Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
James C. Widmaier
dblp:36/3579 · also Jim Widmaier
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2002
—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 testing · 61% Requirements engineering and software design · 30% Compilers and program optimization · 9% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing › non-functional testing
reliability testing |
0.0 | 1 | 2000 | Producing more reliable software: mature software engineering process vs. state-of-the-art technology? · ICSE 2000 |
Requirements engineering and software design
software process |
0.0 | 1 | 2000 | Producing more reliable software: mature software engineering process vs. state-of-the-art technology? · ICSE 2000 |
Software testing
statistical testing |
0.0 | 1 | 2000 | Producing more reliable software: mature software engineering process vs. state-of-the-art technology? · ICSE 2000 |
Compilers and program optimization
code generation |
0.0 | 1 | 2000 | Producing more reliable software: mature software engineering process vs. state-of-the-art technology? · ICSE 2000 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
statistical testing · 0.0process metrics · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2002 | Producing reliable software: an experiment
Carol S. Smidts, James C. Widmaier |
J. Syst. Softw. | 3 |
| 2000 | Producing more reliable software: mature software engineering process vs. state-of-the-art technology?abstractA customer of high assurance software recently sponsored a software engineering experiment in which a real-time software system was developed concurrently by two popular software development methodologies. One company specialized in the state-of-the-practice waterfall method rated at a Capability Maturity Model Level 4. A second developer employed his mathematically based formal method with automatic code generation. As specified in separate contracts, C++ code plus development documentation and process and product metrics (errors) were to be delivered. Both companies were given identical functional specs and agreed to a generous and equal cost, schedule, and explicit functional reliability objectives. At conclusion of the experiment an independent third party determined through extensive statistical testing that neither methodology was able to meet the user's reliability objectives within cost and schedule constraints. The metrics collected revealed the strengths and weaknesses of each methodology and why they were not able to reach customer reliability objectives. This paper will explore the specification for the system under development, the two competing development processes, the products and metrics captured during development, the analysis tools and testing techniques by the third party, and the results of a reliability and process analysis. James C. Widmaier |
ICSE | 1 |
| 1996 | Panel: Deploying SRE in Your Organization or CompanyabstractThe introduction of some new practices into software organizations can be trying, arduous tasks. Software Reliability is a practice that fits in this category. A well thought out strategy needs to be used to successjidly and rapidly install Software Reliability Engineering (SRE) in a software organization. The successfid practitioner must be prepared to sell SRE, retain consultants, train project personnel, demonstrate it's effectiveness, provide measurements of the results, and advertise them. This panel, composed of four members with practical industry experience, will examine all of these areas as it explores the question: "What are the steps for bringing SRE into my organization or company?" Adrian A. Dolinsky, Dave Rentschler, Sue Steele, John A. Teresinski, James C. Widmaier |
ISSRE | 5 |