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: "assessing the varying level of impact measurement accuracy as a function of the citation window length"
  Abstract: With the passage of more time from the original date of publication, the measure of the impact of scientific works using subsequent citation counts becomes more accurate. However the measurement of individual and organizational research productivity should ideally refer to a period with closing date just prior to the evaluation exercise. Therefore it is necessary to compromise between accuracy and timeliness. This work attempts to provide an order of magnitude for the error in measurement that occurs with decreasing the time lapse between date of publication and citation count. The analysis is conducted by scientific discipline on the basis of publications indexed in the Thomson Reuters Italian National Citation Report.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "should citations be field normalized in evaluative bibliometrics an empirical analysis based on propensity score matching"):
  with members:
    - "the preeminence of ethnic diversity in scientific collaboration"
    - "the geography of references in elite articles which countries contribute to the archives of knowledge"
    - "field normalization of scientometric indicators"
    - "which type of citation analysis generates the most accurate taxonomy of scientific and technical knowledge"
    - "relative citation ratio rcr an empirical attempt to study a new field normalized bibliometric indicator"
    - "validity of basing authors publication strategy on journal impact factors"
    - "a review of theory and practice in scientometrics"
    - "large scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of web of science and scopus"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "peer review versus bibliometrics which method better predicts the scholarly impact of publications"):
  with members:
    - "systematic analysis of agreement between metrics and peer review in the uk ref"
    - "predicting publication long term impact through a combination of early citations and journal impact factor"
    - "peer review and citation data in predicting university rankings a large scale analysis"
    - "do citations and readership identify seminal publications"
    - "revisiting the scientometric conceptualization of impact and its measurement"
    - "selecting competent referees to assess research projects proposals a study of referees registers"
    - "do they agree bibliometric evaluation versus informed peer review in the italian research assessment exercise"
    - "refrain from adopting the combination of citation and journal metrics to grade publications as used in the italian national research assessment exercise vqr 2011 2014"

Connected through hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "comparison of research productivity of italian and norwegian professors and universities"):
  with members:
    - "predicting publication long term impact through a combination of early citations and journal impact factor"
    - "the impact of unproductive and top researchers on overall university research performance"
    - "the elephant in the room the problem of quantifying productivity in evaluative scientometrics"
    - "the ratio of top scientists to the academic staff as an indicator of the competitive strength of universities"
    - "not dead just resting the practical value of per publication citation indicators"
    - "efficiency of research performance and the glass researcher"
    - "ranking research institutions by the number of highly cited articles per scientist"
    - "predicting the long term citation impact of recent publications"

Connected through hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "readership data and research impact"):
  with members:
    - "microsoft academic a multidisciplinary comparison of citation counts with scopus and mendeley for 29 journals"
    - "do researchgate scores create ghost academic reputations"
    - "three practical field normalised alternative indicator formulae for research evaluation"
    - "on full text download and citation distributions in scientific scholarly journals"
    - "do mendeley readership counts help to filter highly cited wos publications better than average citation impact of journals jcs"
    - "national research impact indicators from mendeley readers"
    - "tweets vs mendeley readers how do these two social media metrics differ"
    - "how well developed are altmetrics a cross disciplinary analysis of the presence of alternative metrics in scientific publications"

Connected through hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "a nation s foreign and domestic professors which have better research performance the italian case"):
  with members:
    - "the impact of unproductive and top researchers on overall university research performance"
    - "revisiting the scientometric conceptualization of impact and its measurement"
    - "gender bias in academic recruitment"
    - "the determinants of academic career advancement evidence from italy"
    - "how do you define and measure research productivity"
    - "the spin off of elite universities in non competitive undifferentiated higher education systems an empirical simulation in italy"
    - "assessing national strengths and weaknesses in research fields"
    - "career advancement and scientific performance in universities"

Connected through hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields"):
  with members:
    - "dimensions a competitor to scopus and the web of science"
    - "google scholar web of science and scopus a systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories"
    - "international research collaboration novelty conventionality and atypicality in knowledge recombination"
    - "the relationship among research productivity research collaboration and their determinants"
    - "three practical field normalised alternative indicator formulae for research evaluation"
    - "is collaboration among scientists related to the citation impact of papers because their quality increases with collaboration an analysis based on data from f1000prime and normalized citation scores"
    - "national disciplinary and temporal variations in the extent to which articles with more authors have more impact evidence from a geometric field normalised citation indicator"
    - "the journal coverage of web of science and scopus a comparative analysis"

Connected through hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "mendeley reader counts for us computer science conference papers and journal articles"):
  with members:
    - "google scholar web of science and scopus a systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories"
    - "on the relationships between bibliographic characteristics of scientific documents and citation and mendeley readership counts a large scale analysis of web of science publications"
    - "could scientists use altmetric com scores to predict longer term citation counts"
    - "which type of citation analysis generates the most accurate taxonomy of scientific and technical knowledge"
    - "mendeley readership as a filtering tool to identify highly cited publications"
    - "role of interdisciplinarity in computer sciences quantification impact and life trajectory"
    - "are the discretised lognormal and hooked power law distributions plausible for citation data"
    - "more precise methods for national research citation impact comparisons"

Connected through hyperedge HE-8 (induced by source paper "the collaboration behavior of top scientists"):
  with members:
    - "measuring science irresistible temptations easy shortcuts and dangerous consequences"
    - "revisiting the scientometric conceptualization of impact and its measurement"
    - "the relationship among research productivity research collaboration and their determinants"
    - "variation in research collaboration patterns across academic ranks"
    - "how do you define and measure research productivity"
    - "individual research performance a proposal for comparing apples to oranges"
    - "the collaboration behaviors of scientists in italy a field level analysis"
    - "gender differences in research collaboration"

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)