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

Jeffrey J. Thuss

dblp:17/4553 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1989
—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
Software maintenance and evolution · 39% Requirements engineering and software design · 30% Program analysis · 30%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Requirements engineering and software design › modularity
module cohesion
0.011989
The Relationship between Slices and Module Cohesion · ICSE 1989
Software maintenance and evolution
program comprehension
0.011989
The Relationship between Slices and Module Cohesion · ICSE 1989
Program analysis › static analysis
program slicing
0.011989
The Relationship between Slices and Module Cohesion · ICSE 1989
Software maintenance and evolution
software modularity
0.011989
The Relationship between Slices and Module Cohesion · ICSE 1989

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

data flow analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1989 The Relationship between Slices and Module Cohesion
abstract
High module cohesion is often suggested as a desirable property of program modularity.The subjective nature of the definition of cohesion, however, can make it difficult to use in practice.In this paper, we examine the relationship between the data flow in a module and its level of cohesion using aprocessing element frow graph (PFG).Based on these PFG's, we regroup the original seven levels of cohesion into four classifications.Slice projiles are then defined by generating slices for all output variables of a module.A relationship is then shown between these slice profiles and the PFG used to indicate levels of cohesion.It is suggested that these slice profiles can be used to determine more easily the cohesiveness of a module.
Linda M. Ott, Jeffrey J. Thuss
ICSE2