Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Kurtis Zimmerman
dblp:174/2025
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 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 |
Software maintenance and evolution · 100% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computing education · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software maintenance and evolution
code recommendation |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | An Automated Framework for Recommending Program Elements to Novices (N) · ASE 2015 |
Computing education › programming education
programming education tools |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | An Automated Framework for Recommending Program Elements to Novices (N) · ASE 2015 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
tree edit distance · 0.4graph matching · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | An Automated Framework for Recommending Program Elements to Novices (N)abstractNovice programmers often learn programming by implementing well-known algorithms. There are several challenges in the process. Recommendation systems in software currently focus on programmer productivity and ease of development. Teaching aides for such novice programmers based on recommendation systems still remain an under-explored area. In this paper, we present a general framework for recognizing the desired target for partially-written code and recommending a reliable series of edits to transform the input program into the target solution. Our code analysis is based on graph matching and tree edit algorithms. Our experimental results show that efficient graph comparison techniques can accurately match two portions of source code and produce an accurate set of source code edits. We provide details on implementation of our framework, which is developed as a plugin for Java in Eclipse IDE. Kurtis Zimmerman, Chandan Raj Rupakheti |
ASE | 1 |