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
Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert

Geereddy R. Reddy

dblp:07/243 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1987
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1

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 · 67% Software maintenance and evolution · 33%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering › software metrics
software complexity metrics		 0.011987
The Use of Software Complexity Metrics in Software Maintenance · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1987
Software maintenance and evolution
software maintenance		 0.011987
The Use of Software Complexity Metrics in Software Maintenance · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1987
Empirical software engineering
software metrics		 0.011987
The Use of Software Complexity Metrics in Software Maintenance · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1987

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

version analysis · 0.0empirical study · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1987 The Use of Software Complexity Metrics in Software Maintenance
abstract
This paper reports on a modest study which relates seven different software complexity metrics to the experience of maintenance activities performed on a medium size software system. Three different versions of the system that evolved over a period of three years were analyzed in this study. A major revision of the system, while still in its design phase, was also analyzed.
Dennis G. Kafura, Geereddy R. Reddy
 IEEE Trans. Software Eng.2