VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Kata Praditwong
dblp:13/4085
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2011
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 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 · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Mathematical optimization · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software maintenance and evolution › software modularization
software clustering |
0.1 | 1 | 2011 | Software Module Clustering as a Multi-Objective Search Problem · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2011 |
Software maintenance and evolution › software reengineering
software restructuring |
0.1 | 1 | 2011 | Software Module Clustering as a Multi-Objective Search Problem · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2011 |
Mathematical optimization
multi-objective optimization |
0.0 | 1 | 2011 | Software Module Clustering as a Multi-Objective Search Problem · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2011 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
multi-objective search · 0.2cohesion and coupling metrics · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | Software Module Clustering as a Multi-Objective Search ProblemabstractSoftware module clustering is the problem of automatically organizing software units into modules to improve program structure. There has been a great deal of recent interest in search-based formulations of this problem in which module boundaries are identified by automated search, guided by a fitness function that captures the twin objectives of high cohesion and low coupling in a single-objective fitness function. This paper introduces two novel multi-objective formulations of the software module clustering problem, in which several different objectives (including cohesion and coupling) are represented separately. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the multi-objective approach, a set of experiments was performed on 17 real-world module clustering problems. The results of this empirical study provide strong evidence to support the claim that the multi-objective approach produces significantly better solutions than the existing single-objective approach. Kata Praditwong, Mark Harman, Xin Yao 0001 |
IEEE Trans. Software Eng. | 1 |
| 2007 | How well do multi-objective evolutionary algorithms scale to large problemsabstractIn spite of large amount of research work in multi-objective evolutionary algorithms, most have evaluated their algorithms on problems with only two to four objectives. Little has been done to understand the performance of the multi-objective evolutionary algorithms on problems with a larger number of objectives. It is unclear whether the conclusions drawn from the experiments on problems with a small number of objectives could be generalised to those with a large number of objectives. In fact, some of our preliminary work [1] has indicated that such generalisation may not be possible. This paper first presents a comprehensive set of experimental studies, which show that the performance of multi-objective evolutionary algorithms, such as NSGA-II and SPEA2, deteriorates substantially as the number of objectives increases. NSGA-II, for example, did not even converge for problems with six or more objectives. This paper analyses why this happens and proposes several new methods to improve the convergence of NSGA-II for problems with a large number of objectives. The proposed methods categorise members of an archive into small groups (non-dominated solutions with or without domination), using dominance relationship between the new and existing members in the archive. New removal strategies are introduced. Our experimental results show that the proposed methods clearly outperform NSGA-II in terms of convergence. Kata Praditwong, Xin Yao 0001 |
IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation | 1 |