Search

Technology helps to solve problems, but it may also lead to unintended consequences. For example, biofuels may help to overcome the disadvantages of fossil fuels, but their production might compete with food production leading to higher food prices and hunger. Therefore, in recent decades, the societal impact of technology has come to the center of attention. To deal with potential ethical issues related to technology, many scholars have emphasized the importance of addressing values already during the design phase of new technology. Values are understood as beliefs about what is good or desirable, like human autonomy, safety, sustainability, or privacy. Researchers in ethics and philosophy of technology have developed a variety of approaches, like value-sensitive design (VSD) and responsible research and innovation, to help engineers embed values in technological design (e.g.,). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Data-centric artificial intelligence (AI) (DCAI) has the potential to bring significant benefits to society; however, it also poses significant challenges and potential risks. It is crucial to approach the development and deployment of DCAI systems with caution, taking into account the potential societal impacts and working to mitigate any negative effects. DCAI technology is now an essential part of operations for many of the world’s largest software and hardware industries. These industries offer a range of AI and machine-learning (ML) services, tools, and platforms to society to help businesses process and analyze data. By leveraging data, these industries are able to drive innovation, optimize their operations, and gain a competitive advantage in the market. From personalized recommendations to optimized manufacturing processes, data analytics and ML algorithms are being used to improve the overall customer experience, increase efficiency, and identify new opportunities for growth. As data continue to play an increasingly important role in business operations, it is likely that more companies will adopt these technologies to stay ahead of the curve and succeed in today’s data-driven world , ,. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers who have worked in computer science or artificial intelligence for more than a few years will have experienced a profound shift in the public perception of their field from being something that people rarely cared about outside of sci-fi or niche academic or “geek” interest to something that is suddenly everywhere all over the world and seems to be permeating every field and every product. How should we respond to this? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Security and securitization can be defined in numerous ways. For example, an all-hazards approach to (national) security has been considered in the literature whereby we may refer to economic, environmental, and energy security , in addition to other nonmilitary facets inclusive of food-, health-, demographic-, informational-, and resource-related aspects. Furthermore, the literature points to various sectors of securitization , which collectively denote a broad-ranging perspective. Securitization, based on this wider view, implies “survival across a number of dimensions” , and as a necessary offshoot, across numerous academic disciplines. As such, there is the need to turn our attention to transdisciplinary perspectives of securitization to explore the nature of such perspectives and the various streams or tracks that are encompassed within, particularly within the context of complex socio-technical systems, and when considering the implications of technology, in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As I travel around the world, I listen to older generations complain that their children do not go out of their homes and play outside. Instead, youngsters go to their rooms and “play” with their phones and computers. Already, many even prefer avoiding school and taking their courses online. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The book describes how innovations can produce unintended effects that may take years to appear. The author is a well-known scientist and policy analyst whose interdisciplinary research interests encompass energy, food, population, economic, historical, and public policy studies. The author offers a few words to distinguish between the notions of invention and innovation. "The meanings have a large overlap, but innovation is perhaps best understood as the process of introducing, adopting, and mastering new materials, products, processes, and ideas." The book presents detailed descriptions of inventions that fall into three categories: 1) ones that delivered the advertised performance, but with undesirable follow-on consequences; 2) ones that were expected to dominate their markets, but never did; and 3) ones we would like to see succeed, but have not yet achieved their objectives. A final chapter examines current optimistic predictions of what technology could achieve and how fast these advances are likely to happen. It ends with a discussion of what types of innovation are really most needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fifty-two years ago, Milton Friedman proclaimed that the “Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits.” The corporate executive, he said, owed one thing to one group: profit to his “employers,” the shareholders of the firm. And with this rallying cry, he summoned forth a near 30-year movement (involving scholars, regulators, political parties, and others) to force the American corporation to conform to his vision, by doing everything from increasing shareholder control of the firm to linking CEO