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: "why is unsupervised alignment of english embeddings from different algorithms so hard"
  Abstract: This paper presents a challenge to the community: Generative adversarial networks (GANs) can perfectly align independent English word embeddings induced using the same algorithm, based on distributional information alone; but fails to do so, for two different embeddings algorithms. Why is that? We believe understanding why, is key to understand both modern word embedding algorithms and the limitations and instability dynamics of GANs. This paper shows that (a) in all these cases, where alignment fails, there exists a linear transform between the two embeddings (so algorithm biases do not lead to non-linear differences), and (b) similar effects can not easily be obtained by varying hyper-parameters. One plausible suggestion based on our initial experiments is that the differences in the inductive biases of the embedding algorithms lead to an optimization landscape that is riddled with local optima, leading to a very small basin of convergence, but we present this more as a challenge paper than a technical contribution.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "on the robustness of unsupervised and semi supervised cross lingual word embedding learning"):
  with members:
    - "a survey of cross lingual word embedding models"
    - "learning cross lingual word embeddings from twitter via distant supervision"
    - "how to properly evaluate cross lingual word embeddings on strong baselines comparative analyses and some misconceptions"
    - "the limitations of cross language word embeddings evaluation"
    - "xnli evaluating cross lingual sentence representations"
    - "unsupervised multilingual word embeddings"
    - "on difficulties of cross lingual transfer with order differences a case study on dependency parsing"
    - "generalizing procrustes analysis for better bilingual dictionary induction"

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.CL(Computation and Language)