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

Sven Wenzel

dblp:20/4070 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
8ranked-venue papers
5as 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 · 6 · 4 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
2 papers
Requirements engineering and software design · 43% Empirical software engineering · 30% Software maintenance and evolution · 26%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering › mining software repositories
version history analysis
0.112008
Analyzing model evolution · ICSE 2008
Requirements engineering and software design › model-driven engineering › model management
model differencing
0.112007
Difference computation of large models · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2007
Software maintenance and evolution
software evolution
0.112007
Difference computation of large models · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2007
Requirements engineering and software design › model-driven engineering
model-driven development
0.012008
Analyzing model evolution · ICSE 2008
Requirements engineering and software design
model-driven engineering
0.012007
Difference computation of large models · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2007

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

fine-grained differencing · 0.1domain-specific language analysis · 0.1high-dimensional search tree · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2015 Restoring security of evolving software models using graph transformation
Jens Bürger 0001, Jan Jürjens, Sven Wenzel
Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf.3
2014 Unique identification of elements in evolving software models
Sven Wenzel
Softw. Syst. Model.1
2013 Ontology-based Analysis of Compliance and Regulatory Requirements of Business Processes
Thorsten Humberg, Christian Wessel, Daniel Poggenpohl, Sven Wenzel, Thomas Ruhroth, Jan Jürjens
CLOSER4
2012 Securing Processes for Outsourcing into the Cloud
Sven Wenzel, Christian Wessel, Thorsten Humberg, Jan Jürjens
CLOSER1
2009 Evolution analysis with animated and 3D-visualizations
abstract
Large software systems typically exist in many revisions. In order to analyze such systems, their evolution needs to be analyzed, too. The main challenge in this context is to cope with the large volume of data and to visualize the system and its evolution as a whole. This paper presents an approach for visualizing the evolution of large-scale systems which uses three different, tightly integrated visualizations that are 3-dimensional and/or animated and which support different analysis tasks. According to a first empirical study, all tasks are supported well by at least one visualization.
Sven Wenzel, Jens Koch, Udo Kelter, Andreas Kolb 0001
ICSM1
2008 Analyzing model evolution
abstract
Model-driven development leads to development processes in which a large number of different versions of models are produced. We present FAME, a tool environment which enables fine-grained analysis of the version history of a model. The tool is generic in the sense that it can work with various model types including UML and domain-specific languages.
Sven Wenzel, Udo Kelter
ICSE1
2007 Tracing Model Elements
abstract
In model-driven engineering developers work mainly or only with models, which exist in many versions. This paper presents an approach to trace single model elements or groups of elements within a version history of a model. It also offers analysis capabilities such as detection of logical coupling between model elements. The approach uses a differencing algorithm blown as SiDiff to identify similar elements in different versions of a model. SiDiff is highly configurable and thus our tracing approach can be adapted to all diagram types of the UML and to a large set of domain specific languages. The approach has been implemented as an Eclipse plug-in that visualizes all relevant information about the traces and it allows developers to interactively explore details. It has been evaluated by several groups of test persons; they considered most of the functions of the tool to be very useful.
Sven Wenzel, Hermann Hutter, Udo Kelter
ICSM1
2007 Difference computation of large models
abstract
Modern software engineering practices lead to large models which exist in many versions. Version management systems should offer a service to compare, and possibly merge, these models. The computation of a difference between large models is a big challenge; current algorithms are too inefficient here. We present a new technique for computing differences between models. In practical tests, this technique has been an order of magnitude faster than currently known algorithms. The main idea is to use a high-dimensional search tree for efficiently finding similar model elements. Individual elements are mapped onto a vector of numerical values using a collection of metrics for models and a numerical representation of the names which occur in a model.
Christoph Treude, Stefan Berlik, Sven Wenzel, Udo Kelter
ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE3