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 "concise explanations of neural networks using adversarial training"):
  Abstract: We show new connections between adversarial learning and explainability for deep neural networks (DNNs). One form of explanation of the output of a neural network model in terms of its input features, is a vector of feature-attributions. Two desirable characteristics of an attribution-based explanation are: (1) $\textit{sparseness}$: the attributions of irrelevant or weakly relevant features should be negligible, thus resulting in $\textit{concise}$ explanations in terms of the significant features, and (2) $\textit{stability}$: it should not vary significantly within a small local neighborhood of the input. Our first contribution is a theoretical exploration of how these two properties (when using attributions based on Integrated Gradients, or IG) are related to adversarial training, for a class of 1-layer networks (which includes logistic regression models for binary and multi-class classification); for these networks we show that (a) adversarial training using an $\ell_\infty$-bounded adversary produces models with sparse attribution vectors, and (b) natural model-training while encouraging stable explanations (via an extra term in the loss function), is equivalent to adversarial training. Our second contribution is an empirical verification of phenomenon (a), which we show, somewhat surprisingly, occurs $\textit{not only}$ $\textit{in 1-layer networks}$, $\textit{but also}$ $\textit{DNNs trained on}$ $\textit{standard image}$ $\textit{ datasets}$, and extends beyond IG-based attributions, to those based on DeepSHAP: adversarial training with $\ell_\infty$-bounded perturbations yields significantly sparser attribution vectors, with little degradation in performance on natural test data, compared to natural training. Moreover, the sparseness of the attribution vectors is significantly better than that achievable via $\ell_1$-regularized natural training.

Includes members:
  Member "bridging adversarial robustness and gradient interpretability":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "adversarial neural pruning with latent vulnerability suppression")
  Member "on the robustness of interpretability methods":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "sam the sensitivity of attribution methods to hyperparameters")
  Member "regularizing deep networks using efficient layerwise adversarial training":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "universal adversarial attack on attention and the resulting dataset damagenet")
  Member "axiomatic attribution for deep networks":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "adversarial attacks and defenses on graphs a review and empirical study")
  Member "a unified approach to interpreting model predictions":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "causal interpretability for machine learning problems methods and evaluation")
  Member "towards better understanding of gradient based attribution methods for deep neural networks":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "explaining explanations axiomatic feature interactions for deep networks")
  Member "fashion mnist a novel image dataset for benchmarking machine learning algorithms":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "using a thousand optimization tasks to learn hyperparameter search strategies")
  Member "the limitations of deep learning in adversarial settings":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-8 (induced by source paper "adversarial ranking attack and defense")

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.LG(Machine Learning)