, and the size corresponds to the number of replies it received. Every edge—or line—represents a reply relationship. Nodes are color-coded by toxicity: green for less toxic and red for more toxic. These toxicity labels were generated using Google’s Perspective API.
These networks already hint at platform-specific dynamics and how polarized—or productive—these spaces can be. For example, if we look at the New York Times network, some circles are larger simply because they have more replies. One discussion concerns an op-ed about a former Kamala Harris skeptic, which is represented as the largest node in the middle. As expected, most comments have zero replies and cluster near the original post, but there are a few longer threads as well.
This opens up a range of further research questions, like: Do toxic comments produce toxic replies? Could we predict when a conversation will become toxic?
Why does any of this matter? Tools like this can help journalists, sociologists, and NLP researchers ask new kinds of questions—not just what people are saying, but how they’re saying it. If we want healthier discourse, we first need to understand how people talk. This project offers a step in that direction by making comment sections a little less mysterious and a lot more measurable.
This work builds on research from the 2024 Yellow Neck Workshop at Johns Hopkins and is supported by the OSCAR Program at George Mason University. I’d like to thank Dr. Antonis Anastasopoulos and the AI-Curated Democratic Discourse team from the JHU workshop.
Thank you so much for listening. Feel free to reach out if you want to explore the tool or just talk about the project. I’m available at arhavegu.edu.
Thank you again.
Author(s): Jessica Luther
Mentor(s): Lauren Kuykendall, Psychology
AbstractAuthor(s): Maryam Baig
Mentor(s): Ozlem Dilek, Chemistry and Biochemistry
AbstractTo provide a background for this project, I’d like to begin by explaining what fluorophores are. Fluorophores are chemical molecules that absorb Ultraviolet Visible light and project the emission in the form of light, and they help make up fluorescent probes. Fluorescent probes are molecular tools that allow scientists to visualize and observe live cell processes using highly sensitive, non-invasive and safe detection in biological cells. Omaveloxolone (OMA) is a drug being developed to treat Frederick’s ataxia, a rare and worsening disease that affects the nervous system. The fluorophore we are using for this project is a coumarin, and we have found that coumarin-based fluorophores have low inherent toxicity and can be readily internalized and washed out from cells, making them ideal for cell studies. In this project, we will focus on developing the fluorescently labeled OMA to monitor the delivery of fluorophore-OMA drug probes inside cells.
On this slide, we have two molecules that we will be using for our project. On the left side, you can see the OMA drug. It is a big molecule with multiple ketones present. Those are the double bonds with the oxygen molecules. On the right side, we have our CF3 coumarin. This is a published molecule and it is the coumarin that will we will be synthesizing and then conjugating with the OMA.
On this slide we have the synthesis procedure of our starting material, which is an amine, into the CF3 hydrazine that we will be using to conjugate to the OMA. As you can see, we will be adding an NH2 group, which is in amine group, to the existing amine.
To begin, we started by doing a thin layer chromatography between the drug, the dye and the conjugate after we had made the three. We diluted our samples in methanol, and then our TLC chamber solutions included various ratios of solvents that allowed us to visualize the mobility and composition of molecules on the TLC plates.
These are images from our TLC experiment. The samples on the left on the TLC plates are the CF3 dye, while the samples on the right are the product. As you can see, we observed a slight difference in shift between the lowest dots on the TLC samples. This indicates that we may have something new in our product.
From here we moved onto kinetics experiments, and after doing absorbance and emission data collection and nuclear magnetic resonance tests, we were able to make some conclusion. The data from the absorbance and emission graphs show that the drug-dye conjugate is fluorescent. Our NMR comparison between the CF3, the purified conjugate, and the OMA drug also gave us interesting results which we will see in the further slides.
This slide shows a comparison of the absorbance and emission data graphs that we collected for the conjugate to help us understand the composition of our molecule. As stated in the legend at the bottom of the slide, we can see that the CF3 is shown in red, the OMA is shown in blue, and the conjugate is shown in green. And if we look at the graphs, we can see that the red and green lines were very similar while the blue line was not as high. Because the red and green lines are so similar, we came to question if the dye may be overpowering the drug.
