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 "stabilizing the lottery ticket hypothesis"):
  Abstract: Pruning is a well-established technique for removing unnecessary structure from neural networks after training to improve the performance of inference. Several recent results have explored the possibility of pruning at initialization time to provide similar benefits during training. In particular, the "lottery ticket hypothesis" conjectures that typical neural networks contain small subnetworks that can train to similar accuracy in a commensurate number of steps. The evidence for this claim is that a procedure based on iterative magnitude pruning (IMP) reliably finds such subnetworks retroactively on small vision tasks. However, IMP fails on deeper networks, and proposed methods to prune before training or train pruned networks encounter similar scaling limitations. #R##N#In this paper, we argue that these efforts have struggled on deeper networks because they have focused on pruning precisely at initialization. We modify IMP to search for subnetworks that could have been obtained by pruning early in training (0.1% to 7% through) rather than at iteration 0. With this change, it finds small subnetworks of deeper networks (e.g., 80% sparsity on Resnet-50) that can complete the training process to match the accuracy of the original network on more challenging tasks (e.g., ImageNet). In situations where IMP fails at iteration 0, the accuracy benefits of delaying pruning accrue rapidly over the earliest iterations of training. To explain these behaviors, we study subnetwork "stability," finding that - as accuracy improves in this fashion - IMP subnetworks train to parameters closer to those of the full network and do so with improved consistency in the face of gradient noise. These results offer new insights into the opportunity to prune large-scale networks early in training and the behaviors underlying the lottery ticket hypothesis.

Includes members:
  Member "uniform convergence may be unable to explain generalization in deep learning":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "dissecting non vacuous generalization bounds based on the mean field approximation")
  Member "prunetrain gradual structured pruning from scratch for faster neural network training":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "campfire compressible regularization free structured sparse training for hardware accelerators")
  Member "the state of sparsity in deep neural networks":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "soft threshold weight reparameterization for learnable sparsity")
  Member "scalable training of artificial neural networks with adaptive sparse connectivity inspired by network science":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "campfire compressible regularization free structured sparse training for hardware accelerators")
  Member "the lottery ticket hypothesis finding sparse trainable neural networks":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "lossless compression of deep neural networks")
  Member "snip single shot network pruning based on connection sensitivity":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "discrimination aware network pruning for deep model compression")
  Member "rethinking the value of network pruning":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "discrimination aware network pruning for deep model compression")
  Member "deep rewiring training very sparse deep networks":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-8 (induced by source paper "on pruning adversarially robust neural networks")

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)