compensation with short-term share prices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We are all aware of the huge potential for artificial intelligence (AI) to bring massive benefits to under-served populations, advancing equal access to public services such as health, education, social assistance, or public transportation, for example. We are equally aware that AI can drive inequality, concentrating wealth, resources, and decision-making power in the hands of a few countries, companies, or citizens. Artificial intelligence for equity (AI4Eq) as presented in this magazine, calls upon academics, AI developers, civil society, and government policy-makers to work collaboratively toward a technological transformation that increases the benefits to society, reduces inequality, and aims to leave no one behind. A call for equity rests on the human rights principle of equality and nondiscrimination. AI design, development, and deployment (AI-DDD) can and should be harnessed to reduce inequality and increase the share of the world’s population that is able to live in dignity and fully realize their human potential. This commentary argues, first, that far preferable to an ethics framework, adopting a human rights framework for AI-DDD offers the potential for a robust and enforceable set of guidelines for the pursuit of AI4Eq. Second, the commentary introduces the work of IEEE in proposing practical recommendations for AI4Eq, so that people living in high-income countries (HICs), low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), alike, share AI applications’ widespread benefit to humanity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The last few years have seen a large number of initiatives on artificial intelligence (AI) ethics: intergovernmental-institution initiatives such as “Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI” from the high-level expert group on AI of the European Commission or the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Council Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence , government initiatives such as that of the U.K. Parliament Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence , industry initiatives on AI ethical codes such as those of Google, IBM, Microsoft, and Intel, academic initiatives such as the Montreal declaration for the responsible development of AI , the Stanford University 100 Year Study on AI or the Alan Turing Institute’s “Understanding Artificial Intelligence Ethics and Safety” , and finally professional body initiatives such as the IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous/Intelligent Systems (A/IS). These initiatives, while acknowledging the potential of A/IS technologies to contribute to global socioeconomic solutions, highlight the increasing challenges posed by these technologies in the ethical, moral, legal, humanitarian, and sociopolitical domains. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From the 1970s onward, we started to dream of the leisure society in which, thanks to technological progress and consequent increase in productivity, working hours would be minimized and we would all live in abundance. We all could devote our time almost exclusively to personal relationships, contact with nature, sciences, the arts, playful activities, and so on. Today, this utopia seems more unattainable than it did then. Since the 21st century, we have seen inequalities increasingly accentuated: of the increase in wealth in the United States between 2006 and 2018, adjusted for inflation and population growth, more than 87% went to the richest 10% of the population, and the poorest 50% lost wealth. Following the crisis of 2008, social inequalities, rights violations, planetary degradation, and the climate emergency worsened and increased (see). In 2019, the world’s 2153 billionaires had more wealth than 4.6 billion people. The World Bank estimates that COVID-19 will push up to 150 million people into extreme poverty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many recent advances in implantable devices not so long ago would have been strictly in the domain of science fiction. At the same time, the public remains mystified, if not conflicted about implantable technologies. Rising awareness about social issues related to implantable devices requires further exploration. Recently, even popular media are running stories related to implantable technologies. Discusses the economic, social, and technological aspects of implantable technologies and the implications for society as a whole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Those who have recently published a book looking at the intersection of science, technology, and society must wish that they could have delayed its appearance. As I write this in the summer of 2020, the world is dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic and is looking for a medical fix, a life-saving vaccine. The public’s faith in science and technology has never been higher. Computer “apps” that explore things such as the frequency of, and point of origin of, COVID-related Google search terms, and Twitter posts, are being used to trace the progress of the virus and to predict the sites of further outbreaks. The United States has been roiled by the death, at the hands of the police, of George Floyd. Floyd’s killing was captured by an app that has been circulating throughout the globe that has acquired the near iconic power of the crucifixion. With the majority of the American people equipped to make audio–visual recording of police brutality and post them on social media, we expect that crimes such as this will certainly diminish. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

World building exists at the intersection of design, technology, and storytelling. In its ability to enable and conjure deeply considered holistic worlds, it represents the foundational narrative and design practice for transmedia, spherical storytelling, and the post-cinematic. World building takes a lateral anthropological stance, borrowing specifically from ethnographic practice to contextualize speculative designs in real world research. World builders as designers then use this ethnographic groundwork as a place from which to begin imagining future possibilities [5, pp. 2-3]. This process allows designers to intelligently project plausible scenarios and outcomes through the creation of diegetic prototypes and models [3, p. 190] backed by rigorous research, envisioning desirable futures and the steps we may take to realize them - or the parallel universes we may be grateful to prevent. This essay is a case study that illustrates the use of world building as a "technology of the imagination" - entering a tradition of many other technologies of the imagination as elaborated by Sneath et al. and Halse - that envisions the future of media and technology [3, p. 182]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An excerpt from the article "Heartificial Intelligence: Embracing Our Humanity to Maximize Machines, Tarcher/Penguin" by Steve Omohundro in 2016 issue is presented which focuses on the artificial intelligence (AI) creation.

Kenya has seen a steady increase in the number of students wishing to acquire higher (tertiary, or university) level educational qualifications. This is a result of an increased number of students completing free education, paying for tertiary education, and socio-economic development in Kenya [1]. University student enrollment in Kenya increased by 35% between 2012 (240 551) and 2013 (324 560) [2]. The government of Kenya expanded the number of universities in 2013 as one mechanism to address growing demand [3] and has been planning an Open University in Kenya since 2010 [1]. However, it is still very challenging for higher education institutions (HEIs) to deal with the increasing number of students, based on available physical infrastructure and, critically, the number of available qualified university level lecturers [1]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) have persistent deficits in social communication and social interaction, as well as restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities [1]. The prevalence of autism is estimated at 1-2 per 1000, and close to 6 per 1000 for ASD [23]. ASD is a lifelong disorder, and many individuals need high levels of support throughout their lives [28]. Even though no cure has been found, early intervention is critical for a positive long-term outcome. The interventions that have received the most empirical support are early behavioral interventions. They usually involve one-on-one training provided by a therapist, in which children are trained to respond to environmental changes, understand and use language, and interact appropriately with others in social settings [8]. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Some important, long-term, social and economic challenges that we face can potentially be addressed by existing and emerging technologies. This article draws on the future technology growth trends and technology lists identified by Evans [3] in the paper ?Securing Australia?s Future ? Future Technology Overview.? Our focus is on how technological change can be channeled to address the critical challenges of our time and how we can shape the new and emerging technologies and systems to address these challenges. We include a list of basic technology advances that will, within the next ten years, underpin a large range of application technologies. We then identify some of the critical issues facing society, such as urbanization, water, and climate change, and discuss how the convergence of underpinning technologies can be shaped to address these issues. While the paths of technological change cannot always be predicted and impacts are highly uncertain, there are some clearly emerging trends, which point to real possibilities of steering technology in the direction of addressing critical societal issues. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Stop Googling. Let's Talk" in the September 26, 2015 issue.

Early streets contained a thriving social structure, without automobiles. When automobiles were introduced, there was not a friendly integration of the vehicles to city streets and country roads. Instead, early automobiles were rather anti-social to street life, often causing great divides between the public, who felt they had a right to streets, and drivers, whose automobiles? speed and power quickly dominated them.. This phenomenon was illustrated in a montage of clips in Harold Lloyd?s 1928 film, ?Speedy? [26]. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

