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 "flow based reputation with uncertainty evidence based subjective logic"):
  Abstract: The concept of reputation is widely used as a measure of trustworthiness based on ratings from members in a community. The adoption of reputation systems, however, relies on their ability to capture the actual trustworthiness of a target. Several reputation models for aggregating trust information have been proposed in the literature. The choice of model has an impact on the reliability of the aggregated trust information as well as on the procedure used to compute reputations. Two prominent models are flow-based reputation (e.g., EigenTrust, PageRank) and Subjective Logic based reputation. Flow-based models provide an automated method to aggregate trust information, but they are not able to express the level of uncertainty in the information. In contrast, Subjective Logic extends probabilistic models with an explicit notion of uncertainty, but the calculation of reputation depends on the structure of the trust network and often requires information to be discarded. These are severe drawbacks. #R##N#In this work, we observe that the `opinion discounting' operation in Subjective Logic has a number of basic problems. We resolve these problems by providing a new discounting operator that describes the flow of evidence from one party to another. The adoption of our discounting rule results in a consistent Subjective Logic algebra that is entirely based on the handling of evidence. We show that the new algebra enables the construction of an automated reputation assessment procedure for arbitrary trust networks, where the calculation no longer depends on the structure of the network, and does not need to throw away any information. Thus, we obtain the best of both worlds: flow-based reputation and consistent handling of uncertainties.

Includes members:
  Member "gem a distributed goal evaluation algorithm for trust management":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      (none)
  Member "subjective logic operators in trust assessment an empirical study":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      (none)
  Member "flow based reputation more than just ranking":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "absolute trust algorithm for aggregation of trust in peer to peer networks")

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.DC(Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing)