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: "estimating failure in brittle materials using graph theory"
  Abstract: In brittle fracture applications, failure paths, regions where the failure occurs and damage statistics, are some of the key quantities of interest (QoI). High-fidelity models for brittle failure that accurately predict these QoI exist but are highly computationally intensive, making them infeasible to incorporate in upscaling and uncertainty quantification frameworks. The goal of this paper is to provide a fast heuristic to reasonably estimate quantities such as failure path and damage in the process of brittle failure. Towards this goal, we first present a method to predict failure paths under tensile loading conditions and low-strain rates. The method uses a $k$-nearest neighbors algorithm built on fracture process zone theory, and identifies the set of all possible pre-existing cracks that are likely to join early to form a large crack. The method then identifies zone of failure and failure paths using weighted graphs algorithms. We compare these failure paths to those computed with a high-fidelity model called the Hybrid Optimization Software Simulation Suite (HOSS). A probabilistic evolution model for average damage in a system is also developed that is trained using 150 HOSS simulations and tested on 40 simulations. A non-parametric approach based on confidence intervals is used to determine the damage evolution over time along the dominant failure path. For upscaling, damage is the key QoI needed as an input by the continuum models. This needs to be informed accurately by the surrogate models for calculating effective modulii at continuum-scale. We show that for the proposed average damage evolution model, the prediction accuracy on the test data is more than 90\%. In terms of the computational time, the proposed models are $\approx \mathcal{O}(10^6)$ times faster compared to high-fidelity HOSS.

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.CE(Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science)