Good morning and thanks to each of you for your interest and attention. With the retirement of our Chief Investment Officer, David Hollister, and the division of his responsibilities among the rest of us, our presentation sequence starting this quarter is meant to be simpler and more concise. I will offer observations about directions in our business, we'll report on corporate developments, and provide updates on our capital allocation. Then Chief Operating Officer, Nicholas Cumins, will provide expanded operating perspectives, now including in my stead, tone of business by sector and commercial model as well as by region and by brand. CFO, Werner Andre, will conclude with our financial performance, as usual. Robust operating results for 2023 Q1 echo what I think has come to be expected of Bentley Systems end market resilience, predictably accretive business model, and the consistency of our execution and thankfully, absent last year's unfavorable drama in Russia and China. We met or surpassed expectations for our financial performance metrics, most significantly including operating margins measured now by adjusted operating income with stock-based compensation. Our operating cash flows were even higher than expected, but as Werner will explain, we expect consistency here on a trailing 12-month basis. As Nicholas will elaborate, all operating trends remain directionally strong. And as he will explain, even though this year has started appreciably better in China than in other recent years, that probably will serve to accelerate our intentional localization pivot there at some increasing cost to existing ARR. All considered, our across-the-board strength in 2023 Q1 duly increases our confidence in our annual financial outlook for 2023. And as to what I consider our key metric, ARR growth, indeed, this expanded sequentially to a first quarter high of 13% year-over-year constant currency business performance, with net revenue retention over trailing 12 months remaining consistently high at 110%. This new business strength is consistent with external benchmarks as the Dodge survey of US civil engineering firms continues to show that their current backlogs have kept increasing continuously. Broadening to ACEC survey of US engineering firms generally, not limited to civil, such firms are confident about backlogs continuing to increase over the coming 12 months. And as to that 12-month horizon for their expectations about macro conditions at large versus their own environment, US engineering firms' sentiment has generally improved over the last quarter, but again, more so for overall engineering and design services and especially for their own firms' favorable prospects. And this latest ACEC survey of US engineering firms' current sentiment by industry here matched to BSY's infrastructure sectors correlates with our own new business resilience with quite favorable sentiment for water or wastewater within our resources sector, broadly leading sentiment for industries within the public works/utilities sector, satisfactory sentiment for industrial and industries within the commercial facility sector, that is vertical infrastructure, generally lagging. For US ACEC firms, the most significant annual survey was just published by engineering news record earlier this month, ranking the US headquartered top 500 by design billings. They report their design billings to ENR in accordance with this breakdown. So, their aggregate design billings here can likewise be generally grouped within BSY's infrastructure sectors in these proportions. For resources, including at least water networks, the mainstay for us and for these top design firms overall, public works/utilities for industrial, and for the commercial facility sector, which leaves some reported design billings not applicable to infrastructure sectors. Of course, each year, the top 500 are a somewhat different set of firms, so the year-to-year growth in the total of their design billings does not per se correspond to an organic growth rate, but note the conspicuous inflection now underway in the top 500 firms design billings as along with somewhat greater inflation, design intensive infrastructure projects for resilience, adaptation, and energy security are being increasingly prioritized. ENR does not annually report the top design rankings for those largest headquartered outside the US until early summer. So, the latest analytics for the global top design firms are still using the combined 2022 rankings when the consolidated top 637 firms reported aggregate design billings of $216 billion. I have been reasonably asked why when China represents only a few percent of BSY revenues? We are allocating so much attention and emphasis on our determinedly new China-specific go-to-market strategy, particularly as everywhere else in the world, we relatively uniformly apply our proven direct sales formula. The ENR top firm rankings show the answer in terms of magnitude. Just the top 29 firms in China performed 27% of the design buildings of all the world's top firms. This proportion is not an abstract future projection, nor is it derived from murky economic statistics, rather, this reflects the here and now proportion that China already represents among our top accounts and prospects. If and when we can earn the same share of design billings in China as elsewhere, our overall scale of usage and revenues could grow at comparatively little incremental cost by almost 25%. To quantify BSY's current penetration rate outside China, Consider that our ProjectWise enterprise collaboration system is particularly well established in these top firms to distribute their engineering workflows across their globally virtualized talent resources. Such work sharing has become increasingly essential for these firms throughout the pandemic and since then, in light of their staffing challenges, to meet the backlogs we were just looking at, we know from our consumption log analytics, the number of users of ProjectWise within these firms as we charge them each calendar quarter per unique user. Based on the middle-of-the-road assumption that these top firms' design