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: "intelligent knowledge distribution constrained action pomdps for resource aware multi agent communication"
  Abstract: This paper addresses a fundamental question of multi-agent knowledge distribution: what information should be sent to whom and when, with the limited resources available to each agent? Communication requirements for multi-agent systems can be rather high when an accurate picture of the environment and the state of other agents must be maintained. To reduce the impact of multi-agent coordination on networked systems, e.g., power and bandwidth, this paper introduces two concepts for partially observable Markov decision processes (POMDPs): 1) action-based constraints which yield constrained-action POMDPs (CA-POMDPs); and 2) soft probabilistic constraint satisfaction for the resulting infinite-horizon controllers. To enable constraint analysis over an infinite horizon, an unconstrained policy is first represented as a Finite State Controller (FSC) and optimized with policy iteration. The FSC representation then allows for a combination of Markov chain Monte Carlo and discrete optimization to improve the probabilistic constraint satisfaction of the controller while minimizing the impact to the value function. Within the CA-POMDP framework we then propose Intelligent Knowledge Distribution (IKD) which yields per-agent policies for distributing knowledge between agents subject to interaction constraints. Finally, the CA-POMDP and IKD concepts are validated using an asset tracking problem where multiple unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) with heterogeneous sensors collaborate to localize a ground asset to assist in avoiding unseen obstacles in a disaster area. The IKD model was able to maintain asset tracking through multi-agent communications while only violating soft power and bandwidth constraints 3% of the time, while greedy and naive approaches violated constraints more than 60% of the time.

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.MA(Multiagent Systems)