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: "deep separability of ontological constraints"
  Abstract: When data schemata are enriched with expressive constraints that aim at representing the domain of interest, in order to answer queries one needs to consider the logical theory consisting of both the data and the constraints. Query answering in such a context is called ontological query answering. Commonly adopted database constraints in this field are tuple-generating dependencies (TGDs) and equality-generating dependencies (EGDs). It is well known that their interaction leads to intractability or undecidability of query answering even in the case of simple subclasses. Several conditions have been found to guarantee separability, that is lack of interaction, between TGDs and EGDs. Separability makes EGDs (mostly) irrelevant for query answering and therefore often guarantees tractability, as long as the theory is satisfiable. In this paper we review the two notions of separability found in the literature, as well as several syntactic conditions that are sufficient to prove them. We then shed light on the issue of satisfiability checking, showing that under a sufficient condition called deep separability it can be done by considering the TGDs only. #R##N#We show that, fortunately, in the case of TGDs and EGDs, separability implies deep separability. This result generalizes several analogous ones, proved ad hoc for particular classes of constraints. Applications include the class of sticky TGDs and EGDs, for which we provide a syntactic separability condition which extends the analogous one for linear TGDs; preliminary experiments show the feasibility of query answering in this case.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "ontological multidimensional data models and contextual data qality"):
  with members:
    - "a hybrid approach to query answering under expressive datalog"
    - "combining existential rules and transitivity next steps"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "taming the infinite chase query answering under expressive integrity constraints"):
  with members:
    - "querying the guarded fragment"
    - "rewriting ontological queries into small nonrecursive datalog programs"
    - "querying incomplete data over extended er schemata"
    - "the dl lite family and relations"
    - "hypertree decompositions and tractable queries"

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)