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 "from soft classifiers to hard decisions how fair can we be"):
  Abstract: A popular methodology for building binary decision-making classifiers in the presence of imperfect information is to first construct a non-binary "scoring" classifier that is calibrated over all protected groups, and then to post-process this score to obtain a binary decision. We study the feasibility of achieving various fairness properties by post-processing calibrated scores, and then show that deferring post-processors allow for more fairness conditions to hold on the final decision. Specifically, we show: #R##N#1. There does not exist a general way to post-process a calibrated classifier to equalize protected groups' positive or negative predictive value (PPV or NPV). For certain "nice" calibrated classifiers, either PPV or NPV can be equalized when the post-processor uses different thresholds across protected groups, though there exist distributions of calibrated scores for which the two measures cannot be both equalized. When the post-processing consists of a single global threshold across all groups, natural fairness properties, such as equalizing PPV in a nontrivial way, do not hold even for "nice" classifiers. #R##N#2. When the post-processing is allowed to `defer' on some decisions (that is, to avoid making a decision by handing off some examples to a separate process), then for the non-deferred decisions, the resulting classifier can be made to equalize PPV, NPV, false positive rate (FPR) and false negative rate (FNR) across the protected groups. This suggests a way to partially evade the impossibility results of Chouldechova and Kleinberg et al., which preclude equalizing all of these measures simultaneously. We also present different deferring strategies and show how they affect the fairness properties of the overall system. #R##N#We evaluate our post-processing techniques using the COMPAS data set from 2016.

Includes members:
  Member "fairness under composition":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "algorithmic fairness")
  Member "on fairness and calibration":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "algorithmic fairness")
  Member "preventing fairness gerrymandering auditing and learning for subgroup fairness":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "to split or not to split the impact of disparate treatment in classification")
  Member "paradoxes in fair computer aided decision making":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      (none)
  Member "algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairness":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "algorithmic fairness")
  Member "calibration for the computationally identifiable masses":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "putting fairness principles into practice challenges metrics and improvements")
  Member "equality of opportunity in supervised learning":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "algorithmic fairness")
  Member "inherent trade offs in the fair determination of risk scores":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "algorithmic fairness")

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)