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 "on the statistical and information theoretic characteristics of deep network representations"):
  Abstract: It has been common to argue or imply that a regularizer can be used to alter a statistical property of a hidden layer's representation and thus improve generalization or performance of deep networks. For instance, dropout has been known to improve performance by reducing co-adaptation, and representational sparsity has been argued as a good characteristic because many data-generation processes have a small number of factors that are independent. In this work, we analytically and empirically investigate the popular characteristics of learned representations, including correlation, sparsity, dead unit, rank, and mutual information, and disprove many of the \textit{conventional wisdom}. We first show that infinitely many Identical Output Networks (IONs) can be constructed for any deep network with a linear layer, where any invertible affine transformation can be applied to alter the layer's representation characteristics. The existence of ION proves that the correlation characteristics of representation is irrelevant to the performance. Extensions to ReLU layers are provided, too. Then, we consider sparsity, dead unit, and rank to show that only loose relationships exist among the three characteristics. It is shown that a higher sparsity or additional dead units do not imply a better or worse performance when the rank of representation is fixed. We also develop a rank regularizer and show that neither representation sparsity nor lower rank is helpful for improving performance even when the data-generation process has a small number of independent factors. Mutual information $I(\mathbf{z}_l;\mathbf{x})$ and $I(\mathbf{z}_l;\mathbf{y})$ are investigated, and we show that regularizers can affect $I(\mathbf{z}_l;\mathbf{x})$ and thus indirectly influence the performance. Finally, we explain how a rich set of regularizers can be used as a powerful tool for performance tuning.

Includes members:
  Member "utilizing class information for dnn representation shaping":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      (none)
  Member "emergence of invariance and disentanglement in deep representations":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "intelligence physics and information the tradeoff between accuracy and simplicity in machine learning")
  Member "opening the black box of deep neural networks via information":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "on the information bottleneck problems models connections applications and information theoretic views")
  Member "nonlinear information bottleneck":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "learning task driven control policies via information bottlenecks")
  Member "understanding deep learning requires rethinking generalization":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "train large then compress rethinking model size for efficient training and inference of transformers")
  Member "reducing overfitting in deep networks by decorrelating representations":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "regularizing activations in neural networks via distribution matching with the wasserstein metric")
  Member "the power of depth for feedforward neural networks":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "backward feature correction how deep learning performs deep learning")
  Member "convolutional neural networks with low rank regularization":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "discrimination aware network pruning for deep model compression")

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.LG(Machine Learning)