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: "profiling vs time vs content what does matter for top k publication recommendation based on twitter profiles"
  Abstract: So far it is unclear how different factors of a scientific publication recommender system based on users' tweets have an influence on the recommendation performance. We examine three different factors, namely profiling method, temporal decay, and richness of content. Regarding profiling, we compare CF-IDF that replaces terms in TF-IDF by semantic concepts, HCF-IDF as novel hierarchical variant of CF-IDF, and topic modeling. As temporal decay functions, we apply sliding window and exponential decay. In terms of the richness of content, we compare recommendations using both full-texts and titles of publications and using only titles. Overall, the three factors make twelve recommendation strategies. We have conducted an online experiment with 123 participants and compared the strategies in a within-group design. The best recommendations are achieved by the strategy combining CF-IDF, sliding window, and with full-texts. However, the strategies using the novel HCF-IDF profiling method achieve similar results with just using the titles of the publications. Therefore, HCF-IDF can make recommendations when only short and sparse data is available.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "using deep learning for title based semantic subject indexing to reach competitive performance to full text"):
  with members:
    - "lstm a search space odyssey"
    - "on the state of the art of evaluation in neural language models"
    - "amplifying the impact of open access wikipedia and the diffusion of science"
    - "do convolutional networks need to be deep for text classification"
    - "comparative study of cnn and rnn for natural language processing"
    - "recent trends in deep learning based natural language processing"
    - "deep extreme multi label learning"
    - "using titles vs full text as source for automated semantic document annotation"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "inferring user interests in microblogging social networks a survey"):
  with members:
    - "implicit entity linking in tweets"
    - "the bursty dynamics of the twitter information network"
    - "the author topic model for authors and documents"

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.DL(Digital Libraries)