To see a more detailed and more accurate composition of the molecules we had worked with we conducted NMRs for each of the molecules. The purpose of an NMR is to analyze the magnetic properties of atomic nuclei to study the structure, the dynamics and interactions of the molecule. The area outlined here by black lines is where we will zoom in for the next slide.
Enlarging that small area shows us these multiple peaks that appear between the three samples. The yellow highlight indicates peaks that belong to the OMA drug. The blue highlighted peaks indicate the CF3 molecule, and the darker blue highlighted peaks indicate that we may still have some starting material remaining in our conjugate.
Based on the results of our NMR and the other test that we conducted we plan to move forward by trying to figure out where the CF3 is attaching on the OMA drug and how we can predict an NMR for it. Because of the dark blue highlight peaks that were present in our NMR on the previous slide, we decided to re-crystallize the CF3 coumarin to purify it further before we make another conjugate, and to try and get rid of those extra peaks. Finally, we plan to expand our range of molecules that can be conjugated with the OMA drug to see which one will be most efficient. We did a quick experiment in vials using small samples of different types of small molecules which you can see in this bottom image here and you can see were able to fluoresce. We plan to go forward with molecules numbers 2, 5, and 8, and study them further to see if they will be able to conjugate with the OMA drug.
Lastly, I’d like to acknowledge and thank Dr.Ozlem Dilek, Eva-Maria Rudler, and the rest of the Dilek team for their support and guidance throughout this project along with the GMU Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry. Additionally, I would like to express my gratitude to Dr.Karen Lee and the OSCAR team for giving me this unique research opportunity. Thank you for listening to my presentation.
Author(s): Benjamin Safa
Mentor(s): Remi Veneziano, Bioengineering
AbstractUnknown Speaker 0:11
So a key problem in adoptive cell therapy, which is a form of cancer immunotherapy,
Unknown Speaker 0:17
is basically the immunosuppressive environment of the tumor microenvironment and the related cell exhaustion adopted. U cell therapy is a form of cancer where we extract white blood cells from patients, modify them, and then re administer them. And these white blood cells are susceptible to a variety of things, but the main problem that we’re focusing on is cell exhaustion, which causes limited responses across cancers.
Unknown Speaker 0:51
The need for a memory type is integral to solving this problem of cell exhaustion, and
Unknown Speaker 0:59
there have been different types of platforms created for this, but DNA origami is something that may provide a very efficient, scalable platform and very precise platform to solving this problem. DNA origami is basically
Unknown Speaker 1:15
DNA nanostructures that are created through a long, single strand scaffold and several short staple strands that help fold the structure into any arbitrary shape.
Unknown Speaker 1:25
This research thus attempts to create such interfaces,
Unknown Speaker 1:31
namely 2d
Unknown Speaker 1:33
structures to enrich memory like qualities in T cells, in the context of improving adoptive cell therapy and fusion products.
Unknown Speaker 1:43
So the methods we employed for this were one design and two synthesis. We started with a target geometry, in this case a wheel, and used the software predicts to generate scaffold and staple sequences, and we used we ordered those Safa scaffold and scaffold sequences from
Unknown Speaker 2:05
a manufacturer and added different types of
Unknown Speaker 2:10
synthesized the scaffold, first using DNA polymerase and different types of materials such as DNTPs, and added the staple strands to get our final structure.
