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: "a comparative study of rule extraction for recurrent neural networks"
  Abstract: Understanding recurrent networks through rule extraction has a long history. This has taken on new interests due to the need for interpreting or verifying neural networks. One basic form for representing stateful rules is deterministic finite automata (DFA). Previous research shows that extracting DFAs from trained second-order recurrent networks is not only possible but also relatively stable. Recently, several new types of recurrent networks with more complicated architectures have been introduced. These handle challenging learning tasks usually involving sequential data. However, it remains an open problem whether DFAs can be adequately extracted from these models. Specifically, it is not clear how DFA extraction will be affected when applied to different recurrent networks trained on data sets with different levels of complexity. Here, we investigate DFA extraction on several widely adopted recurrent networks that are trained to learn a set of seven regular Tomita grammars. We first formally analyze the complexity of Tomita grammars and categorize these grammars according to that complexity. Then we empirically evaluate different recurrent networks for their performance of DFA extraction on all Tomita grammars. Our experiments show that for most recurrent networks, their extraction performance decreases as the complexity of the underlying grammar increases. On grammars of lower complexity, most recurrent networks obtain desirable extraction performance. As for grammars with the highest level of complexity, while several complicated models fail with only certain recurrent networks having satisfactory extraction performance.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "learning with interpretable structure from gated rnn"):
  with members:
    - "an empirical evaluation of rule extraction from recurrent neural networks"
    - "explanation in artificial intelligence insights from the social sciences"
    - "towards better analysis of deep convolutional neural networks"
    - "the mythos of model interpretability"
    - "minimal gated unit for recurrent neural networks"
    - "understanding neural networks through deep visualization"
    - "visualizing and understanding recurrent networks"
    - "object detectors emerge in deep scene cnns"

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.LG(Machine Learning)