Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jussi Ronkainen
dblp:97/2963
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2003
0000-0001-8042-1160ORCID · corroborated
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
1 paper |
Requirements engineering and software design · 50% Empirical software engineering · 50% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Empirical software engineering
agile software development |
0.0 | 1 | 2003 | New Directions on Agile Methods: A Comparative Analysis · ICSE 2003 |
Requirements engineering and software design
software process |
0.0 | 1 | 2003 | New Directions on Agile Methods: A Comparative Analysis · ICSE 2003 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
comparative analysis · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | New Directions on Agile Methods: A Comparative AnalysisabstractAgile software development methods have caught the attention of software engineers and researchers worldwide. Scientific research is yet scarce. This paper reports results from a study, which aims to organize, analyze and make sense out of the dispersed field of agile software development methods. The comparative analysis is performed using the method's life-cycle coverage, project management support, type of practical guidance, fitness-for-use and empirical evidence as the analytical lenses. The results show that agile software development methods, without rationalization, cover certain/different phases of the software development life-cycle and most of them do not offer adequate support for project management. Yet, many methods still attempt to strive for universal solutions (as opposed to situation appropriate) and the empirical evidence is still very limited. Based on the results, new directions are suggested In principal, it is suggested to place emphasis on methodological quality - not method quantity. Pekka Abrahamsson, Juhani Warsta, Mikko Siponen, Jussi Ronkainen |
ICSE | 4 |
| 2003 | Software Development under Stringent Hardware Constraints: Do Agile Methods Have a Chance?
Jussi Ronkainen, Pekka Abrahamsson |
XP | 1 |
| 2002 | Characteristics of Process Improvement of Hardware-Related SW
Jussi Ronkainen, Jorma Taramaa, Arto Savuoja |
PROFES | 1 |