Unknown Speaker 2:22
Then after that, what we hope to do is attach any type of protein you want. Likely this will be different types of stimulatory ligands, such as 41 BB. This is common
Unknown Speaker 2:35
stimulatory ligand for memory for T cells. We also could attach stuff like fluorophores to track our interfaces and different types of
Unknown Speaker 2:48
beads to characterize these structures,
Unknown Speaker 2:55
so the results that we experienced
Unknown Speaker 2:59
are detailed. So at the top here we have our scaffold synthesis. So we started with a template, primers and additives. So these are DNTPs, which allow us to make the scaffold, and we have a faint Ben at the bottom, which is our single strand DNA, which you want to isolate, as well as our double strand at the top,
Unknown Speaker 3:27
the single strand DNA here is has been purified through centrifugation, and after that, we folded it with our structures, with Our staple strands, and did a variety of different characterization on this at the bottom here, you’ll see a dynamic light scattering graph on the left, then a atomic force microscopy graph image, and then a gel electrophoresis image on the left. Our DLs graph shows the diameter of our particles, and we measured it to be around 58 nanometers, and we got something around that value. So that means it’s consistent. Our AFM images showed that there were some defects in our structure, so that would require us to go back to the staple sequence design, which is what we did and what we’re currently working on. And our gel electrophoresis showed that we were able to successfully purify our structures.
Unknown Speaker 4:27
So
Unknown Speaker 4:29
over the course of the spring, basically what we’ve done is verify the folding of our structures and modify our staple sequences such that we are able to get a structure that does not have the defects that you see in these AFM images. We’ve also proceeded to add overhangs, and we are going to be trying conjugation protocols over this coming summer. Thank you. Applause.
Author(s): Matthew Burdick
Mentor(s): Jerome Short, Psychology
AbstractSo this beats cancer risk. This beats smoking risk. This beats type two diabetes. If you can run fast and hard and you can lift heavy, you will likely live for a long time. Despite this, over 75% of adults in the United States fail to meet the national guidelines. So why is this the case? So our question was, what are the mental and physical factors that predict exercise and sitting behavior, especially in young adults?
And the way we attacked this question was we recruited over 200 Mason students who with a mean age of 20 years old, and we required them to wear smartwatch smart watches throughout a 29 day period. And now throughout that period we analyze their sort of different psychological and physical variables through questionnaire data.
And after that study we were able to run data analysis using SPSS.
So what predictors or did we examine in this study? So we examined sort of two classes of predictors that we hypothesized to be either protective or harmful to physical activity. So protective. We have meaning in life. So the sense that someone feels that they can engage purposefully in their day-to-day lives, sort of the antithesis to nihilism.
And now you have gratitude is gratitude can be a state and a trait so people can feel grateful. All of the time. Or they can have moments where they feel gr grateful, which is more of the trait like gratitude. Um, this questionnaire measures both the state and the trait, but it basically means how grateful are you or like how much gratitude do you have for your current situation despite all the negatives.
So it’s sort of like almost an optimistic worldview. We also have several risk factors, so perceived stress. Anxiety, somatic symptoms and depression. Somatic symptoms meaning bodily pain and aches.
So what do we hypothesize?
First things first, we hypothesize that the risk factors, so remember, that’s your perceived stress, anxiety, depression, and body pain. We predicted that that would be. Um, related to less exercise and more sitting. So for example, someone who is very anxious, we expect them to exercise less and sit more. And this is in line with the research.
Um, uh, alternatively, we think that the protective factors, so those are our median life and gratitude will be related to more exercise and less sitting. Finally, we predict that all these factors to both risk and protective factors will uniquely predict exercise in sitting. So that means that out of all the variables that we assessed in our study, we would think that the, all our protective and risk factors accountant for unique variants in our outcomes.
So what we observe. Our relationship between our predictors and outcomes is primarily attributed to our factors instead of some other confounding third variable. So what do we find? So first we found some pretty interesting information about our samples activity. So again, we have about 200 Mason students over 18 years old.
With a mean age of 20 years old, and we found that GMU students surpass Americans in meeting C to C guidelines. So that means that you can see in our figure here that almost 54% of American, or sorry, 54% of GMU students meet or exceed the national guidelines of activity. So the CD. C recommends that people, especially adults, more specifically.
