nitanilla/NFRfinder: NFR finder artifacts until SBES18

These are the artifacts that support the paper published in SBES 18.

1. By using Catalogs, 4 actors were asked to classify requirements sentences whether NFR or not. Each actor classification is a point of view (triangle, square, diamond, oval). Each author had two perspectives to classify NFR . One perspective is to classify NFR by using their own knowledge (data-track.sample-triangle). The other perspective is to classify NFR by using knowledge bases. (e.g. data-track.sample.CAT-triangle)

2. The image (4viewpoint-highlights vs NFRFinder.png) shows the highlights made by the actors (oval, diamond, triangle, rectangle), and the qualifiers identified by NFRfinder. A Figure in black is when an actor used a catalog. A figure in white is when an actor used his own knowledge

3. POStagging of the sample used vb = verbs, jj = adjective, nn= noun

4. Catalogs used Oliveira, Romeu. 2014. A Semi-Automated Method for Elicitation of Web Accessibility Requirements. Master's thesis. DIMAp (UFRN), Natal, Brasil. Luiz M. Cysneiros, 2018. Privacy Catalog – General Approach. Retrieved July 14, 2018 from http://www.math.yorku.ca/~cysneiro/nfrs/privacy.htm Luiz M. Cysneiros. 2007. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Using Catalogs to Elicit Non-Functional Requirements. In Workshop on Requirements Engineering WER. pp. 107-115 ER-PUC-Rio. 2018. Transparency Catalog. Retrieved July 14, 2018 from http://transparencia.inf.pucrio.br/wiki/index.php/Catálogo_Transparência. Last Access: 7/14/2018.

In Readme some links points to the transparency work performed previous to NFRFinder