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: "on inversely proportional hypermutations with mutation potential"
  Abstract: Artificial Immune Systems (AIS) employing hypermutations with linear static mutation potential have recently been shown to be very effective at escaping local optima of combinatorial optimisation problems at the expense of being slower during the exploitation phase compared to standard evolutionary algorithms. In this paper we prove that considerable speed-ups in the exploitation phase may be achieved with dynamic inversely proportional mutation potentials (IPM) and argue that the potential should decrease inversely to the distance to the optimum rather than to the difference in fitness. Afterwards we define a simple (1+1)~Opt-IA, that uses IPM hypermutations and ageing, for realistic applications where optimal solutions are unknown. The aim of the AIS is to approximate the ideal behaviour of the inversely proportional hypermutations better and better as the search space is explored. We prove that such desired behaviour, and related speed-ups, occur for a well-studied bimodal benchmark function called \textsc{TwoMax}. Furthermore, we prove that the (1+1)~Opt-IA with IPM efficiently optimises a third bimodal function, \textsc{Cliff}, by escaping its local optima while Opt-IA with static potential cannot, thus requires exponential expected runtime in the distance between the cliff and the optimum.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "computational complexity analysis of genetic programming"):
  with members:
    - "evolving boolean functions with conjunctions and disjunctions via genetic programming"
    - "where are we now a large benchmark study of recent symbolic regression methods"
    - "bounding bloat in genetic programming"
    - "destructiveness of lexicographic parsimony pressure and alleviation by a concatenation crossover in genetic programming"
    - "standard steady state genetic algorithms can hillclimb faster than mutation only evolutionary algorithms"
    - "level based analysis of genetic algorithms and other search processes"
    - "computational complexity analysis of multi objective genetic programming"
    - "computational complexity analysis of simple genetic programming on two problems modeling isolated program semantics"

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.NE(Neural and Evolutionary Computing)