Participate in at least 150 minutes. So two and a half hours of moderate intensity exercise per week, or the equivalent of vigorous activity. And so we found that in our sample over almost 54% of our students met or exceeded these guidelines. Whereas nationally, only 25% of American adults meet those guidelines.
So we’re almost twice as compliant. Compared to the average American, but this can be somewhat misleading because as you can see on our bottom bar here, the sedentary bar, almost 20% of GE students in our sample had zero minutes, zero minutes of activity per week. And so that was a cause for concern.
We found that meaning in life was negatively related to sitting time. So people who perceive that they have a purposeful engagement in their life, that they can traverse the day-to-day events of their life and feel like it has purpose. Those people tended to sit less throughout this 29 day period.
We also found that people who were physically active, especially within the moderate physical activity category, um, this uniquely predicted sitting time up to 29 days after baseline. So basically this was our big longitudinal finding that people who were. Especially active at day one of our study tended to sit less up to almost a month after baseline.
Additionally, we found that perceived stress and somatic pain were negatively related to vigorous activity and daily steps. So people who reported being more stressed and having more bodily pain, typically exercised less and walked less.
So exploratory analysis revealed some interesting results. So especially before examining the relationship between stress and vigorous activity. As you can recall, before we found that stress was negatively related to physical activity, but uh, exploratory analysis revealed that stress was not a unique predictor of vigorous activity, meaning that.
There’s something else accounting for that variance. And what we found was exercise satisfaction accounted for that variance in a bi-directional, fully mediated model. So what does that mean? It means that perceived stress has no relationship, uh, has at least no unique relationship with vigorous activity.
But when you include exercise satisfaction. It has a mediaing relationship so that, so in our first model here in Model A, we found that people who were stressed reported less exercise satisfaction and exercise satisfaction. Being a strong predictor of vigorous activity would increase vigorous activity.
So basically, people who were stressed had less as facts from exercising, and so were less likely to exercise. Additionally, this was bidirectional. So if you flip it on its head, it is also true. So vigorous activity has no unique predictive relationship with perceived stress, but when you add exercise satisfaction, vigorous activity can, is, can be associated with a lot of exercise satisfaction.
And in doing so since exercise satisfaction is, is, um, associated with less perceived stress. It can vigor activity, could then could lead to less perceived stress. I should state that this is cross-sectional data, so we’re not making a causal claim, but we did find a fully mediated cross-sectional model with these variables, some things to take away with you.
So median life is negatively related to setting time. So. If you can find a way to increase your perception of life being purposeful to you, that things aren’t meaningless, that your actions matter. If you can increase that, you may be able to sit less and improve your physical health. Um, being active, especially moderately active, decreases your risk of sitting for chronically amount, chronic amounts of time.
Uh, stress may reduce exercise satisfaction, which in turn would reduce your, um, vigorous physical activity and vigorous activity may raise exercise satisfaction. And finally, satisfaction is weigh in more vigorous activity. Thank you for listening. Have a good day.
Author(s): Fatima Durrani
Mentor(s): Joseph DiZinno, Forensics
AbstractAuthor(s): Diborah Gutema
Mentor(s): Theodore Dumas, Department of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Program in Neuroscience
AbstractNMDA receptors are ion channels located on neurons that allow calcium ions to enter the cell when activated by the neurotransmitter glutamate. This calcium signaling, known as ionotropic signaling, is critical for synaptic plasticity, learning, and memory. NMDA receptors can also engage in non-ionotropic signaling, where conformational changes in the receptor trigger internal signaling pathways without ion movement. Each receptor is composed of two GluN1 subunits and two GluN2 subunits. A developmental shift occurs where GluN2B subunits are gradually replaced by GluN2A, a transition essential for synapse maturation. Understanding how these subunits contribute to ion flow and conformational signaling is the focus of our project.
