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: "pocl a performance portable opencl implementation"
  Abstract: OpenCL is a standard for parallel programming of heterogeneous systems. The benefits of a common programming standard are clear; multiple vendors can provide support for application descriptions written according to the standard, thus reducing the program porting effort. While the standard brings the obvious benefits of platform portability, the performance portability aspects are largely left to the programmer. The situation is made worse due to multiple proprietary vendor implementations with different characteristics, and, thus, required optimization strategies. In this paper, we propose an OpenCL implementation that is both portable and performance portable. At its core is a kernel compiler that can be used to exploit the data parallelism of OpenCL programs on multiple platforms with different parallel hardware styles. The kernel compiler is modularized to perform target-independent parallel region formation separately from the target-specific parallel mapping of the regions to enable support for various styles of fine-grained parallel resources such as subword SIMD extensions, SIMD datapaths and static multi-issue. Unlike previous similar techniques that work on the source level, the parallel region formation retains the information of the data parallelism using the LLVM IR and its metadata infrastructure. This data can be exploited by the later generic compiler passes for efficient parallelization. The proposed open source implementation of OpenCL is also platform portable, enabling OpenCL on a wide range of architectures, both already commercialized and on those that are still under research. The paper describes how the portability of the implementation is achieved. We test the two aspects to portability by utilizing the kernel compiler and the OpenCL implementation to run OpenCL applications in various platforms with different style of parallel resources. The results show that most of the benchmarked applications when compiled using pocl were faster or close to as fast as the best proprietary OpenCL implementation for the platform at hand.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "towards green computing a survey of performance and energy efficiency of different platforms using opencl"):
  with members:
    - "gpu computing with python performance energy efficiency and usability"

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.DC(Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing)