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: "modeling single peakedness for votes with ties"
  Abstract: Single-peakedness is one of the most important and well-known domain restrictions on preferences. The computational study of single-peaked electorates has largely been restricted to elections with tie-free votes, and recent work that studies the computational complexity of manipulative attacks for single-peaked elections for votes with ties has been restricted to nonstandard models of single-peaked preferences for top orders. We study the computational complexity of manipulation for votes with ties for the standard model of single-peaked preferences and for single-plateaued preferences. We show that these models avoid the anomalous complexity behavior exhibited by the other models. We also state a surprising result on the relation between the societal axis and the complexity of manipulation for single-peaked preferences.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "incomplete preferences in single peaked electorates"):
  with members:
    - "on the likelihood of single peaked preferences"
    - "computational aspects of nearly single peaked electorates"
    - "recognising multidimensional euclidean preferences"
    - "single peaked consistency for weak orders is easy"
    - "reinstating combinatorial protections for manipulation and bribery in single peaked and nearly single peaked electorates"
    - "the one dimensional euclidean domain finitely many obstructions are not enough"
    - "complexity of manipulative actions when voting with ties"
    - "are there any nicely structured preference profiles nearby"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "stable roommates with narcissistic single peaked and single crossing preferences"):
  with members:
    - "matchings under preferences strength of stability and trade offs"
    - "stable marriage with multi modal preferences"
    - "stable marriage with groups of similar agents"
    - "how hard is it to satisfy almost all roommates"
    - "balanced stable marriage how close is close enough"
    - "stable marriage with covering constraints a complete computational trichotomy"
    - "single peaked consistency for weak orders is easy"
    - "clone structures in voters preferences"

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)