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 "limitations of greed influence maximization in undirected networks re visited"):
  Abstract: We consider the influence maximization problem (selecting $k$ seeds in a network maximizing the expected total influence) on undirected graphs under the linear threshold model. On the one hand, we prove that the greedy algorithm always achieves a $(1 - (1 - 1/k)^k + \Omega(1/k^3))$-approximation, showing that the greedy algorithm does slightly better on undirected graphs than the generic $(1- (1 - 1/k)^k)$ bound which also applies to directed graphs. On the other hand, we show that substantial improvement on this bound is impossible by presenting an example where the greedy algorithm can obtain at most a $(1- (1 - 1/k)^k + O(1/k^{0.2}))$ approximation. This result stands in contrast to the previous work on the independent cascade model. Like the linear threshold model, the greedy algorithm obtains a $(1-(1-1/k)^k)$-approximation on directed graphs in the independent cascade model. However, Khanna and Lucier showed that, in undirected graphs, the greedy algorithm performs substantially better: a $(1-(1-1/k)^k + c)$ approximation for constant $c > 0$. Our results show that, surprisingly, no such improvement occurs in the linear threshold model. Finally, we show that, under the linear threshold model, the approximation ratio $(1 - (1 - 1/k)^k)$ is tight if 1) the graph is directed or 2) the vertices are weighted. In other words, under either of these two settings, the greedy algorithm cannot achieve a $(1 - (1 - 1/k)^k + f(k))$-approximation for any positive function $f(k)$. The result in setting 2) is again in a sharp contrast to Khanna and Lucier's $(1 - (1 - 1/k)^k + c)$-approximation result for the independent cascade model, where the $(1 - (1 - 1/k)^k + c)$ approximation guarantee can be extended to the setting where vertices are weighted. We also discuss extensions to more generalized settings including those with edge-weighted graphs.

Includes members:
  Member "on adaptivity gaps of influence maximization under the independent cascade model with full adoption feedback":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "time constrained adaptive influence maximization")
  Member "adaptive greedy versus non adaptive greedy for influence maximization":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      (none)
  Member "adaptive influence maximization with myopic feedback":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "time constrained adaptive influence maximization")
  Member "beyond worst case in approximability of nonsubmodular influence maximization":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "seeding with costly network information")
  Member "don t be greedy leveraging community structure to find high quality seed sets for influence maximization":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "adaptive greedy versus non adaptive greedy for influence maximization")
  Member "holistic influence maximization combining scalability and efficiency with opinion aware models":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "rcelf a residual based approach for influence maximization problem")
  Member "influence maximization near optimal time complexity meets practical efficiency":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "time constrained adaptive influence maximization")
  Member "staticgreedy solving the scalability accuracy dilemma in influence maximization":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "rcelf a residual based approach for influence maximization problem")

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.DS(Data Structures and Algorithms)