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

Lorri R. Paulsen

dblp:75/1571 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1985
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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
Empirical software engineering · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
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 defect prediction
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 · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
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.4