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: "caveats for using statistical significance tests in research assessments"
  Abstract: This article raises concerns about the advantages of using statistical significance tests in research assessments as has recently been suggested in the debate about proper normalization procedures for citation indicators by Opthof and Leydesdorff (2010). Statistical significance tests are highly controversial and numerous criticisms have been leveled against their use. Based on examples from articles by proponents of the use statistical significance tests in research assessments, we address some of the numerous problems with such tests. The issues specifically discussed are the ritual practice of such tests, their dichotomous application in decision making, the difference between statistical and substantive significance, the implausibility of most null hypotheses, the crucial assumption of randomness, as well as the utility of standard errors and confidence intervals for inferential purposes. We argue that applying statistical significance tests and mechanically adhering to their results are highly problematic and detrimental to critical thinking. We claim that the use of such tests do not provide any advantages in relation to deciding whether differences between citation indicators are important or not. On the contrary their use may be harmful. Like many other critics, we generally believe that statistical significance tests are over- and misused in the empirical sciences including scientometrics and we encourage a reform on these matters.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "analyzing linguistic complexity and scientific impact"):
  with members:
    - "examining scientific writing styles from the perspective of linguistic complexity"
    - "viziometrics analyzing visual information in the scientific literature"
    - "a review of the literature on citation impact indicators"
    - "quantifying long term scientific impact"
    - "tnt a statistical part of speech tagger"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "the integrated impact indicator i3 revisited a non parametric alternative to the journal impact factor"):
  with members:
    - "discontinuities in citation relations among journals self organized criticality as a model of scientific revolutions and change"
    - "creativity in science and the link to cited references is the creative potential of papers reflected in their cited references"
    - "use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles need not be wrong"
    - "can the journal impact factor be used as a criterion for the selection of junior researchers a large scale empirical study based on researcherid data"
    - "citations indicators of quality the impact fallacy"
    - "how are excellent highly cited papers defined in bibliometrics a quantitative analysis of the literature"
    - "the substantive and practical significance of citation impact differences between institutions guidelines for the analysis of percentiles using effect sizes and confidence intervals"
    - "the academic trace of the performance matrix a mathematical synthesis of the h index and the integrated impact indicator i3"

Connected through hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "statistical significance and effect sizes of differences among research universities at the level of nations and worldwide based on the leiden rankings"):
  with members:
    - "conceptual difficulties in the use of statistical inference in citation analysis"
    - "from rankings to funnel plots the question of accounting for uncertainty when assessing university research performance"
    - "the european union china and the united states in the top 1 and top 10 layers of most frequently cited publications competition and collaborations"
    - "the leiden ranking 2011 2012 data collection indicators and interpretation"
    - "testing differences statistically with the leiden ranking"
    - "measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals"

Connected through hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "the precision of the arithmetic mean geometric mean and percentiles for citation data an experimental simulation modelling approach"):
  with members:
    - "national disciplinary and temporal variations in the extent to which articles with more authors have more impact evidence from a geometric field normalised citation indicator"
    - "the vqr italy s second national research assessment methodological failures and ranking distortions"
    - "the relationship between the number of authors of a publication its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal evidence from italy"
    - "more precise methods for national research citation impact comparisons"
    - "national research impact indicators from mendeley readers"
    - "tweets vs mendeley readers how do these two social media metrics differ"
    - "regression for citation data an evaluation of different methods"
    - "distributions for cited articles from individual subjects and years"

Connected through hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "conceptual difficulties in the use of statistical inference in citation analysis"):
  with members:
    - "the precision of the arithmetic mean geometric mean and percentiles for citation data an experimental simulation modelling approach"
    - "from rankings to funnel plots the question of accounting for uncertainty when assessing university research performance"
    - "funnel plots for visualizing uncertainty in the research performance of institutions"
    - "more precise methods for national research citation impact comparisons"
    - "the substantive and practical significance of citation impact differences between institutions guidelines for the analysis of percentiles using effect sizes and confidence intervals"
    - "counting publications and citations is more always better"
    - "the leiden ranking 2011 2012 data collection indicators and interpretation"
    - "caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the cwts leiden evaluations of research performance"

Connected through hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "a critical cluster analysis of 44 indicators of author level performance"):
  with members:
    - "career advancement and scientific performance in universities"
    - "the study about the analysis of responsiveness pair clustering to social network bipartite graph"
    - "individual research performance a proposal for comparing apples to oranges"
    - "evaluating research from informed peer review to bibliometrics"
    - "a unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks"

Connected through hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "funnel plots for visualizing uncertainty in the research performance of institutions"):
  with members:
    - "the substantive and practical significance of citation impact differences between institutions guidelines for the analysis of percentiles using effect sizes and confidence intervals"
    - "how do you define and measure research productivity"
    - "the importance of accounting for the number of co authors and their order when assessing research performance at the individual level in the life sciences"
    - "what is the appropriate length of the publication period over which to assess research performance"
    - "the leiden ranking 2011 2012 data collection indicators and interpretation"
    - "revisiting size effects in higher education research productivity"
    - "the dispersion of research performance within and between universities as a potential indicator of the competitive intensity in higher education systems"
    - "revisiting the scaling of citations for research assessment"

Connected through hyperedge HE-8 (induced by source paper "a review of the characteristics of 108 author level bibliometric indicators"):
  with members:
    - "the google scholar experiment how to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicators"
    - "on the calculation of percentile based bibliometric indicators"
    - "some modifications to the snip journal impact indicator"
    - "the inconsistency of the h index"
    - "discovering author impact a pagerank perspective"
    - "measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals"
    - "assessing scientific research performance and impact with single indices"
    - "on the robustness of the h index"

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)