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: "memetic algorithms beat evolutionary algorithms on the class of hurdle problems"
  Abstract: Memetic algorithms are popular hybrid search heuristics that integrate local search into the search process of an evolutionary algorithm in order to combine the advantages of rapid exploitation and global optimisation. However, these algorithms are not well understood and the field is lacking a solid theoretical foundation that explains when and why memetic algorithms are effective.   We provide a rigorous runtime analysis of a simple memetic algorithm, the (1+1) MA, on the H urdle  problem class, a landscape class of tuneable difficulty that shows a "big valley structure", a characteristic feature of many hard problems from combinatorial optimisation. The only parameter of this class is the hurdle width w, which describes the length of fitness valleys that have to be overcome. We show that the (1+1) EA requires Θ(nw) expected function evaluations to find the optimum, whereas the (1+1) MA with best-improvement and first-improvement local search can find the optimum in Θ(n2 + n3/w2) and Θ(n3/w2) function evaluations, respectively. Surprisingly, while increasing the hurdle width makes the problem harder for evolutionary algorithms, the problem becomes easier for memetic algorithms. We discuss how these findings can explain and illustrate the success of memetic algorithms for problems with big valley structures.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "analysing the robustness of evolutionary algorithms to noise refined runtime bounds and an example where noise is beneficial"):
  with members:
    - "analysis of noisy evolutionary optimization when sampling fails"
    - "analyzing evolutionary optimization in noisy environments"
    - "general drift analysis with tail bounds"
    - "erratum simplified drift analysis for proving lower bounds in evolutionary computation"

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.NE(Neural and Evolutionary Computing)