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

Steven E. Condon

dblp:37/3686 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
0as 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 · 4

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
3 papers
Software maintenance and evolution · 49% Requirements engineering and software design · 42% Software testing · 6%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Requirements engineering and software design › component-based software
COTS selection
0.012000
Investigating and improving a COTS-based software development · ICSE 2000
Requirements engineering and software design
requirements definition
0.012000
Investigating and improving a COTS-based software development · ICSE 2000
Software maintenance and evolution › software evolution
corrective maintenance
0.011997
Characterizing and Modeling the Cost of Rework in a Library of Reusable Software Components · ICSE 1997
Software maintenance and evolution › software reuse
reusable software components
0.011997
Characterizing and Modeling the Cost of Rework in a Library of Reusable Software Components · ICSE 1997
Software maintenance and evolution
software reuse
0.011997
Characterizing and Modeling the Cost of Rework in a Library of Reusable Software Components · ICSE 1997
Software testing
integration testing
0.012000
Investigating and improving a COTS-based software development · ICSE 2000
Requirements engineering and software design › software process
software process modeling
0.011996
Understanding and Predicting the Process of Software Maintenance Release · ICSE 1996

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

case study · 0.0classification model · 0.0c4.5 · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2002 COTS-based software development: Processes and open issues
Maurizio Morisio, Carolyn B. Seaman, Victor R. Basili, Amy T. Parra, Steve E. Kraft, Steven E. Condon
J. Syst. Softw.6
2000 Investigating and improving a COTS-based software development
abstract
The work described in this paper is an investigation of COTS-based software development within a particular NASA environment, with an emphasis on the processes used. Fifteen projects using a COTS-based approach were studied and their actual process was documented. This process is evaluated to identify essential differences in comparison to traditional software development. The main differences, and the activities for which projects require more guidance, are requirements definition and COTS selection, high level design, integration and testing.
Maurizio Morisio, Carolyn B. Seaman, Amy T. Parra, Victor R. Basili, Steve E. Kraft, Steven E. Condon
ICSE6
1997 Characterizing and Modeling the Cost of Rework in a Library of Reusable Software Components
abstract
In this paper we characterize and model the cost of rework in a Component Factory (CF) organization.A CF is responsible for developing and packaging reusable software components.Data was collected on corrective maintenance activities for the Generalized Support Software reuse asset library located at the Flight Dynamics Division of NASA's GSFC.We then constructed a predictive model of the cost of rework using the C4.5 system for generating a logical classification model.The predictor variables for the model are measures of internal software product attributes.The model demonstrates good prediction accuracy, and can be used by managers to allocate resources for corrective maintenance activities.Furthermore, we used the model to generate proscriptive coding guidelines to improve programming practices so that the cost of rework can be reduced in the future.The general approach we have used is applicable to other environments.
Victor R. Basili, Steven E. Condon, Khaled El Emam, Robert B. Hendrick, Walcélio L. Melo
ICSE2
1996 Understanding and Predicting the Process of Software Maintenance Release
Victor R. Basili, Lionel C. Briand, Steven E. Condon, Yong-Mi Kim, Walcélio L. Melo, Jon D. Valett
ICSE3