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: "two timescale convergent q learning for sleep scheduling in wireless sensor networks"
  Abstract: In this paper, we consider an intrusion detection application for Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs). We study the problem of scheduling the sleep times of the individual sensors to maximize the network lifetime while keeping the tracking error to a minimum. We formulate this problem as a partially-observable Markov decision process (POMDP) with continuous state-action spaces, in a manner similar to (Fuemmeler and Veeravalli [2008]). However, unlike their formulation, we consider infinite horizon discounted and average cost objectives as performance criteria. For each criterion, we propose a convergent on-policy Q-learning algorithm that operates on two timescales, while employing function approximation to handle the curse of dimensionality associated with the underlying POMDP. Our proposed algorithm incorporates a policy gradient update using a one-simulation simultaneous perturbation stochastic approximation (SPSA) estimate on the faster timescale, while the Q-value parameter (arising from a linear function approximation for the Q-values) is updated in an on-policy temporal difference (TD) algorithm-like fashion on the slower timescale. The feature selection scheme employed in each of our algorithms manages the energy and tracking components in a manner that assists the search for the optimal sleep-scheduling policy. For the sake of comparison, in both discounted and average settings, we also develop a function approximation analogue of the Q-learning algorithm. This algorithm, unlike the two-timescale variant, does not possess theoretical convergence guarantees. Finally, we also adapt our algorithms to include a stochastic iterative estimation scheme for the intruder's mobility model. Our simulation results on a 2-dimensional network setting suggest that our algorithms result in better tracking accuracy at the cost of only a few additional sensors, in comparison to a recent prior work.

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.SY(Systems and Control)