Abstract
A dominating set is a classic concept that is widely used in road safety, disaster rescue operations, and chemical graphs. In this paper, we introduce a variation of the dominating set: the proper 3-dominating set. For a proper 3-dominating set D of graph any vertex outside D is adjacent to at least three vertices inside D, and there exists one vertex outside D that is adjacent to three vertices inside D. For graph the proper 3-domination number is the minimum cardinality among all proper 3-dominating sets of We find that a graph with minimum degree at least 3 or one for which there exists a subgraph with some characteristic always contains a proper 3-dominating set. Further, we find that when certain conditions are met, some graph products, such as the joint product, strong product, lexicographic product, and corona product of two graphs, have a proper 3-dominating set. Moreover, we discover the bounds of the proper 3-domination number. For some special graphs, we get their proper 3-domination numbers.
MSC:
05C09; 05C69
1. Introduction
In general, we use the standard terminology and notation of graph theory (see []). In this paper, the graph is simple, connected, and undirected. Let G be a connected graph with vertex set and edge set If there exists an edge in the graph then x is a neighbor of The notation denotes the set of all neighbors of vertex x in Let is written as the degree of vertex x in abbreviated as We have The minimum degree of G is denoted by A star graph with n vertices is a tree where one vertex is called the central vertex, which has degree and the other vertices have degree 1. The symbols and represent a path, a cycle, and a complete graph of n vertices, respectively. The notation represents a complete bipartite graph with vertices.
If a graph satisfies and then the graph is a subgraph of Suppose that The induced subgraph of a graph G is formed by a subset of the vertex set and all the edges in G whose two end vertices are in
A subset is said to be a dominating set of a graph G if every vertex outside D has at least one neighbor in For more details about the domination of graphs, see [,]. A subset is called a p-dominating set if every vertex outside S has at least p neighbors in where p is any integer satisfying If then the p-dominating set agrees with the classical dominating set. For the 2-dominating set was studied in [,,,,]. The p-domination number is the minimum cardinality among all p-dominating sets of When is also written as For the graph a p-dominating set of minimum cardinality is denoted as a -set or a -set of If vertex has at least p neighbors in the set then we say that vertex x is dominated by at least p vertices in If vertex has fewer than p neighbors in the set then we say that vertex x is not dominated by p vertices in By definition, for any positive integer we know that a p-dominating set is also an h-dominating set. Then, a 4-dominating set is also a 3-dominating set, and we have For some results on the p-domination number, see [,,]. As a generalization of domination, Harary and Haynes [] introduced the concept of k-tuple domination. For k-tuple domination, see [,]. When k-tuple domination is called double domination, which was studied in [,,].
Dominating sets and their variants have extensive applications in the real world. The literature indicates that dominating sets and dominating parameters have applications in many fields, such as road safety, vehicular ad hoc communications, disaster rescue operations, and air/land/navy defense (see []). Moreover, dominating sets and their variants have been used in wireless networks [] and chemical graphs []. From an algorithmic perspective, domination and its variants in graphs have been studied in [,,].
We give an application problem for the p-domination number. A company needs to promote a new product. Suppose there are n potential customers for this new product. The company needs to select some salespeople from these n potential customers. None of these salespeople will buy the new product. We refer to the rest, excluding the salespeople, as target customers. If a salesperson knows a certain target customer, they will promote the product to the customer. We represent n potential customers as n vertices. If two potential customers know each other, then the vertices corresponding to the two potential customers are adjacent. This forms a graph G with n vertices. If each target customer is approached about the product by at least p salespeople, the company needs to know the minimum number of salespeople. That is, the company needs to know the p-domination number of the graph
Bednarz and Pirga [] introduced the concept of proper 2-dominating sets. Similar to [], a proper 3-dominating set is defined as follows:
Definition 1.
A subset is said to be a proper 3-dominating set if it is a 3-dominating set but not a 4-dominating set.
We use -dset to denote a proper 3-dominating set. The proper 3-domination number is the minimum cardinality among all proper 3-dominating sets of For a graph a proper 3-dominating set of cardinality is called a -set or a -set of D is a proper 3-dominating set if every vertex outside the set D has at least three neighbors in the set D and there exists a vertex outside the set D that has exactly three neighbors in the set In the 3-dominating set if there exists a vertex outside that is dominated by three vertices in the set then this set cannot be a 4-dominating set. Thus, the existence of such a vertex fundamentally distinguishes a 3-dominating set from a 4-dominating set. For the graph G, let For proper dominating sets related to secondary domination, see [,].
Referring to [], we present an example of the application of -dset. Suppose there are n places prone to natural disasters. In order to provide assistance to the residents in places affected by these disasters, rescue stations are to be established at m points (distinct from the n places). Suppose the residents in these n places can seek help from at least three rescue stations. In order to reduce costs by minimizing the number of rescue stations, where should the rescue stations be established? This problem is equivalent to finding a minimum 3-dominating set. Furthermore, if the minimum 3-dominating set is a minimum -dset, then it determines the weakest places from which only three rescue stations can be reached.
Proposition 1
(Lemma 1 []). Suppose k is an integer satisfying In any connected graph, each vertex of degree belongs to a -dominating set, where i is any integer satisfying
According to Proposition 1, in any connected graph, each vertex of degree 1 and 2 belongs to a 3-dominating set. Next, this paper considers what properties of graphs have a proper 3-dominating set, as well as the proper 3-domination number of some special graphs.
For convenience, we give the list of symbols in Table 1.
Table 1.
List of symbols.
2. Main Results
Lemma 1.
Let G be a connected graph with n vertices, where If there exists a vertex v in the graph G satisfying then G has a -dset.
Proof.
Let then Since then So, D is a -dset. □
Lemma 2.
Let G be a connected graph with n vertices, where If then G has a -dset.
Proof.
Let Let x be the vertex of minimum degree in the graph G, and Assume that Let It can be seen that the vertices in D are and all vertices in Then, For any vertex in we consider the number of its neighbors in Since then where That is, the vertex has no more than neighbors outside Since we have where Furthermore, we have So, and D is a -dset. □
Corollary 1.
Let G be a connected graph, and let and be connected. For the graph suppose x is a vertex of minimum degree. For any vertex x is not adjacent to If then G has a -dset.
Proof.
We have Let Assume that Let Then, Similar to the proof of Lemma 2, we have where Moreover, Then, D is a -dset. □
Theorem 1.
Let G be a connected graph with n vertices, where If then G has a -dset.
Proof.
If then there exists a vertex v in the graph G satisfying Then, according to Lemma 1, G has a -dset. If according to Lemma 2, G has a -dset. □
Referring to the definition of the joint product of two graphs in [], we give the following definition.
Definition 2.
The joint product of two graphs G,H, denoted by is a graph with vertex set and edge set
For definitions of the two fundamental graph products (strong and lexicographic), see [,]. Next, we repeat these definitions.
Definition 3.
The strong product of two graphs G,H, denoted by is a graph with vertex set and and are adjacent if and only if one of the following conditions holds:
(1) and ;
(2) and ;
(3) and .
Definition 4.
The lexicographic product of two graphs denoted by is a graph with vertex set and and are adjacent if and only if one of the following conditions holds:
(1) and ;
(2) .
Corollary 2.
Let be two connected graphs with vertex numbers , respectively, where Then, each graph of , and has a -dset.
Proof.
Suppose that and Since G is a connected graph, any vertex u in G satisfies Moreover, So, the vertex u in satisfies Similarly, any vertex v in H satisfies The vertex v in satisfies Then, any vertex x in satisfies That is, Then, according to Theorem 1, has a -dset. Next, we consider and For any vertex or assume that and
For according to Definition 3, is adjacent to , , and Therefore, for any vertex in , the degree of is greater than or equal to So, has a -dset.
For according to Definition 4, is adjacent to , , and Therefore, for any vertex in , the degree of is greater than or equal to So, has a -dset. □
Theorem 2.
Let G be a connected graph. Then, G has a -dset if and only if one of the following conditions holds:
(1) There is a vertex u that satisfies ;
(2) There is a vertex v that satisfies Let and Moreover, for any vertex holds.
Proof.
If G has a vertex u satisfying according to Lemma 1, the conclusion clearly holds. Next, we consider the case where G has a vertex v that satisfies Since then For any vertex we have Furthermore, we have Then, D is a -dset.
For a graph we assume that any vertex u of G satisfies If any vertex w satisfies then G does not have a -dset. Since the graph G has a -dset, there exist vertices in the graph G with degree greater than or equal to Suppose that is a -dset of We have Then, for any vertex we have Moreover, there exists a vertex v that satisfies where Let and Then, we have and We have Moreover, for any vertex we have □
Theorem 3.
Let G be a connected graph. If there exists a vertex v in G satisfying the following conditions, then G has a -dset:
(1) and ;
(2) For any vertex x is not adjacent to
Proof.
