VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Thomas G. Harbich
dblp:40/3748
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2001
0000-0002-9151-4052ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2
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 · 88% Software testing · 12% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software maintenance and evolution › software inspection
reading techniques |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | An Internally Replicated Quasi-Experimental Comparison of Checklist and Perspective-Based Reading of Code Documents · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2001 |
Software maintenance and evolution
software inspection |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | An Internally Replicated Quasi-Experimental Comparison of Checklist and Perspective-Based Reading of Code Documents · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2001 |
Software maintenance and evolution › code review
code inspection |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | An Internally Replicated Quasi-Experimental Comparison of Checklist and Perspective-Based Reading of Code Documents · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2001 |
Software testing
fault detection |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | An Internally Replicated Quasi-Experimental Comparison of Checklist and Perspective-Based Reading of Code Documents · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2001 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
quasi-experiment · 0.0meta-analysis · 0.0internal replication · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | An Internally Replicated Quasi-Experimental Comparison of Checklist and Perspective-Based Reading of Code DocumentsabstractThe basic premise of software inspections is that they detect and remove defects before they propagate to subsequent development phases where their detection and correction cost escalates. To exploit their full potential, software inspections must call for a close and strict examination of the inspected artifact. For this, reading techniques for defect detection may be helpful since these techniques tell inspection participants what to look for and, more importantly, how to scrutinize a software artifact in a systematic manner. Recent research efforts investigated the benefits of scenario-based reading techniques. A major finding has been that these techniques help inspection teams find more defects than existing state-of-the-practice approaches, such as, ad-hoc or checklist-based reading (CBR). We experimentally compare one scenario-based reading technique, namely, perspective-based reading (PBR), for defect detection in code documents with the more traditional CBR approach. The comparison was performed in a series of three studies, as a quasi experiment and two internal replications, with a total of 60 professional software developers at Bosch Telecom GmbH. Meta-analytic techniques were applied to analyze the data. Oliver Laitenberger, Khaled El Emam, Thomas G. Harbich |
IEEE Trans. Software Eng. | 3 |
| 2000 | The application of subjective estimates of effectiveness to controlling software inspections
Khaled El Emam, Oliver Laitenberger, Thomas G. Harbich |
J. Syst. Softw. | 3 |