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: "manipulation of nanson s and baldwin s rules"
  Abstract: Nanson's and Baldwin's voting rules select a winner by successively eliminating candidates with low Borda scores. We show that these rules have a number of desirable computational properties. In particular, with unweighted votes, it is NP-hard to manipulate either rule with one manipulator, whilst with weighted votes, it is NP-hard to manipulate either rule with a small number of candidates and a coalition of manipulators. As only a couple of other voting rules are known to be NP-hard to manipulate with a single manipulator, Nanson's and Baldwin's rules appear to be particularly resistant to manipulation from a theoretical perspective. We also propose a number of approximation methods for manipulating these two rules. Experiments demonstrate that both rules are often difficult to manipulate in practice. These results suggest that elimination style voting rules deserve further study.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "detecting possible manipulators in elections"):
  with members:
    - "asymptotic collusion proofness of voting rules the case of large number of candidates"
    - "coalitional manipulation for schulze s rule"
    - "complexity of manipulation bribery and campaign management in bucklin and fallback voting"
    - "weighted electoral control"
    - "determining possible and necessary winners under common voting rules given partial orders"
    - "complexity of and algorithms for borda manipulation"
    - "is computational complexity a barrier to manipulation"
    - "an empirical study of the manipulability of single transferable voting"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "how hard is it to control an election by breaking ties"):
  with members:
    - "control complexity in bucklin fallback and plurality voting an experimental approach"
    - "eliminating the weakest link making manipulation intractable"
    - "determining possible and necessary winners under common voting rules given partial orders"
    - "an empirical study of the manipulability of single transferable voting"
    - "where are the really hard manipulation problems the phase transition in manipulating the veto rule"
    - "universal voting protocol tweaks to make manipulation hard"

Connected through hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "coalitional manipulation for schulze s rule"):
  with members:
    - "the complexity of online manipulation of sequential elections"
    - "complexity of and algorithms for borda manipulation"

Connected through hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "control complexity in bucklin fallback and plurality voting an experimental approach"):
  with members:
    - "complexity of and algorithms for borda manipulation"
    - "an empirical study of borda manipulation"
    - "an empirical study of the manipulability of single transferable voting"
    - "the shield that never was societies with single peaked preferences are more open to manipulation and control"
    - "where are the really hard manipulation problems the phase transition in manipulating the veto rule"
    - "a richer understanding of the complexity of election systems"
    - "anyone but him the complexity of precluding an alternative"

Connected through hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "eliminating the weakest link making manipulation intractable"):
  with members:
    - "complexity of and algorithms for borda manipulation"
    - "an empirical study of the manipulability of single transferable voting"
    - "complexity of terminating preference elicitation"
    - "where are the really hard manipulation problems the phase transition in manipulating the veto rule"
    - "universal voting protocol tweaks to make manipulation hard"

Connected through hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "taking the final step to a full dichotomy of the possible winner problem in pure scoring rules"):
  with members:
    - "determining possible and necessary winners under common voting rules given partial orders"
    - "complexity of and algorithms for borda manipulation"
    - "towards a dichotomy for the possible winner problem in elections based on scoring rules"
    - "towards a dichotomy of finding possible winners in elections based on scoring rules"
    - "a richer understanding of the complexity of election systems"
    - "dichotomy for voting systems"

Connected through hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "is computational complexity a barrier to manipulation"):
  with members:
    - "dominating manipulations in voting with partial information"
    - "complexity of and algorithms for borda manipulation"
    - "an empirical study of borda manipulation"
    - "multimode control attacks on elections"
    - "an empirical study of the manipulability of single transferable voting"
    - "where are the hard manipulation problems"
    - "manipulation and gender neutrality in stable marriage procedures"
    - "the shield that never was societies with single peaked preferences are more open to manipulation and control"

Connected through hyperedge HE-8 (induced by source paper "the complexity of probabilistic lobbying"):
  with members:
    - "complexity of and algorithms for borda manipulation"
    - "parameterizing by the number of numbers"
    - "control complexity in fallback voting"
    - "the shield that never was societies with single peaked preferences are more open to manipulation and control"
    - "sincere strategy preference based approval voting fully resists constructive control and broadly resists destructive control"
    - "satzilla portfolio based algorithm selection for sat"
    - "llull and copeland voting computationally resist bribery and control"
    - "on approximating optimal weighted lobbying and frequency of correctness versus average case polynomial time"

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.AI(Artificial Intelligence)