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 "on line pca with optimal regrets"):
  Abstract: We carefully investigate the on-line version of PCA, where in each trial a learning algorithm plays a k-dimensional subspace, and suffers the compression loss on the next instance when projected into the chosen subspace. In this setting, we analyze two popular on-line algorithms, Gradient Descent (GD) and Exponentiated Gradient (EG). We show that both algorithms are essentially optimal in the worst-case. This comes as a surprise, since EG is known to perform sub-optimally when the instances are sparse. This different behavior of EG for PCA is mainly related to the non-negativity of the loss in this case, which makes the PCA setting qualitatively different from other settings studied in the literature. Furthermore, we show that when considering regret bounds as function of a loss budget, EG remains optimal and strictly outperforms GD. Next, we study the extension of the PCA setting, in which the Nature is allowed to play with dense instances, which are positive matrices with bounded largest eigenvalue. Again we can show that EG is optimal and strictly better than GD in this setting.

Includes members:
  Member "relative loss bounds for on line density estimation with the exponential family of distributions":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "beyond ucb optimal and efficient contextual bandits with regression oracles")
  Member "on the universality of online mirror descent":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "beyond ucb optimal and efficient contextual bandits with regression oracles")
  Member "a stochastic view of optimal regret through minimax duality":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "connections between mirror descent thompson sampling and the information ratio")

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)