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 "consistency of circuit lower bounds with bounded theories"):
  Abstract: Proving that there are problems in $\mathsf{P}^\mathsf{NP}$ that require boolean circuits of super-linear size is a major frontier in complexity theory. While such lower bounds are known for larger complexity classes, existing results only show that the corresponding problems are hard on infinitely many input lengths. For instance, proving almost-everywhere circuit lower bounds is open even for problems in $\mathsf{MAEXP}$. Giving the notorious difficulty of proving lower bounds that hold for all large input lengths, we ask the following question: Can we show that a large set of techniques cannot prove that $\mathsf{NP}$ is easy infinitely often? Motivated by this and related questions about the interaction between mathematical proofs and computations, we investigate circuit complexity from the perspective of logic. #R##N#Among other results, we prove that for any parameter $k \geq 1$ it is consistent with theory $T$ that computational class $\mathcal{C} \nsubseteq \textit{i.o.}\mathsf{SIZE}(n^k)$, where $(T, \mathcal{C})$ is one of the pairs: #R##N#$T = \mathsf{T}^1_2\;$ and $\;{\cal C} = \mathsf{P}^\mathsf{NP}$, $\quad T = \mathsf{S}^1_2\;$ and $\;{\cal C} = \mathsf{NP}$, $\quad T = \mathsf{PV}\;$ and $\;{\cal C} = \mathsf{P}$. #R##N#In other words, these theories cannot establish infinitely often circuit upper bounds for the corresponding problems. This is of interest because the weaker theory $\mathsf{PV}$ already formalizes sophisticated arguments, such as a proof of the PCP Theorem (Pich, 2015). These consistency statements are unconditional and improve on earlier theorems of Krajicek and Oliveira (2017) and Bydzovsky and Muller (2018) on the consistency of lower bounds with $\mathsf{PV}$.

Includes members:
  Member "pseudodeterministic constructions in subexponential time":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "pseudo deterministic streaming")
  Member "formalizing randomized matching algorithms":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "feasible combinatorial matrix theory")
  Member "robust simulations and significant separations":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      (none)

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.CC(Computational Complexity)