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 "unambiguous buchi is weak"):
  Abstract: A non-deterministic automaton running on infinite trees is unambiguous if it has at most one accepting run on every tree. The class of languages recognisable by unambiguous tree automata is still not well-understood. In particular, decidability of the problem whether a given language is recognisable by some unambiguous automaton is open. Moreover, there are no known upper bounds on the descriptive complexity of unambiguous languages among all regular tree languages. #R##N#In this paper we show the following complexity collapse: if a non-deterministic parity tree automaton $A$ is unambiguous and its priorities are between $i$ and $2n$ then the language recognised by $A$ is in the class $Comp(i+1,2n)$. A particular case of this theorem is for $i=n=1$: if $A$ is an unambiguous Buchi tree automaton then $L(A)$ is recognisable by a weak alternating automaton (or equivalently definable in weak MSO). The main motivation for this result is a theorem by Finkel and Simonnet stating that every unambiguous Buchi automaton recognises a Borel language. #R##N#The assumptions of the presented theorem are syntactic (we require one automaton to be both unambiguous and of particular parity index). However, to the authors' best knowledge this is the first theorem showing a collapse of the parity index that exploits the fact that a given automaton is unambiguous.

Includes members:
  Member "unambiguous tree languages are topologically harder than deterministic ones":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "an upper bound on the complexity of recognizable tree languages")
  Member "the wadge hierarchy of deterministic tree languages":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "regular tree languages in low levels of wadge hierarchy")

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.FL(Formal Languages and Automata Theory)