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

Linda M. Ottenstein

dblp:31/6474 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1979
—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
Empirical software engineering · 61% Software testing · 30% Software maintenance and evolution · 9%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing › software reliability
bug count estimation
0.011979
Quantitative Estimates of Debugging Requirements · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1979
Empirical software engineering
software metrics
0.011979
Quantitative Estimates of Debugging Requirements · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1979
Empirical software engineering › software metrics
software science metrics
0.011979
Quantitative Estimates of Debugging Requirements · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1979

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

software science metrics · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1979 Quantitative Estimates of Debugging Requirements
abstract
A major portion of the problems associated with software development might be blamed on the lack of appropriate tools to aid in the planning and testing phases of software projects. As one step towards solving this problem, this paper presents a model to estimate the number of bugs remaining in a system at the beginning of the testing and integration phases of development. The model, based on software science metrics, was tested using data currently available in the literature. Extensions to the model are also presented which can be used to obtain such estimates as the expected amount of personnel and computer time required for project validation.
Linda M. Ottenstein
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.1