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: "global analysis of synchronization performance for power systems bridging the theory practice gap"
  Abstract: The issue of synchronization in the power grid is receiving renewed attention, as new energy sources with different dynamics enter the picture. Global metrics have been proposed to evaluate performance and analyzed under highly simplified assumptions. In this paper, we extend this approach to more realistic network scenarios and more closely connect it with metrics used in power engineering practice. In particular, our analysis covers networks with generators of heterogeneous ratings and richer dynamic models of machines. Under a suitable proportionality assumption in the parameters, we show that the step response of bus frequencies can be decomposed in two components. The first component is a {system-wide frequency} that captures the aggregate grid behavior, and the residual component represents the individual bus frequency deviations from the aggregate. Using this decomposition, we define --and compute in closed form-- several metrics that capture dynamic behaviors that are of relevance for power engineers. In particular, using the \emph{system frequency}, we define industry-style metrics (Nadir, RoCoF) that are evaluated through a representative machine. We further use the norm of the residual component to define a \emph{synchronization cost} that can appropriately quantify inter-area oscillations. Finally, we employ robustness analysis tools to evaluate deviations from our proportionality assumption. We show that the system frequency still captures the grid steady-state deviation, and becomes an accurate reduced-order model of the grid as the network connectivity grows. Simulation studies with practically relevant data are included to validate the theory and further illustrate the impact of network structure and parameters on synchronization. Our analysis gives conclusions of practical interest, sometimes challenging the conventional wisdom in the field.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "dynamics concentration of large scale tightly connected networks"):
  with members:
    - "performance tradeoffs of dynamically controlled grid connected inverters in low inertia power systems"

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.SY(Systems and Control)