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: "selecting competent referees to assess research projects proposals a study of referees registers"
  Abstract: The selection of referees for evaluation of research projects under competitive financing appears particularly critical: the greater the competence of the referee concerning the core topic, the more their judgment is trustworthy and the more the financing of the best proposals is probable. The current work analyzes registers of experts used to select referees for the evaluation of research proposals in public programs with competitive funding. The work has the objective to present a methodology to verify the degree of "coverage" of the register compared to the spectrum of competencies necessary for the evaluation of such wide-ranging national programs; and to evaluate the level of scientific performance of the register's referees in the hard sciences, compared to the their national colleagues from the same fields.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "peer review versus bibliometrics which method better predicts the scholarly impact of publications"):
  with members:
    - "systematic analysis of agreement between metrics and peer review in the uk ref"
    - "predicting publication long term impact through a combination of early citations and journal impact factor"
    - "peer review and citation data in predicting university rankings a large scale analysis"
    - "do citations and readership identify seminal publications"
    - "revisiting the scientometric conceptualization of impact and its measurement"
    - "do they agree bibliometric evaluation versus informed peer review in the italian research assessment exercise"
    - "refrain from adopting the combination of citation and journal metrics to grade publications as used in the italian national research assessment exercise vqr 2011 2014"
    - "citations indicators of quality the impact fallacy"

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)