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 "interactive effort aware library version harmonization"):
  Abstract: As a mixed result of intensive dependency on third-party libraries, flexible mechanism to declare dependencies, and increased number of modules in a project, multiple versions of the same third-party library are directly depended in different modules of a project. Such library version inconsistencies can increase dependency maintenance cost, or even lead to dependency conflicts when modules are inter-dependent. Although automated build tools (e.g., Maven's enforcer plugin) provide partial support to detect library version inconsistencies, they do not provide any support to harmonize inconsistent library versions. We first conduct a survey with 131 Java developers from GitHub to retrieve first-hand information about the root causes, detection methods, reasons for fixing or not fixing, fixing strategies, fixing efforts, and tool expectations on library version inconsistencies. Then, based on the insights from our survey, we propose LibHarmo, an interactive, effort-aware library version harmonization technique, to detect library version inconsistencies, interactively suggest a harmonized version with the least harmonization efforts based on library API usage analysis, and refactor build configuration files. LibHarmo is currently developed for Java Maven projects. Our experimental study on 443 highly-starred Java Maven projects from GitHub indicates that i) LibHarmo identifies 621 library version inconsistencies covering 152 (34.3%) of projects, and ii) the average harmonization efforts are that 1 and 12 library API calls are affected, respectively due to the deleted and changed library APIs in the harmonized version. 5 library version inconsistencies have been confirmed, and 1 of them has been already harmonized by developers.

Includes members:
  Member "small world with high risks a study of security threats in the npm ecosystem":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "spellbound defending against package typosquatting")
  Member "on the evolution of technical lag in the npm package dependency network":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "an empirical study of usages updates and risks of third party libraries in java projects")
  Member "why and how java developers break apis":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "migrating to graphql a practical assessment")
  Member "beyond metadata code centric and usage based analysis of known vulnerabilities in open source software":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "an empirical study of usages updates and risks of third party libraries in java projects")
  Member "an empirical comparison of dependency network evolution in seven software packaging ecosystems":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "a comprehensive study of bloated dependencies in the maven ecosystem")
  Member "thou shalt not depend on me analysing the use of outdated javascript libraries on the web":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "k resolver towards decentralizing encrypted dns resolution")
  Member "an empirical study on the impact of refactoring activities on evolving client used apis":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "an empirical study of usages updates and risks of third party libraries in java projects")
  Member "an investigation into the use of common libraries in android apps":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-8 (induced by source paper "an empirical study of usages updates and risks of third party libraries in java projects")

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.SE(Software Engineering)