New transportation, production, and telecommunications technologies have had enormous impacts on the economic, political, and social aspects of nations and their people. Different disciplines argue whether the overall consequences of these advances have been positive or negative for humanity [1]. For instance, the industrial revolution has revolutionized the quality of life and economic development of most people in the world; however most agree that this phenomena is a main cause of global warming, which might have a huge impact on future generations. Digital technologies are not exempt from the complex mix of positive and negative repercussions. While the impacts of digital technologies are gradually extending into health, education, governance, and human rights [2], these technologies are being ?adopted at alarmingly different rates and levels around the world and within countries themselves, thus impacting the levels of development and empowerment of individuals, groups of people, and nations [3], [4]. In some cases, technologies that are labeled as ?democratic? and should be tools to reach and impact all citizens, are technologies that are amplifying already existing problems and that unevenly empower segments of the population, thus altering the political, social, health, and economic ecosystems in favor of select few. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

On August 5, 2013, a prototype sample of cultured, or in vitro, meat was tasted at a well-publicized event in London [1]. This hamburger was not grown in an animal, but rather from bovine stem cells in Dr. Mark Post?s laboratory at Maastricht University in the Netherlands. The event may foreshadow a day when traditional livestock production has given way to large-scale growth of meat in factories, or carneries. Dr. Post has suggested that commercialization of cultured meat could be ten to twenty years away [1]. The implications are profound. By some accounts the technology could reduce the environmental impacts of meat production [2], promote human health by eliminating harmful contents such as saturated fats and pathogens [2], address global hunger issues [3], and alleviate the ethical concerns associated with industrial livestock operations [4]. However, technologies powerful enough to address such significant challenges often come with unforseen consequences and a host of costs and benefits that seldom accrue to the same actors. In extreme cases, they can even be destabilizing to social, institutional, economic, and cultural systems [5]. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

An Institutional Review Board (IRB) is an independent committee in the United States that protects the rights and welfare of human subjects recruited to participate in research. The federal government requires that government-funded research of all types involving human subjects, or their records, must have approval from an IRB. Institutions that receive government funds have, therefore, established IRBs to comply with federal requirements. IRBs review research proposals prior to the commencement of research to ensure that the possible risks to human subjects participating in a study are minimized and justified by the anticipated benefits. IRB-type committees that are in place or are being established in other countries are identified under different names, such as Human Subjects Committee or Human Research Ethics Board. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Worldwide, societies are seeing rapid change in modes of social interaction and organization. These new interaction modes are predicated on emerging forms of information infrastructure together with rapidly evolving devices, systems, and applications that are ever more deeply interwoven with our social fabric [1]. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The traditional supply-side model of energy generation and use is changing rapidly. Two major, inter-dependent problems that electric power grids currently face are sustainability in the long run and dealing with the peaks and lows of demand in the short term. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The author asserts that information and communications technologies should be used to re-invent new forms of social capital in the process of developing 21st century socio-technical systems, at a time when the erosion of public trust in institutions worldwide is undermining the ability of people to solve collective action problems. He adds that computational justice and collective awareness could serve as guiding principles that could provide the foundation for these forms of social capital.

Digitally Engaged Communities (DECs) are growing exponentially within Social Networking Sites (SNS), such as Facebook, Twitter, Bebo, LinkedIn, and MySpace, thanks to the wide adoption of such sites. Digitally engaged communities are referred to by terms such as online communities, virtual communities, Web communities, and social networks. One of the most widely cited definitions of DECs is that of Preece [31]. She argues that a DEC consists of people, purpose, policies, and the computer systems. She explains that any community is created by a group of people networking together, interacting publicly, sharing similar needs, and governing themselves through an implicit set of protocols guiding their interactions. Preece [31] also indicates that this kind of digital relationship needs to be mediated by the support of technological facilitators. Hence, one can argue that DECs are Web-based networks of interpersonal ties connecting people socially, and allowing them to 1) create a sense of belonging and construct an online profile within a bounded system, and 2) articulate a list of other online contacts with whom they establish relationships and connections. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In many respects, information and communication technologies (ICTs) pose new challenges to society. It is worth recognizing what ICTs represent within the urban space because of their widespread use and increasing presence in people?s daily lives. ICTs allow new ways of interaction between citizens and communities and, according to many authors, their use can improve not only communication within society, but also public management as a whole. Their use, therefore, favors greater social and economic development. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The authors identify several relevant issues that should be considered by all stakeholders in developing appropriate technology (AT) solutions for improving the quality of life for people residing in resource-constrained communities. Among these issues are whether or not AT systems should be localized for a specific region or standardized for a larger population, the feasibility of community ownership for AT projects, and leveraging both Western and indigenous knowledge in AT design.

