human: Given a node-centered hypergraph: <hypergraph>, where nodes represent authors and hyperedges represent groups of authors who co-authored the same paper.

Details of the hypergraph:
Center node: "Rationales and argument moves"
  Abstract: We discuss five kinds of representations of rationales and provide a formal account of how they can alter disputation. The formal model of disputation is derived from recent work in argument. The five kinds of rationales are compilation rationales, which can be represented without assuming domain-knowledge (such as utilities) beyond that normally required for argument. The principal thesis is that such rationales can be analyzed in a framework of argument not too different from what AI already has. The result is a formal understanding of rationales, a partial taxonomy, and a foundation for computer programs that represent and reason with rationales.

The five kinds of rationales are as follows: (c)ompression and (s)pecialization, which yield rules, and (d)isputation, which yields a decision. These are modeled as potentially changing the focus of the dispute. Then there are (f)it, a rationale for rules, and (r)esolution, a rationale for decisions. These cannot be modeled as simply; they force disputation to a meta-level, at least temporarily.

The paper first discusses each kind of rationale in the abstract. Then it produces a model of dispute in which the simpler rationales can be analyzed. Formal examples are given. The model is augmented to allow analysis of the more difficult rationales. Examples are again given. The discussion is not intended to be strictly mathematical; rather, it aims to use formal methods to illuminate and provide framework for future interpretation and implementation.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "How to reason defeasibly"):
  with members:
    - "A general framework for reason maintenance"
    - "Deontic logic as founded on nonmonotonic logic"

Connected through hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities"):
  with members:
    - "Analysis of the talmudic argumentum a fortiori inference rule (kal vachomer) using matrix abduction"
    - "Preference-based argumentation: Arguments supporting multiple values"
    - "Towards a Common Framework for Dialectical Proof Procedures in Abstract Argumentation"

Question: Please tell me which research area the center author belongs to. The 4 classes are: Computer science, Mathematics, Engineering, Economics, Psychology, Business. Directly output the class name.

gpt: Computer science