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

Nili Itzik

dblp:146/4550 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 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
Requirements engineering and software design · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Requirements engineering and software design › software product lines
feature models
0.212016
Variability Analysis of Requirements: Considering Behavioral Differences and Reflecting Stakeholders' Perspectives · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2016
Requirements engineering and software design
software product lines
0.212016
Variability Analysis of Requirements: Considering Behavioral Differences and Reflecting Stakeholders' Perspectives · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2016

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

semantic analysis · 0.2ontological analysis · 0.2latent semantic analysis · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2016 Variability Analysis of Requirements: Considering Behavioral Differences and Reflecting Stakeholders' Perspectives
abstract
Adoption of Software Product Line Engineering (SPLE) to support systematic reuse of software-related artifacts within product families is challenging, time-consuming and error-prone. Analyzing the variability of existing artifacts needs to reflect different perspectives and preferences of stakeholders in order to facilitate decisions in SPLE adoption. Considering that requirements drive many development methods and activities, we introduce an approach to analyze variability of behaviors as presented in functional requirements. The approach, called semantic and ontological variability analysis (SOVA), uses ontological and semantic considerations to automatically analyze differences between initial states (preconditions), external events (triggers) that act on the system, and final states (post-conditions) of behaviors. The approach generates feature diagrams typically used in SPLE to model variability. Those diagrams are organized according to perspective profiles, reflecting the needs and preferences of the potential stakeholders for given tasks. We conducted an empirical study to examine the usefulness of the approach by comparing it to an existing tool which is mainly based on a latent semantic analysis measurement. SOVA appears to create outputs that are more comprehensible in significantly shorter times. These results demonstrate SOVA's potential to allow for flexible, behavior-oriented variability analysis.
Nili Itzik, Iris Reinhartz-Berger, Yair Wand
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.1
2014 Analyzing Variability of Software Product Lines Using Semantic and Ontological Considerations
Iris Reinhartz-Berger, Nili Itzik, Yair Wand
CAiSE2