<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
    <!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM/DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.2 20120330//EN" "http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.2/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
    <!--<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="article.xsl">-->
<article xmlns:ns0="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en">
	<front>
		<journal-meta>
			<journal-id journal-id-type="eissn">3034-1558</journal-id>
			<journal-title-group>
				<journal-title>Cifra. Information technology and telecommunications</journal-title>
			</journal-title-group>
			<publisher>
				<publisher-name>Cifra LLC</publisher-name>
			</publisher>
		</journal-meta>
		<article-meta>
			<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.60797/itech.2025.7.3</article-id>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group>
					<subject>Brief communication</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>Classification of logical data models implemented by contemporary DBMS</article-title>
			</title-group>
			<contrib-group>
				<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
					<name>
						<surname>Tarassov</surname>
						<given-names>Serguei</given-names>
					</name>
					<email>serge@arbinada.com</email>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1">1</xref>
				</contrib>
			</contrib-group>
			<aff id="aff-1">
				<label>1</label>
				<institution>Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne University</institution>
			</aff>
			<pub-date publication-format="electronic" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2025-07-14">
				<day>14</day>
				<month>07</month>
				<year>2025</year>
			</pub-date>
			<pub-date pub-type="collection">
				<year>2025</year>
			</pub-date>
			<volume>7</volume>
			<issue>7</issue>
			<fpage>1</fpage>
			<lpage>7</lpage>
			<history>
				<date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2024-10-15">
					<day>15</day>
					<month>10</month>
					<year>2024</year>
				</date>
				<date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="2025-07-01">
					<day>01</day>
					<month>07</month>
					<year>2025</year>
				</date>
			</history>
			<permissions>
				<copyright-statement>Copyright: &amp;#x00A9; 2022 The Author(s)</copyright-statement>
				<copyright-year>2022</copyright-year>
				<license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
					<license-p>
						This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See 
						<uri xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</uri>
					</license-p>
					.
				</license>
			</permissions>
			<self-uri xlink:href="https://itech.cifra.science/archive/3-7-2025-july/10.60797/itech.2025.7.3"/>
			<abstract>
				<p>Apart from relational model, many contemporary DBMS implement different data models, including extensions of relational ones. Most of DBMS implement also multiple data models, and are so called “multi-model”. However, there is no commonly used classification of actual data models that is a disorientating factor for database users: engineers, students, teachers, analysts, etc. This article contains common terms and definitions as well as the history of earlier model classification proposed by other experts in the database domain since the 1970s. Developing the graph-based and set-based classification approach, and classical hierarchy-network-relational triad, the article proposes an improved two-axis data model classification including new semi-structured ones as well as examples of DBMS implementing these models.</p>
			</abstract>
			<kwd-group>
				<kwd>DBMS</kwd>
				<kwd> data model</kwd>
				<kwd> database</kwd>
				<kwd> classification</kwd>
				<kwd> NoSQL</kwd>
				<kwd> SQL</kwd>
				<kwd> OLTP</kwd>
				<kwd> OLAP</kwd>
				<kwd> semi-structured data</kwd>
				<kwd> database schema</kwd>
				<kwd> set theory</kwd>
				<kwd> graph theory</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
		</article-meta>
	</front>
	<body>
		<sec>
			<title>HTML-content</title>
			<p>1. Introduction</p>
			<p>Data models are fundamental entities that provide abstraction for DBMS (Data Base Management System). A DBMS is the software that handle all access to the database </p>
			<p>[3]</p>
			<p>The concepts of </p>
			<p>[4][5]</p>
			<p>To resolve this collision, J. Zachman tried to separate clearly conceptual, logical, and physical levels of data in models </p>
			<p>[7]</p>
			<p>Modern computing foundations include the topic of database management; database design and data-centered approach are the important parts of software design strategies and methods </p>
			<p>[23][24][25]</p>
			<p>This article is focused on logical level data models implemented by DBMS.</p>
			<p>2. Main part</p>
			<p>A data model can be defined as a combination of three components </p>
