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: "complexity analysis and efficient measurement selection primitives for high rate graph slam"
  Abstract: Sparsity has been widely recognized as crucial for efficient optimization in graph-based SLAM. Because the sparsity and structure of the SLAM graph reflect the set of incorporated measurements, many methods for sparsification have been proposed in hopes of reducing computation. These methods often focus narrowly on reducing edge count without regard for structure at a global level. Such structurally-naive techniques can fail to produce significant computational savings, even after aggressive pruning. In contrast, simple heuristics such as measurement decimation and keyframing are known empirically to produce significant computation reductions. To demonstrate why, we propose a quantitative metric called elimination complexity (EC) that bridges the existing analytic gap between graph structure and computation. EC quantifies the complexity of the primary computational bottleneck: the factorization step of a Gauss-Newton iteration. Using this metric, we show rigorously that decimation and keyframing impose favorable global structures and therefore achieve computation reductions on the order of $r^2/9$ and $r^3$, respectively, where $r$ is the pruning rate. We additionally present numerical results showing EC provides a good approximation of computation in both batch and incremental (iSAM2) optimization and demonstrate that pruning methods promoting globally-efficient structure outperform those that do not.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "efficient decision making and belief space planning using sparse approximations"):
  with members:
    - "approximate planning for factored pomdps using belief state simplification"
    - "tractable inference for complex stochastic processes"
    - "sampling based algorithms for optimal motion planning"
    - "finding approximate pomdp solutions through belief compression"

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.RO(Robotics)