Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

L. J. Chmura

dblp:03/3702 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1990
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 44% Software maintenance and evolution · 44% Requirements engineering and software design · 13%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software maintenance and evolution
code change analysis
0.011990
Evaluating Software Design Processes by Analyzing Change Data Over Time · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1990
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories
0.011990
Evaluating Software Design Processes by Analyzing Change Data Over Time · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1990
Requirements engineering and software design › software process
software design process
0.011990
Evaluating Software Design Processes by Analyzing Change Data Over Time · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1990

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

time-based analysis · 0.0correlation analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1990 Evaluating Software Design Processes by Analyzing Change Data Over Time
abstract
An analysis is presented of early design and code change data from the software cost reduction (SCR) project, a well-reported effort conducted at the US Naval Research Laboratory from 1978 to 1988. The analyses are mostly time-based studies of the change data and relationships between the data and SCR personnel activity data. Some analyses of the change data show patterns consistent with a major goal of the SCR project: the design and development of easy-to-change software. Specifically, most changes took a day or less to uncover and resolve; the majority of changes updated at most one module. Moreover, these percentages remained fairly stable. No positive relationship appeared between error-correction effort and the number of days that an error remained in the SCR design documentation. Other analyses suggest that consistency may have been temporary. For example, the analyses suggest a stepwise growth in average change effort, and an increasing percentage of changes resulted in module interface updates. Certain specific ratios between SCR change data and personnel activity data may be possible indicators of design incompleteness.>
L. J. Chmura, Anthony F. Norcio, T. J. Wicinski
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.1
1988 Designing complex software
Anthony F. Norcio, L. J. Chmura
J. Syst. Softw.2