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

Jan Hendrik Hausmann

dblp:16/6705 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
3as first author
0since 2021 · last 2006
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 4 · 3 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 · 64% Concurrent programming · 28% Program analysis · 8%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Concurrent programming › concurrency control
conflict detection
0.012002
Detection of conflicting functional requirements in a use case-driven approach: a static analysis technique based on graph transformation · ICSE 2002
Requirements engineering and software design
requirements analysis
0.012002
Detection of conflicting functional requirements in a use case-driven approach: a static analysis technique based on graph transformation · ICSE 2002
Requirements engineering and software design
use case modeling
0.012002
Detection of conflicting functional requirements in a use case-driven approach: a static analysis technique based on graph transformation · ICSE 2002
Requirements engineering and software design › model-driven engineering
graph transformation
0.012002
Detection of conflicting functional requirements in a use case-driven approach: a static analysis technique based on graph transformation · ICSE 2002
Program analysis
static analysis
0.012002
Detection of conflicting functional requirements in a use case-driven approach: a static analysis technique based on graph transformation · ICSE 2002

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

graph transformation · 0.0UML · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2006 Using UML Activities for System-on-Chip Design and Synthesis
Tim Schattkowsky, Jan Hendrik Hausmann, Gregor Engels
MoDELS2
2004 Model-based Discovery of Web Services
abstract
Web services are software components that can be discovered and employed at runtime using the Internet. Conflicting requirements towards the nature of these services can be identified. From a business perspective, Web services promise to enable the formation of ad-hoc cooperations on a global scale. From a technical perspective, a high degree of standardization and rigorous specifications are required to enable the automated integration of Web services. A suitable technology for Web services has to mediate these needs for flexibility and stability. In this paper a new approach to the description of Web service semantics is introduced. It is a visual approach based on the use of software models and graph transformations and allows for the description of innovative services while providing a precise matching concept. An implementation using current standards and tools is available.
Jan Hendrik Hausmann, Reiko Heckel, Marc Lohmann
ICWS1
2004 Dynamic Meta Modeling with time: Specifying the semantics of multimedia sequence diagrams
Jan Hendrik Hausmann, Reiko Heckel, Stefan Sauer 0001
Softw. Syst. Model.1
2002 Detection of conflicting functional requirements in a use case-driven approach: a static analysis technique based on graph transformation
abstract
In object-oriented software development, requirements of different stakeholders are often manifested in use case models which complement the static domain model by dynamic and functional requirements. In the course of development, these requirements are analyzed and integrated to produce a consistent overall requirements specification. Iterations of the model may be triggered by conflicts between requirements of different parties.However, due to the diversity, incompleteness, and informal nature, in particular of functional and dynamic requirements, such conflicts are difficult to find. Formal approaches to requirements engineering, often based on logic, attack these problems, but require highly specialized experts to write and reason about such specifications.In this paper, we propose a formal interpretation of use case models consisting of UML use case, activity, and collaboration diagrams. The formalization, which is based on concepts from the theory of graph transformation, allows to make precise the notions of conflict and dependency between functional requirements expressed by different use cases. Then, use case models can be statically analyzed, and conflicts or dependencies detected by the analysis can be communicated to the modeler by annotating the model.An implementation of the static analysis within a graph transformation tool is presented.
Jan Hendrik Hausmann, Reiko Heckel, Gabriele Taentzer
ICSE1