Assume that and where Since Since suppose that where j is any integer that satisfies If there is a vertex and according to Lemma 1, G has a -dset. Next, we consider the case where where j is any integer satisfying So, we consider where j is any integer satisfying
If then If and then where Let Then, For any j satisfying since has at least three neighbors within That is, for any j satisfying Furthermore, we have Then, v has three neighbors within So, D is a -dset. □
Theorem 3 requires this condition to be satisfied. That is, for a vertex v satisfying any two neighbors x and y of v are not adjacent. If G is a tree, then this condition holds. In Theorem 4, we consider the case where G is a tree.
Theorem 4.
Let G be a tree with n vertices, where Then, G has a -dset if and only if there exists a vertex v in G satisfying one of the following conditions:
(1) ;
(2) and
Proof.
If the tree G has a vertex v that satisfies according to Lemma 1, the conclusion clearly holds. Next, we consider the case where the tree G has a vertex v that satisfies and For any vertex since G is a tree, x is not adjacent to Then, according to Theorem 3, G has a -dset.
For a tree suppose that every vertex v of G satisfies If every vertex v satisfies then G does not have a -dset. Since the tree G has a -dset, there exist vertices in the tree G with degree greater than or equal to Suppose D is a -dset of Then, we have If any vertex v satisfies and then v is dominated by at least four vertices in D, where So, G does not have a -dset. Thus, if the tree G has a -dset, the tree G has a vertex v that satisfies or a vertex v that satisfies and □
Theorem 5.
Let G be a connected graph with n vertices, where If G has a -dset, then
Proof.
Suppose that D is a -set of Then, By definition, we have . If D is a -set of then Next, consider the case where D is not a -set of If D is not a -set of every vertex in is dominated by at least four vertices in Then, D is a 4-dominating set. Furthermore, since and we have Then, D is a -set of Since , suppose that is a -set of Then, Next, we prove that
If , then each vertex in is dominated by at least four vertices in If the vertex in is dominated by at least four vertices in So, the graph G does not have a -dset. Suppose that We have That is, If we add s vertices to then where s is an integer satisfying Since each vertex in is dominated by at least four vertices in each vertex in is dominated by at least four vertices in So, G does not have a -dset. Then, Therefore, there exists at least one vertex u in D satisfying We consider three cases.
Case 1:
Since u is adjacent to at least three vertices in Suppose that u is adjacent to three vertices in Let Since every vertex in is dominated by at least four vertices in every vertex in is dominated by at least three vertices in Moreover, u is dominated by three vertices in So, is a -dset. We have That is,
Case 2:
Since u is adjacent to at least two vertices in Suppose that u is adjacent to two vertices in Let Then, u is dominated by three vertices in and every vertex in is dominated by at least three vertices in So, is a -dset. We have That is,
Case 3:
Suppose that Then, is a 3-dominating set, which contradicts D as a -set. So, we have Since we assume that u is adjacent to where Let Then, u is dominated by three vertices in and every vertex in is dominated by at least three vertices in So, is a -dset, and □
We give examples of graphs that satisfy and
Example 1.
The graph is shown in Figure 1. The set is a -set and also a -set. Furthermore, the set is a -set. We have So,
Figure 1.
The graph .
Example 2.
The graph is shown in Figure 2. The set is a -set and also a -set. Furthermore, the set is a -set. We have So,
Figure 2.
The graph .
Example 3.
The graph is shown in Figure 3. The set is a -set and also a -set. Furthermore, the set is a -set. We have So,
Figure 3.
The graph .
Referring to [,], we give the following definition.
Definition 5.
The corona product of two graphs G,H, denoted by is the graph obtained by taking a copy of G and copies of H and joining the i-th vertex of G to every vertex in the i-th copy of
We consider the corona product of the two graphs and , as shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4.
The graph .
Theorem 6.
Let be two connected graphs with vertex numbers , respectively, where and If H has a -dset, then also has a -dset, and
Proof.
Let and Let D be a -set of H. We can assume that Then, where Every vertex in is dominated by at least three vertices in and at least one vertex is dominated by three vertices in
For let denote the i-th copy of where each vertex of is connected to the i-th vertex of Suppose that The vertex in G is labeled as the vertex in where Then, Let Then, We have Then, every vertex in is dominated by at least three vertices in and at least one vertex is dominated by three vertices in is adjacent to . Then, is dominated by j vertices in where Then, is a -dset of So, □
Suppose that G is a connected graph with m vertices, where Let H be a star graph with four vertices, that is, H is . We have Then, the upper bound of can be reached. We have . For example, in Figure 4, and the 15 larger nodes constitute a -set.
Theorem 7.
