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

Thomas Roy

dblp:28/1648 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2007
—ORCID · unresolved

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous 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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Requirements engineering and software design · 100%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Games and playful interaction · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Requirements engineering and software design
design patterns
0.112006
Evaluating pattern catalogs: the computer games experience · ICSE 2006
Games and playful interaction › digital gaming
computer games
0.012006
Evaluating pattern catalogs: the computer games experience · ICSE 2006

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

metrics · 0.1case study · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2007 ScriptEase: A generative/adaptive programming paradigm for game scripting
Maria Cutumisu, Curtis Onuczko, Matthew McNaughton, Thomas Roy, Jonathan Schaeffer 0001, Allan Schumacher, Jeff Siegel, Duane Szafron, Kevin Waugh, Mike Carbonaro, Harvey Duff, Stephanie Gillis
Sci. Comput. Program.4
2006 Evaluating pattern catalogs: the computer games experience
abstract
Patterns and pattern catalogs (pattern languages) have been proposed as a mechanism for re-use. Traditionally, patterns have been used to foster design re-use, and generative design patterns have been used to achieve both design and code re-use. In theory, a pattern catalog could be created and used to provide re-usable patterns within a project and across a group of related projects. This idea raises a natural question. How can we measure the effectiveness of a pattern catalog or compare the effectiveness of different pattern catalogs? In this paper, we define four metrics that can be used to measure the effectiveness of pattern catalogs. We illustrate these metrics by applying them to a case study that uses a pattern catalog of generative design patterns to generate scripting code for computer games. The metrics are general enough to assess any pattern catalog, independent of application domain or whether the patterns are generative or descriptive.
Maria Cutumisu, Curtis Onuczko, Duane Szafron, Jonathan Schaeffer 0001, Matthew McNaughton, Thomas Roy, Jeff Siegel, Mike Carbonaro
ICSE6
2005 Interactive Story Writing in the Classroom: Using Computer Games
Jonathan Schaeffer 0001, Mike Carbonaro, Duane Szafron, Maria Cutumisu, Matthew McNaughton, Curtis Onuczko, Thomas Roy, Stephanie Gillis, Sabrina Kratchmer
DiGRA Conference7