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: "limitations of assessing active learning performance at runtime"
  Abstract: Classification algorithms aim to predict an unknown label (e.g., a quality class) for a new instance (e.g., a product). Therefore, training samples (instances and labels) are used to deduct classification hypotheses. Often, it is relatively easy to capture instances but the acquisition of the corresponding labels remain difficult or expensive. Active learning algorithms select the most beneficial instances to be labeled to reduce cost. In research, this labeling procedure is simulated and therefore a ground truth is available. But during deployment, active learning is a one-shot problem and an evaluation set is not available. Hence, it is not possible to reliably estimate the performance of the classification system during learning and it is difficult to decide when the system fulfills the quality requirements (stopping criteria). In this article, we formalize the task and review existing strategies to assess the performance of an actively trained classifier during training. Furthermore, we identified three major challenges: 1)~to derive a performance distribution, 2)~to preserve representativeness of the labeled subset, and 3) to correct against sampling bias induced by an intelligent selection strategy. In a qualitative analysis, we evaluate different existing approaches and show that none of them reliably estimates active learning performance stating a major challenge for future research for such systems. All plots and experiments are provided in a Jupyter notebook that is available for download.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "an overview and a benchmark of active learning for outlier detection with one class classifiers"):
  with members:
    - "the mythos of model interpretability"
    - "one class classification taxonomy of study and review of techniques"
    - "julia a fresh approach to numerical computing"
    - "toward supervised anomaly detection"
    - "active learning from positive and unlabeled data"

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)