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

Kurtis Zimmerman

dblp:174/2025 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
—ORCID · none

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
Software maintenance and evolution · 100%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computing education · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software maintenance and evolution
code recommendation
0.212015
An Automated Framework for Recommending Program Elements to Novices (N) · ASE 2015
Computing education › programming education
programming education tools
0.112015
An Automated Framework for Recommending Program Elements to Novices (N) · ASE 2015

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

tree edit distance · 0.4graph matching · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2015 An Automated Framework for Recommending Program Elements to Novices (N)
abstract
Novice programmers often learn programming by implementing well-known algorithms. There are several challenges in the process. Recommendation systems in software currently focus on programmer productivity and ease of development. Teaching aides for such novice programmers based on recommendation systems still remain an under-explored area. In this paper, we present a general framework for recognizing the desired target for partially-written code and recommending a reliable series of edits to transform the input program into the target solution. Our code analysis is based on graph matching and tree edit algorithms. Our experimental results show that efficient graph comparison techniques can accurately match two portions of source code and produce an accurate set of source code edits. We provide details on implementation of our framework, which is developed as a plugin for Java in Eclipse IDE.
Kurtis Zimmerman, Chandan Raj Rupakheti
ASE1