To investigate how different regions of NMDA receptor subunits contribute to signaling, we are working with chimeric GluN2 constructs developed by Dr. Dumas’s lab. These chimeras are engineered by swapping specific intracellular domains between the GluN2A and GluN2B subunits. In doing so, we can separate the functional contributions of individual regions, such as the intracellular tail, to ion flow and to non-ionotropic signaling. By studying receptors with these controlled domain swaps, we aim to determine which portions of the subunit structure are responsible for differences in calcium permeability, activation properties, and downstream signaling. This semester, we focused on preparing the DNA constructs necessary for expressing these receptors in Xenopus laevis oocytes for future functional testing.
The overall goal of this project is to express wild-type and chimeric NMDA receptors in Xenopus laevis oocytes and compare their ionotropic signaling properties using two-electrode voltage clamp recordings. By analyzing how domain swaps between GluN2A and GluN2B affect receptor function, we aim to better understand the molecular basis of NMDA receptor signaling. This semester, we focused on preparing high-quality plasmid DNA, optimizing restriction digests, and initiating PCR amplification of the GluN2 receptor inserts to prepare for future subcloning and expression studies.
First, upon receiving the plasmid pGEMHE-membrane-mEGFP, we transferred a sample from the backstab into a 3 mL bacterial culture, which was incubated overnight at 37 degrees Celsius for 16 to 24 hours. The plasmid includes a Xenopus laevis promoter sequence, which enables later expression in oocytes. Following incubation, we isolated and purified the plasmid DNA from the bacterial culture using a alkaline lysis mini prep protocol. To ensure the integrity and purity of the plasmid, we assessed DNA quality using agarose gel electrophoresis to check for intact plasmid structure and spectrophotometry to measure the 260/280 absorbance ratio.
Next, we performed restriction digests to prepare the plasmid for future subcloning. We used the enzyme NheI to linearize the plasmid and carried out diagnostic digests to prepare for the later excision of the GFP segment originally present in the vector.
In parallel, we grew bacterial cultures containing the DNA for GluN2A, GluN2B, ABc, and BAc constructs. Using these templates, we initiated PCR amplification with construct-specific primers to selectively amplify the inserts. PCR amplification is currently ongoing. Once complete, we will purify the amplified products and verify insert size by gel electrophoresis before moving on to the next phase of subcloning.
After the inserts are fully amplified and purified, we will digest them with restriction enzymes to create compatible ends with the plasmid vector. We will then use a DNA ligase enzyme to join the inserts and vector together, creating new plasmids that carry either the wild-type or chimeric NMDA receptor sequences. Some ligation reactions will be performed in-house, while others may be sent for commercial cloning depending on efficiency. Sequence verification will follow to confirm successful ligation.
Following sequence confirmation, we will synthesize capped RNA transcripts from the recombinant plasmids using in vitro transcription. These RNA molecules will then be injected into individual Xenopus laevis oocytes, allowing the cells to produce functional NMDA receptors for electrophysiological testing.
Two to three days after RNA injection, we will perform two-electrode voltage clamp recordings, a technique that holds the membrane potential constant while measuring ionic currents. By applying glutamate and glycine, we will evaluate receptor function based on current amplitudes, activation and deactivation kinetics, and dose-response characteristics. Comparing wild-type and chimeric receptors will help us determine how specific subunit regions influence NMDA receptor ionotropic signaling.
This semester, we focused on growing bacterial cultures, isolating and purifying plasmid DNA, troubleshooting purification and digestion protocols, and beginning PCR amplification of the NMDA receptor inserts. These steps are critical for setting up RNA synthesis, oocyte injection, and functional testing. Moving forward, we aim to complete subcloning, synthesize RNA, and characterize receptor function using TEVC recordings.
I’d like to take a moment to thank those who have been instrumental in this project.
Dr. Herin who has been an invaluable mentor in electrophysiology and molecular biology.
Dr. Dumas who has provided expert guidance on receptor signaling and chimeric constructs.
Hannah Zikria-Hagemeier who was essential in training me on plasmid preparation.
Finally, I’d like to thank the rest of the PBNJ Lab for their collective support through guidance and resources, which has been key to my growth as a researcher.
