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

Tze-Jie Yu

dblp:35/969 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 1988
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 2 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
Empirical software engineering · 64% Software testing · 18% Software maintenance and evolution · 18%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering
software defect prediction
0.021988
An Analysis of Several Software Defect Models · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988
Identifying Error-Prone Software - An Empirical Study · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1985
Software maintenance and evolution › software quality assurance › defect analysis
defect estimation
0.011988
An Analysis of Several Software Defect Models · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988
Software testing
software reliability
0.011988
An Analysis of Several Software Defect Models · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988
Empirical software engineering › software defect prediction
fault-prone component identification
0.011985
Identifying Error-Prone Software - An Empirical Study · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1985
Empirical software engineering › software metrics
product and process metrics
0.011985
Identifying Error-Prone Software - An Empirical Study · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1985
Empirical software engineering
software metrics
0.011985
Identifying Error-Prone Software - An Empirical Study · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1985

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

correlation analysis · 0.0statistical modeling · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1988 SMDC: An interactive software metrics data collection and analysis system
Tze-Jie Yu, Brian A. Nejmeh, Hubert E. Dunsmore, Vincent Y. Shen
J. Syst. Softw.1
1988 An Analysis of Several Software Defect Models
abstract
Results are presented of an analysis of several defect models using data collected from two large commercial projects. Traditional models typically use either program matrices (i.e. measurements from software products) or testing time or combinations of these as independent variables. The limitations of such models have been well-documented. The models considered use the number of defects detected in the earlier phases of the development process as the independent variable. This number can be used to predict the number of defects to be detected later, even in modified software products. A strong correlation between the number of earlier defects and that of later ones was found. Using this relationship, a mathematical model was derived which may be used to estimate the number of defects remaining in software. This defect model may also be used to guide software developers in evaluating the effectiveness of the software development and testing processes.>
Tze-Jie Yu, Vincent Y. Shen, Hubert E. Dunsmore
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.1
1985 Identifying Error-Prone Software - An Empirical Study
abstract
A major portion of the effort expended in developing commercial software today is associated with program testing. Schedule and/ or resource constraints frequently require that testing be conducted so as to uncover the greatest number of errors possible in the time allowed. In this paper we describe a study undertaken to assess the potential usefulness of various product-and process-related measures in identifying error-prone software. Our goal was to establish an empirical basis for the efficient utilization of limited testing resources using objective, measurable criteria. Through a detailed analysis of three software products and their error discovery histories, we have found simple metrics related to the amount of data and the structural complexity of programs to be of value for this purpose.
Vincent Y. Shen, Tze-Jie Yu, Stephen M. Thebaut, Lorri R. Paulsen
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.2