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

Rohit Takhar

dblp:219/1493 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—ORCID · unresolved

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-authorApplied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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.

Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computing education · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Debugging and program repair · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computing education
automated assessment
0.412019
Grading Uncompilable Programs · AAAI 2019
Debugging and program repair
error correction
0.412019
Grading Uncompilable Programs · AAAI 2019

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

syntax relaxation · 0.8program repair · 0.8machine learning · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2019 Grading Uncompilable Programs
abstract
Evaluators wish to test candidates on their ability to propose the correct algorithmic approach to solve programming problems. Recently, several automated systems for grading programs have been proposed, but none of them address uncompilable codes. We present the first approach to grade uncompilable codes and provide semantic feedback on them using machine learning. We propose two methods that allow us to derive informative semantic features from programs. One of this approach makes the program compilable by correcting errors, while the other relaxes syntax/grammar rules to help parse uncompilable codes. We compare the relative efficacy of these approaches towards grading. We finally combine them to build an algorithm which rivals the accuracy of experts in grading programs. Additionally, we show that the models learned for compilable codes can be reused for uncompilable codes. We present case studies, where companies are able to hire more efficiently by deploying our technology.
Rohit Takhar, Varun Aggarwal
AAAI1
2019 Grading emails and generating feedback
Abhishek Unnam, Rohit Takhar, Varun Aggarwal
EDM2