human: Given a hyperedge-centered hypergraph: <hypergraph>, where the center hyperedge groups authors who co-authored the same paper.

Details of the hypergraph:
Center hyperedge (induced by source paper "On the qualitative comparison of sets of positive and negative affects"):
  Abstract: Decisions can be assessed by sets of positive and negative arguments — the problem is then to compare these sets. Studies in psychology have shown that the scale of evaluation of decisions should then be considered as bipolar. The second characteristic of the problem we are interested in is the qualitative nature of the decision process — decisions are often made on the basis of an ordinal ranking of the arguments rather than on a genuine numerical evaluation of their degrees of attractiveness or rejection. In this paper, we present and axiomatically characterize two methods based on possibilistic order of magnitude reasoning that are capable of handling positive and negative affects. They are extensions of the maximin and maximax criteria to the bipolar case. More decisive rules are also proposed, capturing both the Pareto principle and the idea of order of magnitude reasoning.

Includes members:
  Member "An argumentation-based approach to multiple criteria decision":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      (none)

Question: Please tell me which research area the co-authored paper (i.e., the source paper of the center hyperedge) belongs to. The 4 classes are: Computer science, Mathematics, Engineering, Economics, Psychology, Business. Directly output the class name.

gpt: Computer science