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: "data structures for task based priority scheduling"
  Abstract: Many task-parallel applications can benefit from attempting to execute tasks in a specific order, as for instance indicated by priorities associated with the tasks. We present three lock-free data structures for priority scheduling with different trade-offs on scalability and ordering guarantees. First we propose a basic extension to work-stealing that provides good scalability, but cannot provide any guarantees for task-ordering in-between threads. Next, we present a centralized priority data structure based on $k$-fifo queues, which provides strong (but still relaxed with regard to a sequential specification) guarantees. The parameter $k$ allows to dynamically configure the trade-off between scalability and the required ordering guarantee. Third, and finally, we combine both data structures into a hybrid, $k$-priority data structure, which provides scalability similar to the work-stealing based approach for larger $k$, while giving strong ordering guarantees for smaller $k$. We argue for using the hybrid data structure as the best compromise for generic, priority-based task-scheduling. #R##N#We analyze the behavior and trade-offs of our data structures in the context of a simple parallelization of Dijkstra's single-source shortest path algorithm. Our theoretical analysis and simulations show that both the centralized and the hybrid $k$-priority based data structures can give strong guarantees on the useful work performed by the parallel Dijkstra algorithm. We support our results with experimental evidence on an 80-core Intel Xeon system.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "the lock free k lsm relaxed priority queue"):
  with members:
    - "multiqueues simpler faster and better relaxed concurrent priority queues"
    - "the adaptive priority queue with elimination and combining"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "an improved easily computable combinatorial lower bound for weighted graph bipartitioning"):
  with members:
    - "recent advances in graph partitioning"
    - "minimum cuts in near linear time"

Connected through hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "multiqueues simpler faster and better relaxed concurrent priority queues"):
  with members:
    - "the adaptive priority queue with elimination and combining"

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)