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: "control in the presence of manipulators cooperative and competitive cases"
  Abstract: Control and manipulation are two of the most studied types of attacks on elections. In this paper, we study the complexity of control attacks on elections in which there are manipulators. We study both the case where the "chair" who is seeking to control the election is allied with the manipulators, and the case where the manipulators seek to thwart the chair. In the latter case, we see that the order of play substantially influences the complexity. We prove upper bounds, holding over every election system with a polynomial-time winner problem, for all standard control cases, and some of these bounds are at the second or third level of the polynomial hierarchy, and we provide matching lower bounds to prove these tight. Nonetheless, for important natural systems the complexity can be much lower. We prove that for approval and plurality elections, the complexity of even competitive clashes between a controller and manipulators falls far below those high bounds, even as low as polynomial time. Yet for a Borda-voting case we show that such clashes raise the complexity unless NP = coNP.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "a parameterized perspective on protecting elections"):
  with members:
    - "optimal bribery in voting"
    - "manipulative elicitation a new attack on elections with incomplete preferences"
    - "on the exact amount of missing information that makes finding possible winners hard"
    - "complexity of manipulation with partial information in voting"
    - "frugal bribery in voting"
    - "elections with few voters candidate control can be easy"
    - "detecting possible manipulators in elections"
    - "kernelization complexity of possible winner and coalitional manipulation problems in voting"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "weighted electoral control"):
  with members:
    - "a control dichotomy for pure scoring rules"
    - "possible winners in noisy elections"
    - "schulze and ranked pairs voting are fixed parameter tractable to bribe manipulate and control"
    - "how many vote operations are needed to manipulate a voting system"
    - "control complexity in bucklin fallback and plurality voting an experimental approach"
    - "an atypical survey of typical case heuristic algorithms"
    - "new candidates welcome possible winners with respect to the addition of new candidates"
    - "the complexity of manipulative attacks in nearly single peaked electorates"

Connected through hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "the complexity of controlling candidate sequential elections"):
  with members:
    - "online voter control in sequential elections"
    - "the complexity of online manipulation of sequential elections"
    - "the complexity of online voter control in sequential elections"
    - "new candidates welcome possible winners with respect to the addition of new candidates"
    - "the complexity of manipulative attacks in nearly single peaked electorates"
    - "multimode control attacks on elections"
    - "normalized range voting broadly resists control"
    - "equilibria of plurality voting with abstentions"

Connected through hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "the complexity of online voter control in sequential elections"):
  with members:
    - "the complexity of controlling candidate sequential elections"
    - "online voter control in sequential elections"
    - "an atypical survey of typical case heuristic algorithms"
    - "the complexity of online manipulation of sequential elections"
    - "the complexity of manipulative attacks in nearly single peaked electorates"
    - "equilibria of plurality voting with abstentions"
    - "sincere strategy preference based approval voting fully resists constructive control and broadly resists destructive control"
    - "hybrid elections broaden complexity theoretic resistance to control"

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)