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: "reasoning with axioms theory and pratice"
  Abstract: When reasoning in description, modal or temporal logics it is often useful to consider axioms representing universal truths in the domain of discourse. Reasoning with respect to an arbitrary set of axioms is hard, even for relatively inexpressive logics, and it is essential to deal with such axioms in an efficient manner if implemented systems are to be effective in real applications. This is particularly relevant to Description Logics, where subsumption reasoning with respect to a terminology is a fundamental problem. Two optimisation techniques that have proved to be particularly effective in dealing with terminologies are lazy unfolding and absorption. In this paper we seek to improve our theoretical understanding of these important techniques. We define a formal framework that allows the techniques to be precisely described, establish conditions under which they can be safely applied, and prove that, provided these conditions are respected, subsumption testing algorithms will still function correctly. These results are used to show that the procedures used in the FaCT system are correct and, moreover, to show how efficiency can be significantly improved, while still retaining the guarantee of correctness, by relaxing the safety conditions for absorption.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "semantic matchmaking as non monotonic reasoning a description logic approach"):
  with members:
    - "a semantics and complete algorithm for subsumption in the classic description logic"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "complexity results and practical algorithms for logics in knowledge representation"):
  with members:
    - "practical reasoning for expressive description logics"
    - "the complexity of reasoning with cardinality restrictions and nominals in expressive description logics"
    - "reasoning with individuals for the description logic shiq"
    - "pspace reasoning for graded modal logics"
    - "a semantics and complete algorithm for subsumption in the classic description logic"
    - "decidable reasoning in terminological knowledge representation systems"

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.LO(Logic in Computer Science)