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

Stephen B. Ornburn

dblp:17/250 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 1993
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 2 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
Program synthesis and code generation · 62% Software maintenance and evolution · 19% Requirements engineering and software design · 19%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Requirements engineering and software design › software architecture
component-based software engineering
0.011993
Building, Modifying and Using Component Generators · ICSE 1993
Software maintenance and evolution
software reuse
0.011993
Building, Modifying and Using Component Generators · ICSE 1993
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1993 Building, Modifying and Using Component Generators
Stephen B. Ornburn, Richard J. LeBlanc
ICSE1
1992 Reverse engineering: resolving conflicts between expected and actual software designs
abstract
A real-time embedded system was the subject of a series of experiments in reverse engineering. These experiments used a method of reverse engineering, called synchronized refinement, that analyzes a program, describing its behavior in the vocabulary of the application domain and its structure in terms of design decisions. The results provide insight into the role of domain knowledge in this type of analysis, together with the tools used in the detailed analysis of code. The experiments, which included the redesign of a component and the diagnosis of a critical software failure, showed that the real work of a software maintenance is in resolving apparent inconsistencies between the expectations that have been derived from domain knowledge and the facts that have been uncovered by applying reverse engineering tools to the software.>
Stephen B. Ornburn, Spencer Rugaber
ICSM1