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: "effectiveness of preference elicitation in combinatorial auctions"
  Abstract: Combinatorial auctions where agents can bid on bundles of items are desirable because they allow the agents to express complementarity and substitutability between the items. However, expressing one's preferences can require bidding on all bundles. Selective incremental preference elicitation by the auctioneer was recently proposed to address this problem (Conen & Sandholm 2001), but the idea was not evaluated. In this paper we show, experimentally and theoretically, that automated elicitation provides a drastic benefit. In all of the elicitation schemes under study, as the number of items for sale increases, the amount of information elicited is a vanishing fraction of the information collected in traditional ``direct revelation mechanisms'' where bidders reveal all their valuation information. Most of the elicitation schemes also maintain the benefit as the number of agents increases. We develop more effective elicitation policies for existing query types. We also present a new query type that takes the incremental nature of elicitation to a new level by allowing agents to give approximate answers that are refined only on an as-needed basis. In the process, we present methods for evaluating different types of elicitation policies.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "complexity results about nash equilibria"):
  with members:
    - "complexity of mechanism design"
    - "graphical models for game theory"
    - "computationally feasible vcg mechanisms"
    - "pure nash equilibria hard and easy games"
    - "vote elicitation complexity and strategy proofness"
    - "complexity of manipulating elections with few candidates"
    - "on the np completeness of finding an optimal strategy in games with common payoffs"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "vote elicitation complexity and strategy proofness"):
  with members:
    - "elicitation of probabilities for belief networks combining qualitative and quantitative information"
    - "complexity of manipulating elections with few candidates"

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)