EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Guangyao Weng
dblp:227/7144
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Computer networks · 2 · 1 since 2021
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 |
Empirical software engineering · 92% Software maintenance and evolution · 8% | |
| Network and information security
2 papers |
Web and mobile security · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Web and mobile security
mobile advertising |
0.8 | 2 | 2021 | MAdLens: Investigating Into Android In-App Ad Practice at API Granularity · IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2021 An Investigation into Android In-App Ad Practice: Implications for App Developers · INFOCOM 2018 |
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories |
0.8 | 2 | 2021 | MAdLens: Investigating Into Android In-App Ad Practice at API Granularity · IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2021 An Investigation into Android In-App Ad Practice: Implications for App Developers · INFOCOM 2018 |
Empirical software engineering › mining software repositories
mobile app analysis |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | An Investigation into Android In-App Ad Practice: Implications for App Developers · INFOCOM 2018 |
Software maintenance and evolution › software ecosystems
third-party libraries |
0.1 | 1 | 2018 | An Investigation into Android In-App Ad Practice: Implications for App Developers · INFOCOM 2018 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
static analysis · 1.7ad type classification · 1.0API analysis · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | MAdLens: Investigating Into Android In-App Ad Practice at API GranularityabstractIn-app advertising has served as the major revenue source for millions of app developers in the mobile Internet ecosystem. Ad networks play an important role in app monetization by providing third-party libraries for developers to choose and embed into their apps. Various ad mediations help developers manage all of the ad libraries used in apps to show the best available ad among received ads from different ad network servers. However, developers lack guidelines on how to choose from hundreds of ad networks or ad mediations and various ad features to maximize their revenues without hurting the user experience of their apps. Our work aims to provide app developers guidelines on the selection of ad networks, ad mediations, and ad placement by observing current common practices. To this end, we investigate 838 unique APIs from 207 ad networks which are extracted from 277,616 Android apps, develop a methodology of ad type classification based on UI interaction and behavior, and perform a large scale measurement study of in-app ads with static analysis techniques at the API granularity. We found that developers have more choices about ad networks than several years before. Most developers are conservative about ad placement and about 77 percent of the apps contain at most one ad library. Besides, the likeliness of an app containing ads depends on the app category to which it belongs. Furthermore, we propose a terminology and classify mobile ads into five ad types: Embedded, Popup, Notification, Offerwall, and Floating. Also, our research shows that it is a better solution for developers to integrate ad libraries with ad mediation feature in their apps because it may avoid bad ratings and improve user experience. And in our findings, more than 95 percent of embedded, popup, notification, and offer ads locate in the zero activity (main activity), the first activity and the second activity of Android apps. More interestingly, developers tend to put high aggressive ads on activities which need deeper user interaction. Our research is the first to reveal the preference of both developers and users for ad networks, ad mediation feature and ad types. Ling Jin 0005, Boyuan He, Guangyao Weng, Haitao Xu 0002, Yan Chen 0004, Guanyu Guo |
IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. | 3 |
| 2018 | An Investigation into Android In-App Ad Practice: Implications for App DevelopersabstractIn-app advertising has served as the major revenue source for millions of app developers in the mobile Internet ecosystem. Ad networks play an important role in app monetization by providing third-party libraries for developers to choose and embed into their apps. However, developers lack guidelines on how to choose from hundreds of ad networks and various ad features to maximize their revues without hurting the user experience of their apps. Our work aims to uncover the best practice and provide app developers guidelines on ad network selection and ad placement. To this end, we investigate 697 unique APIs from 164 ad networks which are extracted from 277,616 Android apps, develop a methodology of ad type classification based on UI interaction and behavior, and perform a large scale measurement study of in-app ads with static analysis techniques at the API granularity. We found that developers have more choices about ad networks than several years before. Most developers are conservative about ad placement and about 71% apps contain at most one ad library. In addition, the likeliness of an app containing ads depends on the app category to which it belongs. The app categories featuring young audience usually contain the most ad libraries maybe because of the ad-tolerance characteristic of young people. Furthermore, we propose a terminology and classify mobile ads into five ad types: Embedded, Popup, Notification, Offerwall, and Floating. We found that embedded and popup ad types are popular with apps in nearly all categories. Our results also suggest that developers should embed at most 6 ad libraries into an app, which otherwise would anger the app users. Also, a developer should use at most one ad network when her app is still at the initial stage and could start using more (2 or 3) ad networks when the app becomes popular. Our research is the first to reveal the preference of both developers and users for ad networks and ad types. Boyuan He, Haitao Xu 0002, Ling Jin 0005, Guanyu Guo, Yan Chen 0004, Guangyao Weng |
INFOCOM | 6 |