methods of applying adaptive social computing systems are disclosed. The social computing systems include capabilities to generate adaptive recommendations and representations of social networks derived, at least in part, from inferences of the preferences and interests of system users based on a plurality of usage behaviors, spanning a plurality of usage behavior categories. The behavioral categories include system navigation behaviors, content referencing behaviors, collaborative behaviors, and the monitoring of physical location and changes in location. Privacy control functions and compensatory functions related to insincere usage behaviors can be applied. adaptive recommendation delivery can take the form of visual-based or audio-based formats.
|
0. 29. An apparatus, comprising:
a content aspect comprising information;
a structural aspect comprising the content aspect and relationships within the content aspect;
a usage aspect comprising captured usage behaviors, wherein the captured usage behaviors are associated with users and correspond to usage behavior categories; and
logic circuitry configured to provide user tunable adaptive recommendations for navigating the structural aspect, wherein the user tunable adaptive recommendations are based on inferences of preferences of the users derived from the captured usage behaviors.
0. 26. A method comprising:
providing inputs to a computer-implemented usage aspect, wherein the computer-implemented usage aspect comprises captured usage behaviors and the captured usage behaviors are associated with one or more users; and
receiving on a mobile device an automatically generated user tunable adaptive recommendation based, at least in part, on automatically determining a location of the one or more users and on at least one of the captured usage behaviors associated with the one or more users, wherein the captured usage behaviors correspond to at least one usage behavior category.
12. A mobile adaptive recommendation method comprising:
contributing behaviors to a computer-implemented usage aspect, the usage aspect comprising captured usage behaviors, wherein the usage behaviors are associated with one or more users; and
receiving on a mobile device an automatically generated user tunable adaptive recommendation based, at least in part, on automatically determining the location of a first user of the one or more users and on at least one other usage behavior of the captured usage behaviors associated with the one or more users corresponding to at least one other usage behavior category.
0. 15. A method comprising:
operating a content aspect comprising information;
operating a computer-implemented structural aspect comprising the content aspect and relationships associated with the content aspect;
operating a usage aspect comprising captured usage behaviors, wherein the captured usage behaviors are associated with one or more users and correspond to a plurality of usage behavior categories; and
applying a user tunable adaptive recommendation to navigate the computer-implemented structural aspect, wherein the user tunable adaptive recommendation is based, at least in part, on an automatic inference of a preference of the one or more users from a plurality of the captured usage behaviors associated with the one or more users.
1. An adaptive recommendation method comprising:
interacting with a content aspect comprising information;
interacting with a computer-implemented structural aspect comprising the content aspect and associated relationships;
contributing behaviors to a usage aspect, the usage aspect comprising captured usage behaviors, wherein the usage behaviors are associated with one or more users corresponding to a plurality of usage behavior categories; and
applying a user tunable adaptive recommendation to navigate the computer-implemented structural aspect, the adaptive recommendation being based, at least in part, on an automatic inference of a preference of a user from a plurality of the captured usage behaviors associated with the one or more users corresponding to a plurality of usage behavior categories.
2. The method of
3. The method of
one or more objects, each object comprising the information; and
one or more relationships, wherein each relationship is associated with each pair of the one or more objects.
4. The method of
5. The method of
6. The method of
applying usage behavior categories, wherein the usage behavior categories are selected from a group consisting of navigation and access patterns, collaborative patterns, direct feedback patterns, subscription patterns, self-profiling patterns, reference patterns, and physical location patterns.
7. The method of
inferring a user interest derived from, at least in part, usage behaviors.
8. The method of
applying a compensatory algorithm associated with the detection of apparent insincere system usage behaviors or other inferred “gaming” behaviors by the one or more users.
9. The method of
applying an algorithm that performs pattern matching of information embodied in the structural aspect and content aspect to produce content interpretation patterns, and associates the content interpretation patterns with usage patterns.
10. The method of
receiving a recommendation in a delivery mode, wherein the recommendation delivery mode is selected from a group consisting of visual, audio, and a combination of visual and audio.
11. The method of
modifying a structural element, wherein the structural element is selected from the group consisting of a function to generate a new relationship, a function to modify an existing relationship, a function to delete an existing relationship, a function to add an object, a function to modify an object, and a function to delete an object.
