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

Benjamin Rogers

dblp:116/6630 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2012
—ORCID · conflict

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

Software 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
Requirements engineering and software design · 50% Empirical software engineering · 50%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Requirements engineering and software design › design rationale
design rationale extraction
0.112012
Exploring techniques for rationale extraction from existing documents · ICSE 2012
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories
0.112012
Exploring techniques for rationale extraction from existing documents · ICSE 2012

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

text mining · 0.1parsing · 0.1linguistic features · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2012 Exploring techniques for rationale extraction from existing documents
abstract
The rationale for a software system captures the designers' and developers' intent behind the decisions made during its development. This information has many potential uses but is typically not captured explicitly. This paper describes an initial investigation into the use of text mining and parsing techniques for identifying rationale from existing documents. Initial results indicate that the use of linguistic features results in better precision but significantly lower recall than using text mining.
Benjamin Rogers, James Gung, Yechen Qiao, Janet E. Burge
ICSE1