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: "model based debugging using multiple abstract models"
  Abstract: ABSTRACTThis paper introduces an automatic debuggingframework that relies on model–based reasoning techniquesto locate faults in programs. In particular, model–based diagnosis, together with an abstract interpretationbased conﬂict detection mechanism is used to derive diagnoses, which correspond to possible faults in pro-grams. Design information and partial speciﬁcations are applied to guide a model revision process, whichallows for automatic detection and correction of structural faults. KEYWORDS : Model–based Debugging, Diagnosis, Abstract Interpretation, Program Analysis 1 Introduction Detecting a faulty behavior within a program, locating the cause of the fault, and ﬁxing the faultby means of changing the program, continues to be a crucial and challenging task in software de-velopment. Many papers have been published so far in the domain of detecting faults in software,e.g., testing or formal veriﬁcation [CDH + 00], and locating them, e.g., program slicing [Wei84] andautomatic program debugging [Llo87]. More recently model–based diagnosis [Rei87] has been usedfor locating faults in software [CFD93, MSWW02a].This paper extends previous research in several directions: Firstly, a parameterized debuggingframework is introduced, which integrates dynamic and static properties, as well as design infor-mation of programs. The framework is based on results derived in the ﬁeld of abstract interpreta-tion [CC77], and can therefore be parameterized with different lattices and context selection strate-gies.Secondly, the one–to–one correspondence between model components and program statementsis replaced by a hierarchy of components, which provides means for more efﬁcient reasoning proce-dures, as well as more ﬂexibility when focusing on interesting parts of a program.This work is organized as follows. In Section 2, we give an introduction to model-based debug-ging. Section 3 describes mapping from source code to model components and the (approximate)computation of program effects in the style of [CC77] and [Bou93]. The next section discusses themodeling of programs and the reasoning framework. In Section 5, we provide an example whichputs together the different models and demonstrates the debugging capabilities of our approach.

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.SE(Software Engineering)