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: "scaling private record linkage using output constrained differential privacy"
  Abstract: Private record linkage is the problem of identifying pairs of records that are similar as per an input matching rule from databases that are held by two parties that do not trust one another. We identify three key desiderata that a PRL solution must ensure: a proof of end-to-end privacy, communication and computational costs that scale sub-quadratically in the number of input records, perfect precision and high recall of matching pairs. We show that all of the existing solutions for PRL -- including secure 2-party computation (S2PC), and their variants that use non-private or differentially private (DP) blocking -- violate at least one of the three desiderata. In particular, S2PC techniques guarantee end-to-end privacy but have either low recall or high cost. We show that DP blocking based techniques do not provide an end-to-end privacy guarantee as DP does not permit the release of any exact answers (including matching records in PRL). #R##N#In light of this deficiency, we propose a novel privacy model, called output constrained differential privacy, that shares the strong privacy protection of DP, but allows for the truthful release of the output of a certain function applied to the data. We apply this to PRL, and show that protocols satisfying this privacy model permit the disclosure of the true matching records, but their execution is insensitive to the presence or absence of a single non-matching record. We develop novel protocols that satisfy this end-to-end privacy guarantee and permit a tradeoff between recall, privacy and efficiency. Our empirical evaluations on real and synthetic datasets show that our protocols have high recall, scale near linearly in the size of the input databases (and the output set of matching pairs), and have communication and computational costs that are at least 2 orders of magnitude smaller than S2PC baselines.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "conclave secure multi party computation on big data"):
  with members:
    - "towards practical differential privacy for sql queries"
    - "prochlo strong privacy for analytics in the crowd"
    - "sok cryptographically protected database search"
    - "smcql secure querying for federated databases"
    - "quorums quicken queries efficient asynchronous secure multiparty computation"
    - "secure multi party computation in large networks"

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.DB(Databases)