Let be positive integers. Then, the following statements apply:
- (1)
- (2)
- (3)
- (4)
- (5)
Proof.
(1) For is obvious, so we omit the proof.
(2) Let and Let and If then is a -set. We consider Let D be a -set. Since at least one vertex is dominated by three vertices in we have or Suppose that . Then, each vertex in is dominated by at least three vertices in Since D is a -set, we have Similarly, suppose that . Then, we have So, Let Then, D is a -set.
In (3)–(5), let and where
(3) For is a -set.
(4) Suppose that any two distinct vertices and If then is adjacent to in If then is adjacent to in If then So is adjacent to in Then, in graph is adjacent to Let For any vertex and is adjacent to and Therefore, is a -set.
(5) Suppose that any two distinct vertices and If then is adjacent to in If then is adjacent to in Let For any vertex and is adjacent to and Therefore, for is a -set. □
Theorem 8.
Suppose that are star graphs, where m and n are positive integers that satisfy and Let and Let and Then,
Proof.
Suppose that D is a -set of If and then is a -set. If and then is a -set. If and , suppose that . Then, there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in Similarly, if there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in Suppose that and . Then, there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by two vertices in Thus, there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in Similarly, if and there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in So, Then, is a -set. □
In Lemma 3 and Theorem 9 below, the notation represents a cycle of length i, where . Suppose that and Let and Let and
Lemma 3.
Let be positive integers. Then,
Proof.
Suppose that D is a -set of Let and Suppose that and If there exists one vertex x in that is not dominated by vertices in , then x is not dominated by three vertices in Let and Then, there exists one vertex y in that is not dominated by vertices in So, y is not dominated by three vertices in
Let and Suppose that If , then, since every vertex has there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in Let and Suppose that Then, is not dominated by three vertices in If and , suppose that Then, is not dominated by three vertices in So,
If and , we have Suppose that If , then for any vertex we have Then, each vertex in is not dominated by three vertices in If and , then there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by two vertices in So, there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in If and , then there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by one vertex in , and there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in So,
If and , we have Suppose that If , then each vertex in is not dominated by three vertices in If and , then there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by two vertices in So, there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in If and , then there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by one vertex in , and there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in So, □
Theorem 9.
Let be positive integers. Then,
Proof.
Suppose that D is a -set of
Case 1:
Then, is a -set.
Case 2:
According to Lemma 3, we have If and then is a -set. If and then is a -set.
Case 3:
According to Lemma 3, we have Then, is a -set.
Case 4:
According to Lemma 3, we have Then, is a -set. □
In Lemma 4 and Theorem 10 below, the notation represents a path of i vertices, where . Suppose that and Let and Let and
Lemma 4.
Let be positive integers. Then,
Proof.
Suppose that D is a -set of Let and Suppose that and If there exists one vertex x in that is not dominated by vertices in , then x is not dominated by three vertices in Let and Then, there exists one vertex y in that is not dominated by vertices in So, y is not dominated by three vertices in
Let Suppose that If For any vertex we have so there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in If and , there exists at least one vertex in that is not adjacent to the vertex in Then, there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in Similarly, if and then there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in So,
If or , we have Suppose that If then there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in If and then there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by two vertices in Then, there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in If and then there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by one vertex in Then, there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in So,
If , we have Suppose that If Then, there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in If and then there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by two vertices in Then, there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in If and then there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by one vertex in Then, there exists at least one vertex in that is not dominated by three vertices in So, □
Theorem 10.
Let be positive integers. Then,
Proof.
Suppose that D is a -set of
Case 1:
Then, is a -set.
Case 2:
According to Lemma 4, we have If and then is a -set. If and then is a -set.
Case 3:
Then, is a -set.
Case 4:
According to Lemma 4, we have Then, is a -set.
Case 5:
If and then is a -set. If and then is a -set.
Case 6:
According to Lemma 4, we have Then, is a -set. □
3. Conclusions
In this paper, we introduced the concept of proper 3-dominating sets in graphs and studied the characteristics of graphs with such sets. We found several sufficient conditions for graphs with proper 3-dominating sets. Corollary 2 and Theorem 6 show that there are proper 3-dominating sets in some graph products.