			<p>[1]</p>
			<p>1. </p>
			<p>2. </p>
			<p>3. </p>
			<p>Another term definition is “A data model is a collection of conceptual tools for describing data, data relationships, data semantics, and consistency constraints” </p>
			<p>[2]</p>
			<p>Data models are often confused with data (database) structural schemes. In fact, a </p>
			<p>As of 1979, some 40 or more data models (mostly incomplete) have been proposed for the management of formatted data </p>
			<p>[1][15][16]</p>
			<p>The classical approach has been suggested by C. Date in the first edition of his book </p>
			<p>[1]</p>
			<p>– hierarchical model;</p>
			<p>– network model;</p>
			<p>– relational model.</p>
			<p>This classification has been largely reused in the study books on data management since the middle of 1970thMissing Mark : sup and up to 2000thMissing Mark : sup </p>
			<p>[2][4][8][3]</p>
			<p>However, since the 1990thMissing Mark : sup and early 2000thMissing Mark : sup many non-relational data structures and models was introduced and re-introduced in different DBMS. There are several important reasons </p>
			<p>[6][9][10][12][13]</p>
			<p>– dominating of object-oriented approach and impedance mismatch of object-relational mapping;</p>
			<p>– evolution of OLAP (Online Analytical Processing) DBMS;</p>
			<p>– evolution of Internet/Web data;</p>
			<p>– reintroducing of VLDB (Very Large Databases) storage and analysis as &quot;Big Data&quot;.</p>
			<p>For example, the authors of &quot;Database System Concepts&quot; </p>
			<p>[2]</p>
			<p>– relational model;</p>
			<p>– entity-relationship model;</p>
			<p>– semi-structured data model;</p>
			<p>– object-based data model.</p>
			<p>M. Stonebraker and J.M. Hellerstein </p>
			<p>[11]</p>
			<p>– hierarchical (IMS): late 1960’s and 1970’s;</p>
			<p>–  network (CODASYL): 1970’s;</p>
			<p>–  relational: 1970’s and early 1980’s;</p>
			<p>–  entity-Relationship: 1970’s;</p>
			<p>– extended Relational: 1980’s;</p>
			<p>– semantic: late 1970’s and 1980’s;</p>
			<p>–  object-oriented: late 1980’s and early 1990’s;</p>
			<p>–  object-relational: late 1980’s and early 1990’s;</p>
			<p>–  semi-structured (XML): late 1990’s to the present.</p>
			<p>As one can see, the categorizations mentioned above:</p>
			<p>1. Confuse data models of different levels. For example, ER (entity-relationship) was suggested in 1976 </p>
			<p>[14]</p>
			<p>2. Do not take in account the mathematical basics like the graph theory or the set theory.</p>
			<p>3. Do not regard schemaless/schemafull approach out of scope of semi-structured models. For example, XML data model without a schema can be considered as a semi-structured but the simple adding of an XML schema makes the model fully structured.</p>
			<p>Database systems can be conveniently categorized according to the data structures and operators they present to the user </p>
			<p>[3]</p>
			<p>The first classification axis is the theoretical basis, or the formalism which a data model is based on. The following formalisms are used since first DBMS had been developed in 1960’s:</p>
			<p>– graph theory;</p>
			<p>– set theory;</p>
			<p>– higher-order function notion from the category theory (map).</p>
			<p>Data models based on the graph theory have the following qualities:</p>
			<p>1. Each data item is represented as a record of some type. In the modern world an object with properties may be used instead.</p>
			<p>2. Each record can be explicitly linked to one or more records, for example, using physical pointers; the model is called &quot;hierarchical&quot; when cyclic links are disabled.</p>
			<p>3. To access a data item the user should specify the path containing established links.</p>
			<p>Data models based on the set theory have the following characteristics:</p>
			<p>1. Each data item called &quot;a tuple&quot; is an ordered set of elements of different data types.</p>
			<p>2. There are no explicit links between tuples</p>
			<p>3. To access one or more data items user should specify an operation on the data set; for example, intersect two set of tuples</p>
			<p>The maps are well known since introducing in the LISP programming language in 1958 </p>
			<p>[20][19]</p>
			<p>1. Each data item called &quot;a value&quot; may have any data type.</p>
			<p>2. There is no explicit or implicit links between items.</p>
			<p>3. To access an item user should specify other value called &quot;a key&quot;. Every key can be associated with only one value.</p>
			<table-wrap id="T1">
				<label>Table 1</label>
				<caption>
					<p>Principal distinctions between data model classes</p>
				</caption>
				<table>
					<tr>
						<td>Comparing element</td>
						<td>Graph models</td>
						<td>Set-oriented models</td>
						<td>Map based models</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Data structure type of an item</td>
						<td>Record</td>
						<td>Tuple</td>
						<td>Value</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Links between data items</td>
						<td>Explicit</td>
						<td>Implicit (set operations)</td>
						<td>Not supported</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Data integrity rules</td>
						<td>Supported</td>
						<td>Supported</td>
						<td>Not supported (*)</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Access to a data item</td>
						<td>Explicit path (trajectory)</td>
						<td>Implicit (set operations)</td>
						<td>Explicit (by key)</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Storing of data items</td>
						<td>Ordered</td>
						<td>Not ordered</td>
						<td>Ordered</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Output of data items</td>
						<td>Ordered</td>
						<td>Not ordered (**)</td>
						<td>Not ordered</td>
					</tr>
				</table>
			</table-wrap>
			<p>The second axis identifies the class of data structuring level supported by a data model:</p>
			<p>– structured data models;</p>
			<p>– semi-structured data models;</p>
			<p>– non-structured data models (out of subject).</p>
			<p>In the structured data model, all data items should have a predefined type including complex types. For example, records of the same type should have the same set of fields </p>
			<p>[2]</p>
			<p>Semi-structured data model allows the specification of data items where individual items may do not have a type at all, or the items of the same type may have different structure </p>
			<p>[2]</p>
			<p>Non-structured data models are out of databases realm because of the database definition as a structured data storage </p>
			<p>[3][8][10]</p>
			<p>The following hierarchy seems to be good enough to include all widely used data models.</p>
			<p>1) </p>
			<p>◦     Hierarchical model;</p>
			<p>◦     Network model;</p>
			<p>◦     Document-oriented;</p>
			<p>◦     Object-oriented (data only);</p>
			<p>◦     Graph model;</p>
			<p>◦     RDF (Resource Description Framework) </p>
			<p>[22]</p>
			<p>2)</p>
			<p>◦     Relational;</p>
			<p>◦     Multidimensional </p>
			<p>[10]</p>
			<p>◦     Key-object </p>
			<p>[21]</p>
			<p>3) </p>
			<p>◦     Key-value </p>
			<p>[19]</p>
			<p>◦     EAV/CR;</p>
			<p>◦     Column store.</p>
			<p>Only two classes are required to distinguish data models:</p>
			<p>1. </p>
			<p>2. </p>
			<p>Some data models allow to use both structured and semi-structured facilities. For example, XML, the modern document-oriented framework implementation, allows to define documents which are constrained by XML schema, as well as schemaless documents. Idem for JSON.</p>
			<p>The following examples are based on a wide range of DBMS including multi-model ones, embedded, “on-premises” and cloud SaaS ones, commercial and open source ones etc. Some of DBMS like IBM IMS may be considered as discontinued but they are important at the historical perspective, and still using in business.</p>
			<table-wrap id="T2">
				<label>Table 2</label>
				<caption>
					<p>Classified DBMS examples</p>
				</caption>
				<table>
					<tr>
						<td>Formalism used</td>
						<td>Structured</td>
						<td>Semi-structured</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Graph based</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Hierarchical model</td>
						<td>IMS, INES, Caché</td>
						<td>LDAP, Windows registry, Caché</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Document-oriented</td>
						<td>JSON: Dynamo, CosmosDB, MongoDB, CouchDB, PostgreSQL,  Spark</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Network model</td>
						<td>IDS, Raima DB, Cronos</td>
						<td> </td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Object-oriented</td>
						<td>GemStone, Versant, DB4O</td>
						<td> </td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Graph</td>
						<td>Oracle, SQL Server</td>
						<td>Neo4j</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>RDF</td>
						<td>Oracle</td>
						<td> </td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Set-oriented</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Relational</td>
						<td>DB2, Oracle, SQL Server, PostgreSQL, MySQL</td>
						<td>Excel, Calc</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Multidimensional</td>
						<td>SQL Server (MDX), Cognos, SAS</td>
						<td>Caché</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Key-object</td>
						<td>KeySQL</td>
						<td> </td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Map based</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Key-value</td>
						<td>Windows INI files</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>EAV/CR</td>
						<td>TrialDB, Magento</td>
					</tr>
					<tr>
						<td>Column store</td>
						<td>HBase, Cassandra, Riak</td>
					</tr>
				</table>
			</table-wrap>
			<p>The classification may also be presented as a pie-chart diagram.</p>
			<fig id="F1">
				<label>Figure 1</label>
				<caption>
					<p>Graphical representation of classified DBMS</p>
				</caption>
				<alt-text>Graphical representation of classified DBMS</alt-text>
				<graphic ns0:href="/media/images/2025-07-14/45b8aefe-4a82-4fe7-b620-77edc3574a09.png"/>
			</fig>
			<p>Understanding and comparing supported data models may be a crucial factor on DBMS technical choice.</p>
			<p>Different data models have their own limitations that may affect the efficiency of storing and querying the data (see more details on different models in the book </p>
			<p>[9][10]</p>
			<p>For example, the multidimensional model may require massive recomputing when one of values has been changed. This wont be a good solution for transactional processing but will be for analytical one.</p>
			<p>NoSQL models are indeed pre-relational, they are not closed under certain operations on the data. This means, you should write programs to extract the data instead of simple query pipelines as it is for SQL. That is why many NoSQL vendors is trying to add SQL-like query language on the top of existing low level scripting languages.</p>
			<p>Data model classification is also useful when giving courses for students: we may concentrate on more abstract notions than the names and functions of different  DBMS brands.</p>
			<p>3. Conclusion</p>
			<p>The proposed classification allows to understand better contemporary DBMS features, opportunities and constraints based on the used data model. In fact, many DBMS implement more than one data model to enhance the field of use.</p>
			<p>Some buzzwords like “NoSQL” or “NewSQL” could be formalized as a subset of corresponding models. For example, “NoSQL” can be defined as both structured and semi-structured document-oriented model or, marginally, as all non-relational data models.</p>
			<p>The proposed classification is not exhaustive but extensible and can include future data models.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="supplementary-material">
			<title>Additional File</title>
			<p>The additional file for this article can be found as follows:</p>
			<supplementary-material xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" id="S1" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5334/cpsy.78.s1">
				<!--[<inline-supplementary-material xlink:title="local_file" xlink:href="https://itech.cifra.science/media/articles/15941.docx">15941.docx</inline-supplementary-material>]-->
				<!--[<inline-supplementary-material xlink:title="local_file" xlink:href="https://itech.cifra.science/media/articles/15941.pdf">15941.pdf</inline-supplementary-material>]-->
				<label>Online Supplementary Material</label>
				<caption>
					<p>
						Further description of analytic pipeline and patient demographic information. DOI:
						<italic>
							<uri>https://doi.org/10.60797/itech.2025.7.3</uri>
						</italic>
					</p>
				</caption>
			</supplementary-material>
		</sec>
	</body>
	<back>
		<ack>
			<title>Acknowledgements</title>
			<p/>
		</ack>
		<sec>
			<title>Competing Interests</title>
			<p/>
		</sec>
		<ref-list>
			<ref id="B1">
				<label>1</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Codd E.F. Data models in database management / E.F. Codd // ACM SIGMOD record. — 1981. — Vol. 11, № 2. — P. 112–114.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B2">
				<label>2</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Silberschatz A. Database System Concepts / A. Silberschatz, H.F. Korth, S. Sudarshan. — 7th ed. — New York : McGraw-Hill, 2020. — 1344 p.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B3">
				<label>3</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Date C.J. An introduction to database systems / C.J. Date. — 8th ed. — Boston : Pearson, 2004. — 1024 p.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B4">
				<label>4</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Tsichritzis D.C. Data models / D.C. Tsichritzis, F.H. Lochovsky. — Englewood Cliffs : Prentice Hall, 1982. — 454 p.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B5">
				<label>5</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">ANSI/X3/SPARC Study Group on Data Base Management Systems. Interim Report // ACM SIGMOD Bulletin. — 1975. — Vol. 7, № 2.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B6">
				<label>6</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Bruchez R. [Bases de données NoSQL et Big Data] NoSQL databases and Big Data / R. Bruchez. — 2nd ed. — Paris : Eyrolles, 2015. — 320 p. [in French] </mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B7">
				<label>7</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Zachman J. A framework for information systems architecture / J. Zachman // IBM Systems Journal. — 1987. — Vol. 26, № 3. — P. 276–292.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B8">
