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 "biased assimilation homophily and the dynamics of polarization"):
  Abstract: Are we as a society getting more polarized, and if so, why? We try to answer this question through a model of opinion formation. Empirical studies have shown that homophily results in polarization. However, we show that DeGroot's well-known model of opinion formation based on repeated averaging can never be polarizing, even if individuals are arbitrarily homophilous. We generalize DeGroot's model to account for a phenomenon well-known in social psychology as biased assimilation: when presented with mixed or inconclusive evidence on a complex issue, individuals draw undue support for their initial position thereby arriving at a more extreme opinion. We show that in a simple model of homophilous networks, our biased opinion formation process results in either polarization, persistent disagreement or consensus depending on how biased individuals are. In other words, homophily alone, without biased assimilation, is not sufficient to polarize society. Quite interestingly, biased assimilation also provides insight into the following related question: do internet based recommender algorithms that show us personalized content contribute to polarization? We make a connection between biased assimilation and the polarizing effects of some random-walk based recommender algorithms that are similar in spirit to some commonly used recommender algorithms.

Includes members:
  Member "opinion fluctuations and disagreement in social networks":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "shifting opinions in a social network through leader selection")
  Member "an analysis of one dimensional schelling segregation":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "positive algorithmic bias cannot stop fragmentation in homophilic social networks")
  Member "how bad is forming your own opinion":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "adversarial perturbations of opinion dynamics in 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.SI(Social and Information Networks)