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: "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.

Connected through hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "An argumentation-based approach to multiple criteria decision"):
  with members:
    (none)

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