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: "can we use google scholar to identify highly cited documents"
  Abstract: The main objective of this paper is to empirically test whether the identification of highly-cited documents through Google Scholar is feasible and reliable. To this end, we carried out a longitudinal analysis (1950–2013), running a generic query (filtered only by year of publication) to minimise the effects of academic search engine optimisation. This gave us a final sample of 64,000 documents (1000 per year). The strong correlation between a document’s citations and its position in the search results (r=−0.67) led us to conclude that Google Scholar is able to identify highly-cited papers effectively. This, combined with Google Scholar’s unique coverage (no restrictions on document type and source), makes the academic search engine an invaluable tool for bibliometric research relating to the identification of the most influential scientific documents. We find evidence, however, that Google Scholar ranks those documents whose language (or geographical web domain) matches with the user’s interface language higher than could be expected based on citations. Nonetheless, this language effect and other factors related to the Google Scholar’s operation, i.e. the proper identification of versions and the date of publication, only have an incidental impact. They do not compromise the ability of Google Scholar to identify the highly-cited papers.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "author level metrics in the new academic profile platforms the online behaviour of the bibliometrics community"):
  with members:
    - "a novel method for depicting academic disciplines through google scholar citations the case of bibliometrics"
    - "do researchgate scores create ghost academic reputations"
    - "scholars on twitter who and how many are they"
    - "grand challenges in altmetrics heterogeneity data quality and dependencies"
    - "scholarly use of social media and altmetrics a review of the literature"
    - "a review of the characteristics of 108 author level bibliometric indicators"
    - "do altmetrics correlate with citations extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective"
    - "do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research an overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "dimensions a competitor to scopus and the web of science"):
  with members:
    - "microsoft academic automatic document searches accuracy for journal articles and suitability for citation analysis"
    - "citation analysis with microsoft academic"
    - "the journal coverage of web of science and scopus a comparative analysis"
    - "more precise methods for national research citation impact comparisons"
    - "a review of the literature on citation impact indicators"
    - "tweets vs mendeley readers how do these two social media metrics differ"
    - "do altmetrics correlate with citations extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective"
    - "the google scholar experiment how to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicators"

Connected through hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "coverage of highly cited documents in google scholar web of science and scopus a multidisciplinary comparison"):
  with members:
    - "evidence of open access of scientific publications in google scholar a large scale analysis"
    - "google scholar as a data source for research assessment"
    - "the accuracy of confidence intervals for field normalised indicators"
    - "three practical field normalised alternative indicator formulae for research evaluation"
    - "a two sided academic landscape portrait of highly cited documents in google scholar 1950 2013"
    - "the journal coverage of web of science and scopus a comparative analysis"
    - "methods for estimating the size of google scholar"
    - "a new methodology for comparing google scholar and scopus"

Connected through hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "google scholar as a data source for research assessment"):
  with members:
    - "a two sided academic landscape portrait of highly cited documents in google scholar 1950 2013"
    - "2016 google scholar metrics released a matter of languages and something else"
    - "methods for estimating the size of google scholar"
    - "a new methodology for comparing google scholar and scopus"
    - "google scholar metrics 2014 a low cost bibliometric tool"
    - "does google scholar contain all highly cited documents 1950 2013"
    - "h index of scientific nursing journals according to google scholar metrics 2007 2011"
    - "ranking journals could google scholar metrics be an alternative to journal citation reports and scimago journal rank"

Connected through hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "a novel method for depicting academic disciplines through google scholar citations the case of bibliometrics"):
  with members:
    - "a two sided academic landscape portrait of highly cited documents in google scholar 1950 2013"
    - "methods for estimating the size of google scholar"
    - "information metrics imetrics a research specialty with a socio cognitive identity"
    - "the google scholar experiment how to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicators"
    - "coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community"
    - "beyond citations scholars visibility on the social web"

Connected through hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "evidence of open access of scientific publications in google scholar a large scale analysis"):
  with members:
    - "developing indicators on open access by combining evidence from diverse data sources"
    - "a two sided academic landscape portrait of highly cited documents in google scholar 1950 2013"
    - "the journal coverage of web of science and scopus a comparative analysis"
    - "methods for estimating the size of google scholar"
    - "green and gold open access percentages and growth by discipline"

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.DL(Digital Libraries)