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: "optimization of privacy utility trade offs under informational self determination"
  Abstract: The pervasiveness of Internet of Things results in vast volumes of personal data generated by smart devices of users (data producers) such as smart phones, wearables and other embedded sensors. It is a common requirement, especially for Big Data analytics systems, to transfer these large in scale and distributed data to centralized computational systems for analysis. Nevertheless, third parties that run and manage these systems (data consumers) do not always guarantee users' privacy. Their primary interest is to improve utility that is usually a metric related to the performance, costs and the quality of service. There are several techniques that mask user-generated data to ensure privacy, e.g. differential privacy. Setting up a process for masking data, referred to in this paper as a `privacy setting', decreases on the one hand the utility of data analytics, while, on the other hand, increases privacy. This paper studies parameterizations of privacy-settings that regulate the trade-off between maximum utility, minimum privacy and minimum utility, maximum privacy, where utility refers to the accuracy in the approximations of aggregation functions. Privacy settings can be universally applied as system-wide parameterizations and policies (homogeneous data sharing). Nonetheless they can also be applied autonomously by each user or decided under the influence of (monetary) incentives (heterogeneous data sharing). This latter diversity in data sharing by informational self-determination plays a key role on the privacy-utility trajectories as shown in this paper both theoretically and empirically. A generic and novel computational framework is introduced for measuring privacy-utility trade-offs and their optimization. The framework computes a broad spectrum of such trade-offs that form privacy-utility trajectories under homogeneous and heterogeneous data sharing.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "privacy enhancing aggregation of internet of things data via sensors grouping"):
  with members:
    - "t closeness through microaggregation strict privacy with enhanced utility preservation"
    - "smart meter privacy a utility privacy framework"

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.CR(Cryptography and Security)