Thank you all for your help and support!
Author(s): Robert Haas
Mentor(s): Nathaila Peixoto, Electrical and Computer Engineering
AbstractBACKGROUND:
The initial prototype I designed was part of a group project for my introduction to engineering class. It was controlled by a mobile app that connected to a microcontroller via Bluetooth module. This prototype had several shortcomings, most notably the single motor set up didn’t deliver enough power to close the hand properly. This issue was compounded by the hand’s lack of flexibility.
SECOND PROTOTYPE:
When developing the second prototype, I mitigated these problems with additional motors on the back of the hand and included a horizontal joint in the upper half of the palm, allowing the hand to flex.
FINGER DEVELOPMENT: 20 sec (show pictures of finger prototypes and them video of them flexing)
When designing the fingers, I developed multiple prototypes to test different tolerances for the hinge joints. I used dual pivoting joints for the fingers to increase flexibility and extended the supports on the back of each of the links to prevent them from flexing backwards.
MATERIALS
I tested multiple materials for this project including PLA+, PETG, and Resin. Resin provided the highest level of detail with resin. However, the most practical option was PETG. It’s stronger and more heat resistant then PLA+, and unlike resin it can be printed on a standard FDM printer.
CONTROL METHODS
I experimented with multiple control methods, using an off the shelf electromyography amplifier, also known as EMG, and custom-built amplifier. I was able to control the hand using the input from an accelerometer module. When the module detects a tilt the motors wind mono filament line closing the hand. When the module is tilted back the motors spin the opposite direction, unwinding the line and opening the hand. One area for improvement is with the EMG amplifier. I was unable to control the hand using input from the EMG amplifier.
CONCLUSION
There are some improvements that can be made to the project. Specifically, further testing of the EMG component as well as exploring other methods of control, to provide diverse control options to potential users. Additionally, certain components of the hand such as the cable guides and elastic retainers could be redesigned to print as one piece. This would also reduce and optimize the materials needed to construct it. I would also like to integrate a Bluetooth component to the hand, to allow the user to configure specific gesture presets through an app.
Author(s): Layla Hasanzadah
Mentor(s): Purva Gade, Center for Applied Proteomics & Molecular Medicine
AbstractHere you can see some images of me working in the lab: doing cell culture, running Western Blots, and observing my pancreatic cancer cells.
My project produced some very interesting results. I compared the relative concentrations of p53, the tumor suppressor protein, and PINK-1, the mitophagy-associated signalling molecule, and found that there is a very high and positive correlation between the export of PINK-1 p-p53 via EVs when oxidative stress is induced, indicating that p53 is degraded and exported alongside PINK-1 in EVs.Exported p53 may aid tumor progression and constitute a novel diagnostic method of non-invasively determining the mitochondrial health and p53 status within PC. PC EVs positive for phospho-p53 represent a novel diagnostic biomarker indicative of tumor stress. Targeting EV pathways in combination with oxidative stress could be a novel method of treating PC. Our lab is currently investigating if secretory mitophagy & EV export of tumor suppressors is common among other kinds of cancer, as well.
We recently published a paper on the topic of secretory mitophagy, but again, we hope to connect secretory mitophagy to the export of other tumor suppressors in future studies.
I wanted to thank my mentors and colleagues at the Center for Applied Proteomics and Molecular Medicine for their continued guidance and support, including the following people: Purva Gade, my direct mentor, Dr. Lance Liotta, Dr. Marissa Howard, Sofie Strompf, Angela Rojas, and Thomas Philipson.
I would also like to thank the GMU OSCAR URSP program and Dr. Karen Lee, as I received funding and guidance from OSCAR throughout the past semester.
Thank you very much for listening to my presentation!
Author(s): Cristian Cabral Rios, Bodhi Bryan-Roig
Mentor(s): Benjamin Steger, Film and Video Studies
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VgaADw78d2UXKx0qQ309YMxTCDiX8gwS/view?usp=drive_link
Abstract