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: "methodological issues in observational studies"
  Abstract: Background. Starting from the 1960s, practitioners and researchers have looked for ways to empirically investigate new technologies such as inspecting the effectiveness of new methods, tools, or practices. With this purpose, the empirical software engineering domain started to identify different empirical methods, borrowing them from various domains such as medicine, biology, and psychology. Nowadays, a variety of empirical methods are commonly applied in software engineering, ranging from controlled and quasi-controlled experiments to case studies, from systematic literature reviews to the newly introduced multivocal literature reviews. However, to date, the only available method for proving any cause-effect relationship are controlled experiments. Objectives. The goal of the thesis is introducing new methodologies for studying causality in empirical software engineering. Methods. Other fields use observational studies for proving causality. They allow observing the effect of a risk factor and testing this without trying to change who is or is not exposed to it. As an example, with an observational study it is possible to observe the effect of pollution on the growth of a forest or the effect of different factors on development productivity without the need of waiting years for the forest to grow or exposing developers to a specific treatment. Conclusion. In this thesis, we aim at defining a methodology for applying observational studies in empirical software engineering, providing guidelines on how to conduct such studies, how to analyze the data, and how to report the studies themselves.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "the technical debt dataset"):
  with members:
    - "an empirical study on technical debt in a finnish sme"
    - "on the fault proneness of sonarqube technical debt violations a comparison of eight machine learning techniques"
    - "towards surgically precise technical debt estimation early results and research roadmap"
    - "on the relationship between coupling and refactoring an empirical viewpoint"
    - "on developers personality in large scale distributed projects the case of the apache ecosystem"

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.SE(Software Engineering)