billings are performed by full-time employees, FTEs, each estimated to generate an average of $200,000 of design billings annually. It turns out that about 14% of these FTEs in a calendar quarter are ProjectWise users. While I am sure this makes us, by far, the leader in enterprise collaboration for these top firms, the remaining opportunity for firms and projects to further standardize on ProjectWise is a compelling priority for our product, sales and success organizations. Collectively, these global ENR top design firms alone account for about one-fourth of BSY's ARR. And of course, within this, we log each hour of each firm's users BSY and application consumption. And most of these firms are E365 accounts that we charge per day of such use. So how does our revenue compared to the design firms revenue for each such design hour as to which educated assumption is that these ex-China firms bill at about $150 on average. For each such power using BSY applications, the average expenditure by these top design firms is $1.41 or less than 1% of that hour's rate of billing. And apportioning these firms' ProjectWise expenditures over their BSY application usage hours adds on average about $0.39 in cost per such design hour. While there are other additional costs of going digital, among others, hardware, Microsoft, communications, internal support, I think there would be a general agreement that BSY's application software and ProjectWise, if used, most largely determine the actual value of that design hour, yet presently account for only a few percent of the total cost to the design firm. At this juncture, when such firms face record backlogs, but are constrained from adding hours by the limitations of skill shortages, I think this makes the case that there is a long upside runway ahead for us to provide and be paid commensurately for more valuable, more specialized applications, enabling a continuously increasing rate of application mix accretion. Now, by way of reporting corporate portfolio developments in the last two months, we announced during 2023 Q1, our investment in Worldsensing, up-and-coming global independent leader in integrated infrastructure IoT hardware connectivity solutions. In exchange for the thread connectivity hardware, which we acquired with sensemetrics in 2021, and a financial investment in Worldsensing's Series D capital round, we have acquired a low double-digit equity stake. But even more importantly, our sensemetrics software within iTwin IoT, will be closely though nonexclusively integrated with Worldsensing sensors and network connectivity hardware and our freemium trial license subscription will be included in all new Worldsensing installations. For this quarter's observations about capital allocation, I will next show how I think about measuring and optimizing that leverage within our capital structure that's dominated by convertible securities. I think this is significant because you can look at a Bloomberg screen that shows BSY as a highly leveraged outlier as a result of not distinguishing between convertibles and straight debt. Now, I recognize that accounting rules do treat convertible securities, 100% is debt. But for leverage assessment, I believe it's appropriate to look more through a finance lens as with the holders of the convertibles as they're intrinsically and intentionally a dynamic mix between debt on the one hand and equity on the other. Obviously, our bank debt which was incurred early last year to finance our highly accretive platform acquisition of Power Line Systems and which net of cash, was down to $340 million at the end of 2023 Q1, anchors are debt leverage. But how should we think about our unquestionably attractive convertible debt with coupon rates of 1/8s and 3/8s percent covenant-free, which financed our highly accretive platform acquisition of Seequent in 2020. It consists of an issue maturing in 2026, which one can view on this Bloomberg page, including here a computed delta statistic, that's for the embedded equity option. The delta changes constantly based on the BSY stock price, volatility, interest rates, and the remaining time to maturity. And this snapshot reflected the market on a recent day. The other issue maturing in 2027 has a different delta statistic corresponding to its different parameters. In any prevailing market condition, these delta statistics -- look here, I admit to being a recovering financial engineer. As the first company, I founded 35 years ago, was in the business of software for derivatives modeling. The delta can help us to conceptually apportion each convertible issue between debt and equity. The delta is the hedge ratio, the degree to which the value of the convertible issue moves in relation to the value of the underlying shares as the stock price changes. The delta would range from zero at the maturity date if the stock price would be lower than the strike price such that the security then behaves as if all debt, to 1, if at maturity, the stock price would be higher than the strike price such that conversion to equity would be certain. Accordingly, at the delta of 0.43 for the first issue, we can ascribe 43% of its face value to be acting as if approximately 4.5 million shares of equity and the remainder to be acting approximately as is $400 million of debt. And at its delta of 0.39 doing the same for the 2027 issue results as if $350 million of debt. Now, we reckon our leverage ratio on the basis of our adjusted EBITDA as that's what our bank syndicate does for pricing and covenants, and for the last 12 months through 2023 Q1, our adjusted EBITDA was $383 million, which implies a net bank debt leverage ratio of 0.9 times. And for the delta adjusted debt portion of both convertible issues, additional leverage of 1.9 times. For a total current effective debt leverage ratio of 2.8 times adjusted EBITDA, tolerably approaching the range, which I think we would consider optimal. Now, I welcome feedback on this apparently novel delta-adjusted approach to monitoring leverage that includes convergence. But now over to Nicholas for his informed operational perspectives on 2023 Q1. Nicholas?