The permeation of the mobile platform is creating a shift in community behavior. What began with a few individuals, has now quickly replicated as many people communicate not only through mobile phones, but through smartphones that are multi-functioning communications computers. Mobile devices have broadened people?s capability and reach, and within that context, people have adapted their behavior to adjust to communications ?on the go.? In this article we explore how multiplexed networked individuated communications are creating new contexts for human behavior within communities, particularly noting the shift from synchronous to asynchronous communication as an adaptation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Great economic, social, and structural disparities exist in the world today, and these disparities have led to immense challenges for healthcare facilities around the world. The global community ?lacks an equal rights-based approach in the distribution of healthcare? [1]. The burden of disease is growing disproportionately in different regions of the world, with developing countries moving toward a double burden of both chronic and infectious disease. Many countries with low economic and human resources have the highest public health burden. Of the 163 million births each year, 3?4 million babies die in their first four weeks, and 10.6 million children die before reaching the age of five. Approximately 530 000 women die in pregnancy or childbirth each year [1]. Over 17 million people will die of cardiovascular disease worldwide in 2010, with more than 60% of the global burden of coronary heart disease occurring in developing countries [2]. The number of people living with HIV/AIDS worldwide is 33.3 million, while in 2008, 1000 children became infected each day [3]. Seventy to eighty percent of the health problems are preventable, but access and utilization of the health systems remains low in some regions [4]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines the future of business, investment, and employment in a changing gloabl economy. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The authors discuss the value of the interaction of digitalization, globalization, and convergence within a framework of service to society as a foundation for formulating information and communication technology core curricula. Topics include the emergence of ICTs as instruments of social interaction, elements for digital convergence adoption that are not limited to technological perspective, and digital convergence as coevolution of technology with other disciplines.

The Digital Society is increasingly characterized by an ecosystem of smart, sociotechnical applications, such as smart grids, smart homes, smart cars, and so on. These applications are embedded in a social context with people ?in the loop.? They are fully networked and saturated with sensors, and they use artificial intelligence for context-awareness and adaptivity. Unlike biological ecosystems, each application, and indeed the ecosystem itself, is critically dependent on humancentred, mutually agreed upon, conventional rules or norms for its effective and efficient operation. Therefore, developing socio-technical (eco) systems raises three major engineering challenges, but offers important new opportunities for successful collective action. The first challenge consists in modeling, understanding, and developing the interrelated processes behind the formation, selection, and adaptation of the systemic rules, since these are essential for ensuring desirable macro-level outcomes and avoiding detrimental ones. This may include for instance the definition of efficient and commonly-acceptable rules for maintaining and sustaining the (eco)system over long periods of time. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Equity can be defined as a state, quality, or ideal of being just, impartial, and fair. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines equity as “the absence of avoidable or remediable differences among groups of people, whether those groups are defined socially, economically, demographically, or geographically.” When benchmarking those who operationalize equity well, five Ps are often used as an overarching equity lens. AI4Eq was our purpose in this issue; our community addressed the remaining Ps very well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Addresses the concept of deception and truth when dealing with robotics. What if you could no longer believe what your robot assistant was telling you was the truth? Are there circumstances under which that would be acceptable? What if it was for your own good? The time of robotic deception is rapidly approaching. We are being bombarded regarding the inherent ethical dangers of the approaching robotics and AI revolution, but far less concern has been expressed about the potential for robots to deceive human beings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Explores the short and long term benefits and drawbacks for developing nations looking to maintain an social, environmental, political and economic balance with the deploying of new communication technologies and online services. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The author shares his thoughts on the pros and cons of the use of wearable visual devices. Issues raised include the estimated number of mobile users by 2017, the potential effects of the proliferation of surveillance technology on individual freedom and societal interactions, and ways by which images can be used for deception.

Robots are becoming an important part of the “new social technology” defined by Hirai [1], where finding a robot in any environment is becoming more common. While we are used to finding robots in different environments such as supermarkets, nurseries (e.g., robotic pets), hospitals (e.g., for surgery), or at home (e.g., vacuuming robots), the environment that still has the most robots is industry (e.g., the automotive industry). For that reason, many studies are required to find the appropriate mechanisms to integrate robots at all levels of our society. We must consider issues from many perspectives, such as history, literature, economics, culture, technological developments, electronics, computers, or industry. The conclusions obtained will help us achieve the most positive and beneficial integration of robots with humans. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Is the effort of engineers to advance technology for social benefit worthwhile? One widely accepted definition of social benefit, the UN Declaration of Human Rights, includes several rights that depend to a greater or lesser extent on technology. On the face of it this validates the effort of engineers. Yet prominent economist Friedrich Hayek queried the very concept of social benefit. This gap between the engineering and economic perspectives is not widely recognized. While initially neutral on the purpose of economic activity, economist Michael Porter has taken a position supporting social benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The articles in this special section were selected from the 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS?11) that was held at Saint Xavier University in Chicago, IL, May 23 to 25, 2011. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Good evening good people of planet earth and welcome to the program! Tonight we are chatting with Sam Willis, founder and spokesperson for the new political party standing at this year's global election. They are calling themselves the “Intellectual” party and claiming to bring a shade of “White” to the political spectrum. Welcome to the program Sam! Perhaps you could begin by telling us a little bit about why the party started and what it's all about. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Privacy impact assessment can be a tool for responsible research and innovation (RRI). RRI can be defined as a transparent, interactive process by which societal actors and innovators become mutually responsive to each other. In order to allow a proper embedding of scientific and technological advances in society, actors and innovators keep in mind ethical acceptability, sustainability, and societal desirability of the innovation process and its marketable products [1]. This definition of RRI is close to the definition of privacy impact assessment (PIA). PIA is a process of engaging stakeholders to consider the impact of a new technology, product, service, project, or policy on privacy, and what measures could be taken to avoid or mitigate unwanted effects. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Many recent studies document a demographic shift towards an older and healthier population [1]. The challenges posed by an aging society include care needs and social costs [2]. Many elderly citizens, following retirement, quickly become marginalized, losing their social links, which often leads to loneliness. Some consider the elderly a cost burden, rather than a resource capable of “value creation” in the society. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article is the first of a series of T&S Magazine interviews with IEEE and other technology experts and leaders, commenting on the social implications of technology within their engineering specialties. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The book is one of a longstanding series of humanities anthologies issued by Wadsworth that I fi rst encountered a decade ago in Louis Pojman?s compilation of classic philosophy texts, The Quest for Truth. But in contrast to Plato and Aristotle, the fi elds of ethics and science and technology studies simply won?t stand still, so publishers are justifi ed in bringing out new editions in this area every few years. The mix of papers and essays in this collection strikes a good balance between relatively timeless and historical material on the one hand, and up-to-date topical discussions of current topics such as globalization, genetic engineering, and climate change on the other. This anthology began with a course the authors developed in 1993 at the College of New Jersey, assisted by NSF support for the fi eld of science and technology studies. The book is divided into two parts: Perspectives on Technology, which carries works on the history, politics, and ethics of technology in general; and Contemporary Technology and the Future, focused on five topical areas. The typography and layout of the book follow the pleasing well-established Wadsworth style. I detected a few signs of haste in copyediting: a typo here and there, and, most seriously, a place where apparently an entire page of references was left out. Considering that the office of proofreader was abolished by most publishers somewhere around 1995, this book is still better than average in its freedom from errors. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]