EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Markus Riedl-Ehrenleitner
dblp:151/4445
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 4 · 1 first-authorApplied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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 |
Software maintenance and evolution · 50% Requirements engineering and software design · 50% |
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
consistency checking |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Efficient detection of inconsistencies in a multi-developer engineering environment · ASE 2016 |
Software maintenance and evolution › software configuration management
consistency management |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Efficient detection of inconsistencies in a multi-developer engineering environment · ASE 2016 |
Software maintenance and evolution
artifact consistency |
0.1 | 1 | 2016 | Efficient detection of inconsistencies in a multi-developer engineering environment · ASE 2016 |
Requirements engineering and software design
software architecture |
0.1 | 1 | 2016 | Efficient detection of inconsistencies in a multi-developer engineering environment · ASE 2016 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
consistency checking · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | Towards efficient risk-identification in risk-driven development processesabstractToday's software projects face an environment of continuous change and evolution. In order to handle evolution in development environments (e.g., requirements, technology) effectively, over the last decades well-established development processes have been adapted significantly and new process models have been proposed. For example, there is a wide range of agile processes which are risk-driven and which not only handle but embrace frequent change. However, agile and risk-driven processes still suffer from a lack of support for automatic and generic identification of certain risks. Andreas Demuth, Markus Riedl-Ehrenleitner, Roland Kretschmer, Alexander Egyed |
ICSSP | 2 |
| 2016 | Efficient detection of inconsistencies in a multi-developer engineering environmentabstractSoftware developers work concurrently on different kinds of development artifacts such as requirements, architecture, design, or source code. To keep these development artifacts consistent, developers have a wide range of consistency checking approaches available. However, most existing consistency checkers work best in context of single tools and they are not well suited when development artifacts are distributed among different tools and are being modified concurrently by many developers. Andreas Demuth, Markus Riedl-Ehrenleitner, Alexander Egyed |
ASE | 2 |
| 2016 | Co-evolution of metamodels and models through consistent change propagation
Andreas Demuth, Markus Riedl-Ehrenleitner, Roberto Erick Lopez-Herrejon, Alexander Egyed |
J. Syst. Softw. | 2 |
| 2014 | Towards Model-and-Code Consistency CheckingabstractIn model-driven engineering, design models allow for efficient designing without considering implementation details. Still, it is crucial that design models and source code are in sync. Unfortunately, both artifacts do evolve frequently and concurrently which causes them to drift apart over time. Even though technologies such as model-to-code transformations are commonly employed to keep design models and source code synchronized, those technologies typically still require unguided, manual adaptations. Hence, they do not effectively prevent inconsistencies from being introduced. In this paper, we outline a novel approach for checking consistency between design models and source code. Our approach aims at detecting inconsistencies instantly and informing developers about a project's consistency status live during development. Markus Riedl-Ehrenleitner, Andreas Demuth, Alexander Egyed |
COMPSAC | 1 |