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 "revisiting the scaling of citations for research assessment"):
  Abstract: Over the past decade, national research evaluation exercises, traditionally conducted using the peer review method, have begun opening to bibliometric indicators. The citations received by a publication are assumed as proxy for its quality, but they require standardization prior to use in comparative evaluation of organizations or individual scientists: the citation data must be standardized, due to the varying citation behavior across research fields. The objective of this paper is to compare the effectiveness of the different methods of normalizing citations, in order to provide useful indications to research assessment practitioners. Simulating a typical national research assessment exercise, he analysis is conducted for all subject categories in the hard sciences and is based on the Thomson Reuters Science Citation Index-Expanded®. Comparisons show that the citations average is the most effective scaling parameter, when the average is based only on the publications actually cited.

Includes members:
  Member "a systematic empirical comparison of different approaches for normalizing citation impact indicators":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (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 "evaluating research from informed peer review to bibliometrics":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "when research assessment exercises leave room for opportunistic behavior by the subjects under evaluation")
  Member "a national scale cross time analysis of university research performance":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "from rankings to funnel plots the question of accounting for uncertainty when assessing university research performance")
  Member "rescaling citations of publications in physics":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "should citations be field normalized in evaluative bibliometrics an empirical analysis based on propensity score matching")

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)