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: "rational proofs with non cooperative provers"
  Abstract: Interactive-proof-based approaches are widely used in verifiable computation outsourcing. The verifier models a computationally-constrained client and the provers model powerful service providers. In classical interactive-proof models with multiple provers, the provers' interests either perfectly align (e.g. MIP) or directly conflict (e.g. refereed games). However, service providers participating in outsourcing applications may not meet such extremes. Instead, each provider may be paid for his service, while he acts solely in his own best interest. An active research area in this context is rational interactive proofs (RIP), in which the provers try to maximize their payment. However, existing works consider either a single prover, or multiple provers who cooperate to maximize their total payment. None of them truly capture the strategic nature of multiple service providers. How to define and design non-cooperative rational interactive proofs is a well-known open problem. #R##N#We introduce a multi-prover interactive-proof model in which the provers are rational and non-cooperative. That is, each prover acts individually so as to maximize his own payment in the resulting game. This model generalizes single-prover rational interactive proofs as well as cooperative multi-prover rational proofs. This new model better reflects the strategic nature of service providers from a game-theoretic viewpoint. #R##N#To design and analyze non-cooperative rational interactive proofs (ncRIP), we define a new solution concept for extensive-form games with imperfect information, strong sequential equilibrium. Our technical results focus on protocols which give strong guarantees on utility gap, which is analogous to soundness gap in classical interactive proofs. We give tight characterizations of the class of ncRIP protocols with constant, noticeable, and negligible gap.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "efficient rational proofs with strong utility gap guarantees"):
  with members:
    - "rational proofs with multiple provers"
    - "streaming verification in data analysis"
    - "verifying computations with streaming interactive proofs"

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.GT(Computer Science and Game Theory)