human: Given a node-centered hypergraph: <hypergraph>, where nodes represent papers and hyperedges represent sets of papers co-cited by a source paper.

Details of the hypergraph:
Center node: "how can we fool lime and shap adversarial attacks on post hoc explanation methods"
  Abstract: As machine learning black boxes are increasingly being deployed in domains such as healthcare and criminal justice, there is growing emphasis on building tools and techniques for explaining these black boxes in an interpretable manner. Such explanations are being leveraged by domain experts to diagnose systematic errors and underlying biases of black boxes. In this paper, we demonstrate that post hoc explanations techniques that rely on input perturbations, such as LIME and SHAP, are not reliable. Specifically, we propose a novel scaffolding technique that effectively hides the biases of any given classifier by allowing an adversarial entity to craft an arbitrary desired explanation. Our approach can be used to scaffold any biased classifier in such a way that its predictions on the input data distribution still remain biased, but the post hoc explanations of the scaffolded classifier look innocuous. Using extensive evaluation with multiple real-world datasets (including COMPAS), we demonstrate how extremely biased (racist) classifiers crafted by our framework can easily fool popular explanation techniques such as LIME and SHAP into generating innocuous explanations which do not reflect the underlying biases.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "nestedvae isolating common factors via weak supervision"):
  with members:
    - "a two step disentanglement method"
    - "emerging disentanglement in auto encoder based unsupervised image content transfer"
    - "diversity in faces"
    - "toward gender inclusive coreference resolution"
    - "robust ordinal vae employing noisy pairwise comparisons for disentanglement"
    - "weakly supervised disentanglement with guarantees"
    - "contrastive variational autoencoder enhances salient features"
    - "weakly supervised disentanglement by pairwise similarities"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "auditing and debugging deep learning models via decision boundaries individual level and group level analysis"):
  with members:
    - "an evaluation of the human interpretability of explanation"
    - "fooling lime and shap adversarial attacks on post hoc explanation methods"
    - "measurable counterfactual local explanations for any classifier"
    - "on the accuracy of influence functions for measuring group effects"
    - "how do i fool you manipulating user trust via misleading black box explanations"
    - "refining the structure of neural networks using matrix conditioning"
    - "interpreting neural networks using flip points"
    - "efficient search for diverse coherent explanations"

Connected through hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "recast interactive auditing of automatic toxicity detection models"):
  with members:
    - "what bert is not lessons from a new suite of psycholinguistic diagnostics for language models"
    - "attention is not not explanation"
    - "distilbert a distilled version of bert smaller faster cheaper and lighter"
    - "sanvis visual analytics for understanding self attention networks"
    - "black is to criminal as caucasian is to police detecting and removing multiclass bias in word embeddings"
    - "huggingface s transformers state of the art natural language processing"
    - "exbert a visual analysis tool to explore learned representations in transformers models"
    - "gender bias in contextualized word embeddings"

Connected through hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "learning fair rule lists"):
  with members:
    - "explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations"
    - "the bouncer problem challenges to remote explainability"
    - "fairwashing the risk of rationalization"
    - "the dangers of post hoc interpretability unjustified counterfactual explanations"
    - "learning optimal and fair decision trees for non discriminative decision making"
    - "faht an adaptive fairness aware decision tree classifier"
    - "fooling neural network interpretations via adversarial model manipulation"
    - "how do i fool you manipulating user trust via misleading black box explanations"

Question: Please tell me which class the center node 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)