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: "are key foreign key joins safe to avoid when learning high capacity classifiers"
  Abstract: Machine learning (ML) over relational data is a booming area of the database industry and academia. While several projects aim to build scalable and fast ML systems, little work has addressed the pains of sourcing data and features for ML tasks. Real-world relational databases typically have many tables (often, dozens) and data scientists often struggle to even obtain and join all possible tables that provide features for ML. In this context, Kumar et al. showed recently that key-foreign key dependencies (KFKDs) between tables often lets us avoid such joins without significantly affecting prediction accuracy--an idea they called avoiding joins safely. While initially controversial, this idea has since been used by multiple companies to reduce the burden of data sourcing for ML. But their work applied only to linear classifiers. In this work, we verify if their results hold for three popular complex classifiers: decision trees, SVMs, and ANNs. We conduct an extensive experimental study using both real-world datasets and simulations to analyze the effects of avoiding KFK joins on such models. Our results show that these high-capacity classifiers are surprisingly and counter-intuitively more robust to avoiding KFK joins compared to linear classifiers, refuting an intuition from the prior work's analysis. We explain this behavior intuitively and identify open questions at the intersection of data management and ML theoretical research. All of our code and datasets are available for download from this http URL.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "a survey on data collection for machine learning a big data ai integration perspective"):
  with members:
    - "data cleaning for accurate fair and robust models a big data ai integration approach"
    - "the gan landscape losses architectures regularization and normalization"
    - "adversarial example generation with syntactically controlled paraphrase networks"
    - "snorkel drybell a case study in deploying weak supervision at industrial scale"
    - "data synthesis based on generative adversarial networks"
    - "quality control in crowdsourcing a survey of quality attributes assessment techniques and assurance actions"
    - "a survey on deep transfer learning"
    - "learning based video motion magnification"

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.DB(Databases)