Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Michael Deutsch 0002
dblp:15/3754-2
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2001
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1
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 · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Requirements engineering and software design › inconsistency management
conflict resolution |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | Applying WinWin to Quality Requirements: A Case Study · ICSE 2001 |
Requirements engineering and software design › non-functional requirements
quality requirements |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | Applying WinWin to Quality Requirements: A Case Study · ICSE 2001 |
Requirements engineering and software design
requirements elicitation |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | Applying WinWin to Quality Requirements: A Case Study · ICSE 2001 |
Requirements engineering and software design › requirements elicitation
stakeholder analysis |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | Applying WinWin to Quality Requirements: A Case Study · ICSE 2001 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
statistical analysis · 0.0case study · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | Applying WinWin to Quality Requirements: A Case StudyabstractDescribes the application of the WinWin paradigm to identify and resolve conflicts in a series of real-client, student-developer digital library projects. The paper is based on a case study of the statistical analysis of 15 projects and an in-depth analysis of one representative project. These analyses focus on the conflict resolution process, stakeholders' roles and their relationships to quality artifacts, and tool effectiveness. We show that stakeholders tend to accept satisfactory rather than optimal resolutions. Users and customers are more proactive in stating win conditions, whereas developers are more active in working toward resolutions. Further, we suggest that knowledge-based automated aids have potential to significantly enhance process effectiveness and efficiency. Finally, we conclude that such processes and tools have theoretical and practical implications in the quest for better software requirements elicitation. Hoh Peter In, Barry W. Boehm, Thomas Lee Rodgers, Michael Deutsch 0002 |
ICSE | 4 |