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: "kubernetes as an availability manager for microservice applications"
  Abstract: The move towards the microservice based architecture is well underway. In this architectural style, small and loosely coupled modules are developed, deployed, and scaled independently to compose cloud-native applications. However, for carrier-grade service providers to migrate to the microservices architectural style, availability remains a concern. Kubernetes is an open source platform that defines a set of building blocks which collectively provide mechanisms for deploying, maintaining, scaling, and healing containerized microservices. Thus, Kubernetes hides the complexity of microservice orchestration while managing their availability. In a preliminary work we evaluated Kubernetes, using its default configuration, from the availability perspective in a private cloud settings. In this paper, we investigate more architectures and conduct more experiments to evaluate the availability that Kubernetes delivers for its managed microservices. We present different architectures for public and private clouds. We evaluate the availability achievable through the healing capability of Kubernetes. We investigate the impact of adding redundancy on the availability of microservice based applications. We conduct experiments under the default configuration of Kubernetes as well as under its most responsive one. We also perform a comparative evaluation with the Availability Management Framework (AMF), which is a proven solution as a middleware service for managing high-availability. The results of our investigations show that in certain cases, the service outage for applications managed with Kubernetes is significantly high.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "distributed redundancy scheduling for microservice based applications at the edge"):
  with members:
    - "spatio temporal edge service placement a bandit learning approach"
    - "follow me at the edge mobility aware dynamic service placement for mobile edge computing"
    - "online job scheduling with redundancy and opportunistic checkpointing a speedup function based analysis"
    - "a survey on mobile edge computing the communication perspective"

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)