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: "the normalization of citation counts based on classification systems"
  Abstract: If we want to assess whether the paper in question has had a particularly high or low citation impact compared to other papers, the standard practice in bibliometrics is to normalize citations in respect of the subject category and publication year. A number of proposals for an improved procedure in the normalization of citation impact have been put forward in recent years. Against the background of these proposals this study describes an ideal solution for the normalization of citation impact: in a first step, the reference set for the publication in question is collated by means of a classification scheme, where every publication is associated with a single principal research field or subfield entry (e. g. via Chemical Abstracts sections) and a publication year. In a second step, percentiles of citation counts are calculated for this set and used to assign the normalized citation impact score to the publications (and also to the publication in question).

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "how well does i3 perform for impact measurement compared to other bibliometric indicators the convergent validity of several field normalized indicators"):
  with members:
    - "which differences can be expected when two universities in the leiden ranking are compared some benchmarks for institutional research evaluations"
    - "creativity in science and the link to cited references is the creative potential of papers reflected in their cited references"
    - "revisiting relative indicators and provisional truths"
    - "which type of citation analysis generates the most accurate taxonomy of scientific and technical knowledge"
    - "citation score normalized by cited references csncr the introduction of a new citation impact indicator"
    - "a review of theory and practice in scientometrics"
    - "a review of the literature on citation impact indicators"
    - "how are excellent highly cited papers defined in bibliometrics a quantitative analysis of the literature"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "should citations be field normalized in evaluative bibliometrics an empirical analysis based on propensity score matching"):
  with members:
    - "the preeminence of ethnic diversity in scientific collaboration"
    - "the geography of references in elite articles which countries contribute to the archives of knowledge"
    - "field normalization of scientometric indicators"
    - "which type of citation analysis generates the most accurate taxonomy of scientific and technical knowledge"
    - "relative citation ratio rcr an empirical attempt to study a new field normalized bibliometric indicator"
    - "validity of basing authors publication strategy on journal impact factors"
    - "a review of theory and practice in scientometrics"
    - "large scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of web of science and scopus"

Connected through hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "critical rationalism and the search for standard field normalized indicators in bibliometrics"):
  with members:
    - "algorithmically generated subject categories based on citation relations an empirical micro study using papers on overall water splitting"
    - "relative citation ratio rcr an empirical attempt to study a new field normalized bibliometric indicator"
    - "citation score normalized by cited references csncr the introduction of a new citation impact indicator"
    - "a review of the literature on citation impact indicators"
    - "how are excellent highly cited papers defined in bibliometrics a quantitative analysis of the literature"
    - "methods for the generation of normalized citation impact scores in bibliometrics which method best reflects the judgements of experts"
    - "alternative metrics in scientometrics a meta analysis of research into three altmetrics"
    - "measuring impact in research evaluations a thorough discussion of methods for effects of and problems with impact measurements"

Connected through hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "algorithmically generated subject categories based on citation relations an empirical micro study using papers on overall water splitting"):
  with members:
    - "granularity of algorithmically constructed publication level classifications of research publications identification of topics"
    - "which type of citation analysis generates the most accurate taxonomy of scientific and technical knowledge"
    - "a review of theory and practice in scientometrics"
    - "large scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of web of science and scopus"
    - "a review of the literature on citation impact indicators"
    - "methods for the generation of normalized citation impact scores in bibliometrics which method best reflects the judgements of experts"
    - "on the causes of subject specific citation rates in web of science"
    - "source normalized indicators of citation impact an overview of different approaches and an empirical comparison"

Connected through hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "how to improve the outcome of performance evaluations in terms of percentiles for citation frequencies of my papers"):
  with members:
    - "examples for counterintuitive behavior of the new citation rank indicator p100 for bibliometric evaluations"
    - "empirical evidence for the relevance of fractional scoring in the calculation of percentile rank scores"
    - "which percentile based approach should be preferred for calculating normalized citation impact values an empirical comparison of five approaches including a newly developed citation rank approach p100"
    - "how much do different ways of calculating percentiles influence the derived performance indicators a case study"
    - "on the calculation of percentile based bibliometric indicators"
    - "the use of percentiles and percentile rank classes in the analysis of bibliometric data opportunities and limits"
    - "accounting for the uncertainty in the evaluation of percentile ranks"
    - "citation analysis with medical subject headings mesh using the web of knowledge a new routine"

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.DL(Digital Libraries)