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 "is collaboration among scientists related to the citation impact of papers because their quality increases with collaboration an analysis based on data from f1000prime and normalized citation scores"):
  Abstract: In recent years, the relationship of collaboration among scientists and the citation impact of papers have been frequently investigated. Most of the studies show that the two variables are closely related: an increasing collaboration activity (measured in terms of number of authors, number of affiliations, and number of countries) is associated with an increased citation impact. However, it is not clear whether the increased citation impact is based on the higher quality of papers which profit from more than one scientist giving expert input or other (citation-specific) factors. Thus, the current study addresses this question by using two comprehensive datasets with publications (in the biomedical area) including quality assessments by experts (F1000Prime member scores) and citation data for the publications. The study is based on nearly 10,000 papers. Robust regression models are used to investigate the relationship between number of authors, number of affiliations, and number of countries, respectively, and citation impact - controlling for the papers' quality (measured by F1000Prime expert ratings). The results point out that the effect of collaboration activities on impact is largely independent of the papers' quality. The citation advantage is apparently not quality-related; citation specific factors (e.g. self-citations) seem to be important here.

Includes members:
  Member "excellence networks in science a web based application based on bayesian multilevel logistic regression bmlr for the identification of institutions collaborating successfully":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "core elements in the process of citing publications conceptual overview of the literature")
  Member "validity of altmetrics data for measuring societal impact a study using data from altmetric and f1000prime":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "do altmetrics assess societal impact in a comparable way to case studies an empirical test of the convergent validity of altmetrics based on data from the uk research excellence framework ref")
  Member "how are excellent highly cited papers defined in bibliometrics a quantitative analysis of the literature":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "an evaluation of percentile measures of citation impact and a proposal for making them better")
  Member "the substantive and practical significance of citation impact differences between institutions guidelines for the analysis of percentiles using effect sizes and confidence intervals":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "an evaluation of percentile measures of citation impact and a proposal for making them better")
  Member "do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research an overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "the stability of twitter metrics a study on unavailable twitter mentions of scientific publications")
  Member "brics countries and scientific excellence a bibliometric analysis of most frequently cited papers":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "research assessment by percentile based double rank analysis")
  Member "on the causes of subject specific citation rates in web of science":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "how well does i3 perform for impact measurement compared to other bibliometric indicators the convergent validity of several field normalized indicators")
  Member "how to calculate the practical significance of citation impact differences an empirical example from evaluative institutional bibliometrics using adjusted predictions and marginal effects":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-8 (induced by source paper "do altmetrics correlate with the quality of papers a large scale empirical study based on f1000prime data")

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.DL(Digital Libraries)