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 "are we making real progress in simulated environments measuring the sim2real gap in embodied visual navigation"):
  Abstract: Does progress in simulation translate to progress in robotics? Specifically, if method A outperforms method B in simulation, how likely is the trend to hold in reality on a robot? We examine this question for embodied (PointGoal) navigation, developing engineering tools and a research paradigm for evaluating a simulator by its sim2real predictivity, revealing surprising findings about prior work. First, we develop Habitat-PyRobot Bridge (HaPy), a library for seamless execution of identical code on a simulated agent and a physical robot. Habitat-to-Locobot transfer with HaPy involves just one line change in config, essentially treating reality as just another simulator! Second, we investigate sim2real predictivity of Habitat-Sim for PointGoal navigation. We 3D-scan a physical lab space to create a virtualized replica, and run parallel tests of 9 different models in reality and simulation. We present a new metric called Sim-vs-Real Correlation Coefficient (SRCC) to quantify sim2real predictivity. #R##N#Our analysis reveals several important findings. We find that SRCC for Habitat as used for the CVPR19 challenge is low (0.18 for the success metric), which suggests that performance improvements for this simulator-based challenge would not transfer well to a physical robot. We find that this gap is largely due to AI agents learning to 'cheat' by exploiting simulator imperfections: specifically, the way Habitat allows for 'sliding' along walls on collision. Essentially, the virtual robot is capable of cutting corners, leading to unrealistic shortcuts through non-navigable spaces. Naturally, such exploits do not work in the real world where the robot stops on contact with walls. Our experiments show that it is possible to optimize simulation parameters to enable robots trained in imperfect simulators to generalize learned skills to reality (e.g. improving $SRCC_{Succ}$ from 0.18 to 0.844).

Includes members:
  Member "emergent tool use from multi agent autocurricula":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "learning zero sum simultaneous move markov games using function approximation and correlated equilibrium")
  Member "fastdepth fast monocular depth estimation on embedded systems":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "perception and decision making of autonomous systems in the era of learning an overview")
  Member "decentralized distributed ppo solving pointgoal navigation":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      (none)
  Member "benchmarking classic and learned navigation in complex 3d environments":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "an exploration of embodied visual exploration")
  Member "splitnet sim2sim and task2task transfer for embodied visual navigation":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "audio visual embodied navigation")
  Member "pyrobot an open source robotics framework for research and benchmarking":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "audio visual embodied navigation")
  Member "learning agile and dynamic motor skills for legged robots":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "rapidly adaptable legged robots via evolutionary meta learning")
  Member "to learn or not to learn analyzing the role of learning for navigation in virtual environments":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "target driven visual navigation exploiting object relationships")

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.CV(Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition)