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

Toshifumi Tanaka

dblp:04/5412 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1996
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 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
Software maintenance and evolution · 50% Empirical software engineering · 50%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering › software engineering research methodology
industrial case study
0.011995
Improvement of Software Process by Process Description and Benefit Estimation · ICSE 1995
Software maintenance and evolution
software process improvement
0.011995
Improvement of Software Process by Process Description and Benefit Estimation · ICSE 1995

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

process modeling · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1996 Analysis of Software Process Improvement Experience Using the Project Visibility Index
abstract
Based on the capability maturity model (CMM), process improvement at OMRON, a Japanese microprocessor manufacturer, increased project predictability in three ways: accuracy, variability, and performance. The authors use the project visibility index (PVI) and other measurements to quantitatively demonstrate this. Qualitative analysis of how and why OMRON achieved higher project visibility and increases in the QCD (quality, cost, and delivery on time) factors are supported with data on review-effort ratios and productivity. They identify factors directly affected by high project visibility.
Keishi Sakamoto, Naoki Niihara, Toshifumi Tanaka, Kumiyo Nakakoji, Kouichi Kishida
APSEC3
1995 Improvement of Software Process by Process Description and Benefit Estimation
abstract
This paper describes an actual experience of software process improvement at OMRON corporation.posed procedure are proven to be effective for reclucing the development effort at OM RON corporation.
Toshifumi Tanaka, Keishi Sakamoto, Shinji Kusumoto, Ken-ichi Matsumoto, Tohru Kikuno
ICSE1
1995 Analysis of review's effectiveness based on software metrics
abstract
The paper statistically analyzes the relationship between review and software quality and the relationship between review and productivity, utilizing software metrics on 36 actual projects executed in the OMRON Corporation from 1992 to 1994. Firstly, by examining the relationship between review effort and field quality (the number of faults after delivery) of each project, and the relationship between the number of faults detected in review and field quality of each project, we reasoned that: (1) greater review effort helps to increase field quality (decrease the number of faults after delivery); (2) source code review is more effective in order to increase field quality than design review; (3) if more than 10% of total design and programming effort is spent on review, one can achieve a quite stable field quality. We noticed that no relevant effects were recognized in productivity (LOC/staff month) with respect to a review rate of up to 20%. As a result of the analysis above, we recommended that 15% of review effort is a suitable percentage to use as a guideline for our software project management.
Yasunari Takagi, Toshifumi Tanaka, Naoki Niihara, Keishi Sakamoto, Shinji Kusumoto, Tohru Kikuno
ISSRE2