human: Given a hyperedge-centered hypergraph: <hypergraph>, where the center hyperedge is induced by one source paper and its member nodes are the cited papers.

Details of the hypergraph:
Center hyperedge (induced by source paper "strategyproof and approximately maxmin fair share allocation of chores"):
  Abstract: We initiate the work on fair and strategyproof allocation of indivisible chores. The fairness concept we consider in this paper is maxmin share (MMS) fairness. We consider three previously studied models of information elicited from the agents: the ordinal model, the cardinal model, and the public ranking model in which the ordinal preferences are publicly known. We present both positive and negative results on the level of MMS approximation that can be guaranteed if we require the algorithm to be strategyproof. Our results uncover some interesting contrasts between the approximation ratios achieved for chores versus goods.

Includes members:
  Member "weighted maxmin fair share allocation of indivisible chores":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "maximin fairness with mixed divisible and indivisible goods")
  Member "fair allocation of combinations of indivisible goods and chores":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "equitable allocations of indivisible chores")
  Member "approximation algorithms for computing maximin share allocations":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "maximin fairness with mixed divisible and indivisible goods")
  Member "on truthful mechanisms for maximin share allocations":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "fair and truthful mechanisms for dichotomous valuations")
  Member "egalitarianism of random assignment mechanisms":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "investigating the characteristics of one sided matching mechanisms under various preferences and risk attitudes")

Question: Please tell me which class the source paper belongs to. The 40 classes are: cs.NA(Numerical Analysis), cs.MM(Multimedia), cs.LO(Logic in Computer Science), cs.CY(Computers and Society), cs.CR(Cryptography and Security), cs.DC(Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing), cs.HC(Human-Computer Interaction), cs.CE(Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science), cs.NI(Networking and Internet Architecture), cs.CC(Computational Complexity), cs.AI(Artificial Intelligence), cs.MA(Multiagent Systems), cs.GL(General Literature), cs.NE(Neural and Evolutionary Computing), cs.SC(Symbolic Computation), cs.AR(Hardware Architecture), cs.CV(Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition), cs.GR(Graphics), cs.ET(Emerging Technologies), cs.SY(Systems and Control), cs.CG(Computational Geometry), cs.OH(Other Computer Science), cs.PL(Programming Languages), cs.SE(Software Engineering), cs.LG(Machine Learning), cs.SD(Sound), cs.SI(Social and Information Networks), cs.RO(Robotics), cs.IT(Information Theory), cs.PF(Performance), cs.CL(Computation and Language), cs.IR(Information Retrieval), cs.MS(Mathematical Software), cs.FL(Formal Languages and Automata Theory), cs.DS(Data Structures and Algorithms), cs.OS(Operating Systems), cs.GT(Computer Science and Game Theory), cs.DB(Databases), cs.DL(Digital Libraries), cs.DM(Discrete Mathematics). Directly output the class name.

gpt: cs.GT(Computer Science and Game Theory)