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 "computational tradeoffs in biological neural networks self stabilizing winner take all networks"):
  Abstract: We initiate a line of investigation into biological neural networks from an algorithmic perspective. We develop a simplified but biologically plausible model for distributed computation in stochastic spiking neural networks and study tradeoffs between computation time and network complexity in this model. Our aim is to abstract real neural networks in a way that, while not capturing all interesting features, preserves high-level behavior and allows us to make biologically relevant conclusions. #R##N#In this paper, we focus on the important `winner-take-all' (WTA) problem, which is analogous to a neural leader election unit: a network consisting of $n$ input neurons and $n$ corresponding output neurons must converge to a state in which a single output corresponding to a firing input (the `winner') fires, while all other outputs remain silent. Neural circuits for WTA rely on inhibitory neurons, which suppress the activity of competing outputs and drive the network towards a converged state with a single firing winner. We attempt to understand how the number of inhibitors used affects network convergence time. #R##N#We show that it is possible to significantly outperform naive WTA constructions through a more refined use of inhibition, solving the problem in $O(\theta)$ rounds in expectation with just $O(\log^{1/\theta} n)$ inhibitors for any $\theta$. An alternative construction gives convergence in $O(\log^{1/\theta} n)$ rounds with $O(\theta)$ inhibitors. We compliment these upper bounds with our main technical contribution, a nearly matching lower bound for networks using $\ge \log\log n$ inhibitors. Our lower bound uses familiar indistinguishability and locality arguments from distributed computing theory. It lets us derive a number of interesting conclusions about the structure of any network solving WTA with good probability, and the use of randomness and inhibition within such a network.

Includes members:
  Member "cortical computation via iterative constructions":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      (none)
  Member "unsupervised learning through prediction in a model of cortex":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      (none)

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.NE(Neural and Evolutionary Computing)