Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Software processes are software too
1987571 citationsLeon J. OsterweilInternational Conference on Software Engineeringprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Leon J. Osterweil
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Leon J. Osterweil's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Leon J. Osterweil with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Leon J. Osterweil more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Leon J. Osterweil
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Leon J. Osterweil. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Leon J. Osterweil. The network helps show where Leon J. Osterweil may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Leon J. Osterweil
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Leon J. Osterweil.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Leon J. Osterweil based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with Leon J. Osterweil. Leon J. Osterweil is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Phan, Huong Thu Thi, George S. Avrunin, Matt Bishop, Lori A. Clarke, & Leon J. Osterweil. (2012). A systematic process-model-based approach for synthesizing attacks and evaluating them. eScholarship (California Digital Library). 10–10.9 indexed citations
Osterweil, Leon J., et al.. (2011). Characterizing process variation.. International Conference on Software Engineering. 836–839.1 indexed citations
5.
Osterweil, Leon J.. (2011). A Process Programmer Looks at the Spiral Model: A Tribute to the Deep Insights of Barry W. Boehm. 5. 457–474.1 indexed citations
6.
Peisert, Sean, et al.. (2010). Modeling and analyzing faults to improve election process robustness. USF Scholarship Repository (University of San Francisco). 1–8.13 indexed citations
7.
Zhu, Liming, et al.. (2007). Desiderata for languages to be used in the definition of reference business processes. UNSWorks (UNSW Sydney). 1. 37–65.8 indexed citations
8.
Li, Mingshu, Barry Boehm, & Leon J. Osterweil. (2006). Unifying the Software Process Spectrum: International Software Process Workshop, SPW 2005, Beijing, China, May 25-27, 2005 Revised Selected Papers (Lecture Notes in Computer Science). Springer eBooks.1 indexed citations
Griss, Martin, et al.. (1999). Agents and Workflow -- An Intimate Connection, or Just Friends?. 558–562.5 indexed citations
11.
Osterweil, Leon J. & William L. Scherlis. (1998). Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering.16 indexed citations
Osterweil, Leon J., et al.. (1994). Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Software engineering. International Conference on Software Engineering.22 indexed citations
Osterweil, Leon J.. (1987). Software processes are software too. International Conference on Software Engineering. 2–13.571 indexed citations breakdown →
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.