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 "characterising equilibrium logic and nested logic programs reductions and complexity1 2"):
  Abstract: Equilibrium logic is an approach to non-monotonic reasoning that extends the stable-model and answer-set semantics for logic programs. In particular, it includes the general case of nested logic programs, where arbitrary Boolean combinations are permitted in heads and bodies of rules, as special kinds of theories. In this paper, we present polynomial reductions of the main reasoning tasks associated with equilibrium logic and nested logic programs into quantified propositional logic, an extension of classical propositional logic where quantifications over atomic formulas are permitted. Thus, quantified propositional logic is a fragment of second-order logic, and its formulas are usually referred to as quantified Boolean formulas (QBFs). We provide reductions not only for decision problems, but also for the central semantical concepts of equilibrium logic and nested logic programs. In particular, our encodings map a given decision problem into some QBF such that the latter is valid precisely in case the former holds. The basic tasks we deal with here are the consistency problem, brave reasoning and skeptical reasoning. Additionally, we also provide encodings for testing equivalence of theories or programs under different notions of equivalence, viz. ordinary, strong and uniform equivalence. For all considered reasoning tasks, we analyse their computational complexity and give strict complexity bounds. Hereby, our encodings yield upper bounds in a direct manner. Besides this useful feature, our approach has the following benefits: First, our encodings yield a uniform axiomatisation for a variety of problems in a common language. Second, extant solvers for QBFs can be used as back-end inference engines to realise implementations of the encoded task in a rapid prototyping manner. Third, our axiomatisations also allow us to straightforwardly relate equilibrium logic with circumscription.

Includes members:
  Member "embedding non ground logic programs into autoepistemic logic for knowledge base combination":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "embedding description logic programs into default logic")
  Member "propositional theories are strongly equivalent to logic programs":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "implementing dynamic answer set programming")
  Member "a common view on strong uniform and other notions of equivalence in answer set programming":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "inlining external sources in answer set programs")
  Member "the dlv system for knowledge representation and reasoning":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "the seventh answer set programming competition design and results")
  Member "semantical characterizations and complexity of equivalences in answer set programming":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "query inseparability for alc ontologies")
  Member "tight logic programs":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "a formal framework for robot construction problems a hybrid planning approach")
  Member "strong equivalence made easy nested expressions and weight constraints":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "on uniform equivalence of epistemic logic programs")
  Member "characterization of strongly equivalent logic programs in intermediate logics":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-8 (induced by source paper "combining intermediate propositional logics with classical logic")

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.LO(Logic in Computer Science)