13. The method of
determining the change in location of a user as a function of time.
14. The method of
receiving the automatically generated adaptive recommendation, wherein the recommendation is based, at least in part, on the first user's proximity to a second user.
0. 16. The method of claim 15, wherein the information comprises one or more text, graphics, audio, video, interactive forms of content, applets, tutorials, advertising content, courseware, demonstrations, representations of people, modules, executable code, or computer programs.
0. 17. The method of claim 15, wherein:
the computer-implemented structural aspect comprises one or more objects comprising the information; and
the relationships are associated with the one or more objects.
0. 18. The method of claim 15, wherein the captured usage behaviors are associated with a single-member subset of the one or more users or a multiple-member subset of the one or more users.
0. 19. The method of claim 15, further comprising restricting designation of the captured usage behaviors as non-private behaviors.
0. 20. The method of claim 15, wherein the usage behavior categories comprise one or more navigation and access patterns, collaborative patterns, direct feedback patterns, subscription patterns, self-profiling patterns, reference patterns, or physical location patterns.
0. 21. The method of claim 15, wherein said applying a user tunable adaptive recommendation further comprises inferring an interest of the one or more users from the captured usage behaviors.
0. 22. The method of claim 15, wherein said applying a user tunable adaptive recommendation further comprises identifying apparent insincere system usage behaviors or inferred gaming behaviors by the one or more users.
0. 23. The method of claim 15, wherein said applying a user tunable adaptive recommendation further comprises:
pattern matching the information to produce content interpretation patterns, and
associating the content interpretation patterns with usage patterns.
0. 24. The method of claim 15, wherein said applying a user tunable adaptive recommendation comprises presenting the user tunable adaptive recommendation as visual data, audio data, or visual data and audio data.
0. 25. The method of claim 15, wherein said applying a user tunable adaptive recommendation comprises modifying at least some of the relationships, deleting at least some of the relationships, generating new relationships, adding an object, modifying the object, or deleting the object.
0. 27. The method of claim 26, further comprising determining a change in the location of the one or more users as a function of time.
0. 28. The method of claim 26, wherein the automatically generated user tunable adaptive recommendation is based, at least in part, on a proximity of a first one of the one or more users to a second one of the one or more users.
0. 30. The apparatus of claim 29, wherein the user tunable adaptive recommendations are tunable by non-users.
0. 31. The apparatus of claim 29, wherein the information comprises text, graphics, audio, video, interactive forms of content, applets, tutorials, advertising content, courseware, demonstrations, representations of people, modules, executable code, or computer programs.
0. 32. The apparatus of claim 29, wherein:
the structural aspect comprises objects associated with the information; and
the relationships are between the objects.
0. 33. The apparatus of claim 29, wherein the captured usage behaviors are associated with a single-member subset of the users or a multiple-member subset of the users.
0. 34. The apparatus of claim 29, wherein the logic circuitry is further configured to restrict access to the captured usage behaviors.
0. 35. The apparatus of claim 29, wherein the usage behavior categories comprise one or more navigation and access patterns, collaborative patterns, direct feedback patterns, subscription patterns, self-profiling patterns, reference patterns, or physical location patterns.
0. 36. The apparatus of claim 29, wherein the logic circuitry is further configured to infer interests of the users based on the captured usage behaviors.
0. 37. The apparatus of claim 29, wherein the logic circuitry is further configured to detect apparent insincere system usage behaviors by the users.
0. 38. The apparatus of claim 29, wherein the logic circuitry is further configured to:
identify content interpretation patterns from the information, and
associate the content interpretation patterns with usage patterns for the users.
|
for a given affinity level, affinityij, where 0<affinityij≦1, for Node i and Node j, and where 1 is the strongest possible relationship, excluding the identity relationship, and 0 implies no direct relationship. “Scaling factor” is a number between 0 and 1 chosen to normalize the degrees of separation for the fuzzy network consistent with the specific definition and distributions of the affinities between nodes in the fuzzy network.
For example, if an affinity of 1.0 is defined as the identity function, then the scaling factor could be set to 0 so that the degree of separation of an affinity of 1.0, the identity degree of separation, is defined as 0. Alternatively, if an affinity of 0 is defined as no relationship whatsoever, then the degree of separation should logically be greater than 1.0, so the scaling factor may be chosen as a number up to and including 1.0.
