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: "google scholar web of science and scopus a systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories"
  Abstract: Abstract   Despite citation counts from Google Scholar (GS), Web of Science (WoS), and Scopus being widely consulted by researchers and sometimes used in research evaluations, there is no recent or systematic evidence about the differences between them. In response, this paper investigates 2,448,055 citations to 2299 English-language highly-cited documents from 252 GS subject categories published in 2006, comparing GS, the WoS Core Collection, and Scopus. GS consistently found the largest percentage of citations across all areas (93%–96%), far ahead of Scopus (35%–77%) and WoS (27%–73%). GS found nearly all the WoS (95%) and Scopus (92%) citations. Most citations found only by GS were from non-journal sources (48%–65%), including theses, books, conference papers, and unpublished materials. Many were non-English (19%–38%), and they tended to be much less cited than citing sources that were also in Scopus or WoS. Despite the many unique GS citing sources, Spearman correlations between citation counts in GS and WoS or Scopus are high (0.78-0.99). They are lower in the Humanities, and lower between GS and WoS than between GS and Scopus. The results suggest that in all areas GS citation data is essentially a superset of WoS and Scopus, with substantial extra coverage.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "a tale of two databases the use of web of science and scopus in academic papers"):
  with members:
    - "funding information in web of science an updated overview"
    - "missing author address information in web of science an explorative study"
    - "trends in russian research output indexed in scopus and web of science"
    - "book reviews in academic journals patterns and dynamics"
    - "publish or impoverish an investigation of the monetary reward system of science in china 1999 2016"
    - "the journal coverage of web of science and scopus a comparative analysis"
    - "large scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of web of science and scopus"
    - "global maps of science based on the new web of science categories"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields"):
  with members:
    - "dimensions a competitor to scopus and the web of science"
    - "international research collaboration novelty conventionality and atypicality in knowledge recombination"
    - "the relationship among research productivity research collaboration and their determinants"
    - "three practical field normalised alternative indicator formulae for research evaluation"
    - "is collaboration among scientists related to the citation impact of papers because their quality increases with collaboration an analysis based on data from f1000prime and normalized citation scores"
    - "national disciplinary and temporal variations in the extent to which articles with more authors have more impact evidence from a geometric field normalised citation indicator"
    - "the journal coverage of web of science and scopus a comparative analysis"
    - "the relationship between the number of authors of a publication its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal evidence from italy"

Connected through hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "mendeley reader counts for us computer science conference papers and journal articles"):
  with members:
    - "on the relationships between bibliographic characteristics of scientific documents and citation and mendeley readership counts a large scale analysis of web of science publications"
    - "could scientists use altmetric com scores to predict longer term citation counts"
    - "which type of citation analysis generates the most accurate taxonomy of scientific and technical knowledge"
    - "mendeley readership as a filtering tool to identify highly cited publications"
    - "role of interdisciplinarity in computer sciences quantification impact and life trajectory"
    - "are the discretised lognormal and hooked power law distributions plausible for citation data"
    - "more precise methods for national research citation impact comparisons"
    - "tweets vs mendeley readers how do these two social media metrics differ"

Connected through hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "can google scholar and mendeley help to assess the scholarly impacts of dissertations"):
  with members:
    - "on the relationships between bibliographic characteristics of scientific documents and citation and mendeley readership counts a large scale analysis of web of science publications"
    - "google scholar and the gray literature a reply to bonato s review"
    - "medical theses and derivative articles dissemination of contents and publication patterns"
    - "mendeley readership as a filtering tool to identify highly cited publications"
    - "the precision of the arithmetic mean geometric mean and percentiles for citation data an experimental simulation modelling approach"
    - "the influence of time and discipline on the magnitude of correlations between citation counts and quality scores"
    - "tweets vs mendeley readers how do these two social media metrics differ"
    - "do altmetrics correlate with citations extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective"

Connected through hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "the state of nlp literature a diachronic analysis of the acl anthology"):
  with members:
    - "measuring academic influence not all citations are equal"
    - "about the size of google scholar playing the numbers"
    - "generating extractive summaries of scientific paradigms"

Connected through hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "hunting for supernovae articles in the universe of scientometrics"):
  with members:
    - "a new methodology for comparing google scholar and scopus"
    - "the google scholar experiment how to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicators"
    - "comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the web of science and scopus"

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)