Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Joachim Kurz
dblp:88/11455
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2014
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2Software 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 |
Software maintenance and evolution · 100% | |
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
User interface design and tools · 100% |
Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software maintenance and evolution
program comprehension |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | How tools in IDEs shape developers' navigation behavior · CHI 2013 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
predictive modeling · 0.3controlled experiment · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | How live coding affects developers' coding behaviorabstractWe report on the behavior of developers working with a live coding environment, which provides information about a program's execution immediately after each change to the source code. The live coding environment we used shows information about each individual source code line, e.g., changed variable values or truth values of conditions. In comparison to developers working in a non-live environment, those working live found and fixed bugs they introduced significantly faster. Further, working live encouraged developers to switch between editing and debugging phases more frequently. Jan-Peter Krämer, Joachim Kurz, Thorsten Karrer, Jan O. Borchers |
VL/HCC | 2 |
| 2013 | How tools in IDEs shape developers' navigation behaviorabstractUnderstanding source code is crucial for successful software maintenance, and navigating the call graph is especially helpful to understand source code [12]. We compared maintenance performance across four different development environments: an IDE without any call graph exploration tool, a Call Hierarchy tool as found in Eclipse, and the tools Stacksplorer [7]and Blaze [11]. Using any of the call graph exploration tools more developers could solve certain maintenance tasks correctly. Only Stacksplorer and Blaze, however, were also able to decrease task completion times, although the Call Hierarchy offers access to a larger part of the call graph. To investigate if this result was caused by a change in navigation behavior between the tools, we used a set of predictive models to create formally comparable descriptions of programmer navigation. The results suggest that the decrease in task completion times has been caused by Stacksplorer and Blaze promoting call graph navigation more than the Call Hierarchy tool. Jan-Peter Krämer, Thorsten Karrer, Joachim Kurz, Moritz Wittenhagen, Jan O. Borchers |
CHI | 3 |
| 2012 | Blaze
Jan-Peter Krämer, Joachim Kurz, Thorsten Karrer, Jan O. Borchers |
ICSE | 2 |