For a connected graph G with a -dset, we found the relationship between and That is, However, for the structure of the graph satisfying is still unknown, which we will examine in future work. In addition, for some joint products of two special graphs, we obtained their proper 3-domination numbers. It is also meaningful to calculate the proper 3-domination numbers of the strong product, lexicographic product, and corona product of two graphs. From an algorithmic perspective, it is also possible to consider studying the minimum -dset and the proper 3-domination number of the graph.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, D.C. and S.C.; methodology, D.C.; validation, D.C.; writing—original draft preparation, D.C. and S.C.; writing—review and editing, D.C. and S.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement
The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to the anonymous reviewers for their many valuable comments and suggestions.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
- Diestel, R. Graph Theory; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Haynes, T.W.; Hedetniemi, S.T.; Slater, P.J. Fundamentals of Domination in Graphs; Marcel Dekker: New York, NY, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Haynes, T.W.; Hedetniemi, S.T.; Slater, P.J. Domination in Graphs: Advanced Topics; Marcel Dekker: New York, NY, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Bednarz, P. On (2-d)-kernels in the tensor product of graphs. Symmetry 2021, 13, 230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bednarz, P.; Włoch, I. An algorithm determining (2-d)-kernels in trees. Util. Math. 2017, 102, 215–222. [Google Scholar]
- Bednarz, P.; Hernandez-Cruz, C.; Włoch, I. On the existence and the number of (2-d)-kernels in graphs. Ars Combin. 2015, 121, 341–351. [Google Scholar]
- Blidia, M.; Chellali, M.; Favaron, O. Independence and 2-domination in trees. Australas. J. Combin. 2005, 33, 317–327. [Google Scholar]
- Chellali, M. Bounds on the 2-domination number in cactus graphs. Opusc. Math. 2006, 26, 5–12. [Google Scholar]
- Cockayne, E.J.; Gamble, B.; Shepherd, B. An Upper Bound for the k-Domination Number of a Graph. J. Graph Theory 1985, 9, 533–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caro, Y.; Roditty, Y. A note on the k-domination number of a graph. Internat. J. Math. Sci. 1990, 13, 205–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Volkmann, L. Some remarks on lower bounds on the p-domination number in trees. J.Combin. Math. Combin. Comput. 2007, 61, 159–167. [Google Scholar]
- Harary, F.; Haynes, T.W. Double domination in graphs. Ars Combin. 2000, 55, 201–213. [Google Scholar]
- Martínez, A.C. A note on the k-tuple domination number of graphs. Ars Math. Contemp. 2022, 22, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Martínez, A.C. Some new results on the k-tuple domination number of graphs. RAIRO-Oper. Res. 2022, 56, 3491–3497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blidia, M.; Chellali, M.; Haynes, T.W. Characterizations of trees with equal paired and double domination numbers. Discret. Math. 2006, 306, 1840–1845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blidia, M.; Chellali, M.; Haynes, T.W.; Henning, M. Independent and double domination in trees. Util. Math. 2006, 70, 159–173. [Google Scholar]
- Chellali, M.; Haynes, T.W. On paired and double domination in graphs. Util. Math. 2005, 67, 161–171. [Google Scholar]
- Raczek, J. Complexity Issues on of Secondary Domination Number. Algorithmica 2024, 86, 1163–1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hurink, J.L.; Nieberg, T. Approximating minimum independent dominating sets in wireless networks. Inf. Process. Lett. 2008, 109, 155–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bermudo, S.; Higuita, R.A.; Rada, J. Domination in hexagonal chains. Appl. Math. Comput. 2020, 369, 124817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, F.; Du, H.; Camacho, E.; Xu, K.; Lee, W.; Shi, Y.; Shan, S. On positive influence dominating sets in social networks. Theor. Comput. Sci. 2011, 412, 265–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lan, J.K.; Chang, G.J. Algorithmic aspects of the k-domination problem in graphs. Discret. Appl. Math. 2013, 161, 1513–1520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bednarz, P.; Pirga, M. On Proper 2-Dominating Sets in Graphs. Symmetry 2024, 16, 296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kosiorowska, A.; Michalski, A.; Włoch, I. On minimum intersections of certain secondary dominating sets in graphs. Opusc. Math. 2023, 43, 813–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michalski, A.; Włoch, I.; Dettlaff, M.; Lemańska, M. On proper (1,2)-dominating sets in graphs. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 2022, 45, 7050–7057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Susilowati, L.; Sa’adah, I.; Fauziyyah, R.Z.; Erfanian, A.; Slamin. The dominant metric dimension of graphs. Heliyon 2020, 6, e03633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Simanjuntak, R.; Tritama, A. Distance Antimagic Product Graphs. Symmetry 2022, 14, 1411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sen, J.; Kola, S.R. Broadcast domination of lexicographic and modular products of graphs. AKCE Int. J. Graphs Comb. 2022, 19, 177–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frucht, R.; Harary, F. On the Corona of Two Graphs. Aequationes Math. 1970, 4, 322–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).