				<label>8</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Karpova T.S. Bazy dannykh: modeli, razrabotka, realizatsiya [Databases: Models, Development, Implementation] / T.S. Karpova. — St. Petersburg : Piter, 2001. — 304 p. — ISBN 5-272-00278-4. [in Russian]</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B9">
				<label>9</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Tarasov S.V. Programmirovanie s bazami dannyh [Programming with databases] / S.V. Tarasov. — Moscow : Solon-Press, 2015. — 256 p. — ISBN 978-2-7466-7383-0. [in Russian]</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B10">
				<label>10</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Tarassov S. Programming with databases / S. Tarassov. — 2nd ed. — Amazon, 2018. — 280 p. — ISBN 978-2-9563008-0-9.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B11">
				<label>11</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Hellerstein J.M. What goes around comes around / J.M. Hellerstein, M. Stonebraker // Readings in Database Systems. — 4th ed. — 2005. — P. 2–41.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B12">
				<label>12</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Gilula M. The set model for database and information systems / M. Gilula. — Boston : Addison-Wesley, 1994. — 320 p. — ISBN 0-201-59379-3.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B13">
				<label>13</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Gilula M. Structured Search for Big Data. From Keywords to Key-objects / M. Gilula. — San Francisco : Morgan Kaufmann, 2016. — 280 p. — ISBN 978-0-12-804631-9.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B14">
				<label>14</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Chen P. The Entity–Relationship model – toward a unified view of data / P. Chen // ACM Transactions on Database Systems. — 1976. — Vol. 1, № 1. — P. 9–36.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B15">
				<label>15</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">North K. Database Systems: The First Generation / K. North // CODASYL Systems Committee. — 1968. — September.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B16">
				<label>16</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Fry J.P. Evolution of Data-Base Management Systems / J.P. Fry, E. Sibley // ACM Computing Surveys. — 1976. — Vol. 8, № 1. — P. 7–42.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B17">
				<label>17</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Date C.J. Introduction to Data Base Systems / C.J. Date. — Boston : Addison-Wesley, 1975. — 400 p.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B18">
				<label>18</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Ireland C. A Classification of Object-Relational Impedance Mismatch / C. Ireland, D. Bowers, M. Newton [et al.] // First International Conference on Advances in Databases, Knowledge, and Data Applications. — 2009. — DOI: 10.1109/DBKDA.2009.11.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B19">
				<label>19</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Kim J. The Key to Value: Understanding the NVMe Key-Value Standard / J. Kim, B. Martin. — Storage Networking Industry Association, 2020.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B20">
				<label>20</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">McCarthy J. LISP Programmer's Manual / J. McCarty, K. Maling, S. Russell [et al.]. — 1959. </mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B21">
				<label>21</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Gilula M. Key-object data model / M. Gilula // Structured Search for Big Data. — 2016. — DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-804631-9.00003-0.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B22">
				<label>22</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">W3C Recommendation. RDFa Core 1.1 – Third Edition. — 2015. — URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2015/REC-rdfa-core-20150317/ (accessed: 18.12.2024).</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B23">
				<label>23</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge v4.0. / ed. by H. Washizaki. — Waseda University : IEEE Computer Society, 2024.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B24">
				<label>24</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Hernandez M.J. Database Design for Mere Mortals / M.J. Hernandez. — 4th ed. — Boston : Addison-Wesley, 2020. — 672 p.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B25">
				<label>25</label>
				<mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Reis J. Fundamentals of Data Engineering. Plan and Build Robust Data Systems / J. Reis, M. Housley. — 1st ed. — Sebastopol : O’Reilly Media, 2022. — 420 p.</mixed-citation>
			</ref>
		</ref-list>
	</back>
	<fundings/>
</article>