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 "paging with dynamic memory capacity"):
  Abstract: We study a generalization of the classic paging problem that allows the amount of available memory to vary over time - capturing a fundamental property of many modern computing realities, from cloud computing to multi-core and energy-optimized processors. It turns out that good performance in the "classic" case provides no performance guarantees when memory capacity fluctuates: roughly speaking, moving from static to dynamic capacity can mean the difference between optimality within a factor 2 in space and time, and suboptimality by an arbitrarily large factor. More precisely, adopting the competitive analysis framework, we show that some online paging algorithms, despite having an optimal (h,k)-competitive ratio when capacity remains constant, are not (3,k)-competitive for any arbitrarily large k in the presence of minimal capacity fluctuations. In this light it is surprising that several classic paging algorithms perform remarkably well even if memory capacity changes adversarially - even without taking those changes into explicit account! In particular, we prove that LFD still achieves the minimum number of faults, and that several classic online algorithms such as LRU have a "dynamic" (h,k)-competitive ratio that is the best one can achieve without knowledge of future page requests, even if one had perfect knowledge of future capacity fluctuations (an exact characterization of this ratio shows it is almost, albeit not quite, equal to the "classic" ratio k/(k-h+1)). In other words, with careful management, knowing/predicting future memory resources appears far less crucial to performance than knowing/predicting future data accesses.

Includes members:
  Member "a comparison of performance measures for online algorithms":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "benchmark design and prior independent optimization")
  Member "the k server dual and loose competitiveness for paging":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "cache optimization models and algorithms")
  Member "competitive paging algorithms":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "online metric algorithms with untrusted predictions")

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.DS(Data Structures and Algorithms)