The scaling factor may be a function of the specific distribution of the intensity level of affinities in a fuzzy network. These intensities may be linear across the range of 0 and 1, or may be nonlinear. If, for example, the mean intensity is defined at 0.5, then the scaling factor for the fractional degree of separation calculation could be set at 0.5.
In summary, for fuzzy networks, the general case of “distance” relationship between two directly linked nodes is a fractional degree of separation. More generally, the degree of separation between any two nodes in a fuzzy network is defined as the minimum of the degrees of separation (which may be calculated on the basis of a specific directional orientation of relationships among the nodes) among all possible paths between the two nodes, where the degrees of separation between any two nodes along the path may be fractional. Where a network has multiple relationships between nodes, multiple potentially fractional degrees of separation may be calculated between any two nodes in the network.
For convenience, the term fractional degrees of separation may be shortened to the acronym “FREES” (FRactional degrEEs of Separation)—as in, say, “Node X is 2.7 FREES from Node Y.”
The degree of separation within the fuzzy or non-fuzzy network may be calculated and displayed on demand for any two nodes in the network. All nodes within a specified degree of separation of a specified node may be calculated and displayed. Optionally, the associated fractional degrees of separation between the base node and the nodes within the specified fractional degrees of separation may be displayed.
The degrees of separation among nodes in a fuzzy network may be described by a fractional degrees-of-separation (FREES) matrix. For a network with N nodes, n1, . . . nun, the degree-of-separation matrix will have N rows and columns. Each cell of the matrix contains a number that describes the degree of separation between the associated two nodes, in and no. For non-fuzzy networks, each cell will contain an integer value; for fuzzy networks each cell of the FREES matrix may contain non-integer values. For both fuzzy and non-fuzzy networks, the diagonal of the affinity matrix will be 0's—the identity degree of separation. If a fuzzy network is described by multiple affinity matrices, then the multiple affinity matrices correspond on a one-to-one basis with multiple associated FREES matrices.
The degrees of separation for networks with multiple relationship types, whether for fuzzy or non-fuzzy networks, may be calculated as a function across some or all of the relationship types. For example, such a function could be the minimum of degree of separation from Node X to Node Y of all associated relationship types, or the function could be an average, or any other relevant mathematical function.
According to some embodiments, the adaptive recombinant system 800 of
Fuzzy Network Subsets and Adaptive Operators
The adaptive recombinant system 800 of
A selection operator 822, which selects subsets of networks, may designate the selected network subsets based on degrees of separation. For example, subsets of a fuzzy network may be selected from the neighborhood, designated by a FREES metric, around a given node, say Node X. The selection may take the form of selecting all nodes within the designated network neighborhood, or all the nodes and all the associated links as well within the designated network neighborhood, where the network neighborhood is defined as being within a certain degree of separation from Node X. A non-null fuzzy network subset will therefore contain at least one node, and possibly multiple nodes and relationships.
Two or more fuzzy network subsets may then be operated on by network operations such as union, intersection, difference, and complement, as well as any other Boolean set operators. An example is an operation that outputs the intersection (intersection operator 826) of the network subset defined by the first degree or less of separation from Node X and the network subset defined by the second or less degree of separation from Node Y. The operation would result in the set of nodes and relationships common to these two network subsets, with special auxiliary rules optionally applied to resolve duplicative relationships as will be explained below.
The network operations may apply explicitly to fractional degrees of separation. For example, the union operator 824 may be applied to the network subset defined by half a degree of separation (0.5) or less from Node X and the network subset defined as 2.4 degrees of separation or less from Node Y. The union of the two network subsets results in a unique set of nodes and relationships that are contained in both of these network subsets. Special auxiliary rules may optionally be applied to resolve duplicative relationships. Fuzzy network operations may also be chained together, e.g., a union of two network subsets intersected with a third network subset, etc.
The fuzzy network operators 820 may have special capabilities to resolve the situation in which union 824 and intersection 826 operators define common nodes, but with differing relationships or values of the relationships among the common nodes. The fuzzy network intersection operator 826, Fuzzy_Network_Intersection, may be defined as follows:
Z=Fuzzy_Network_Intersection(X,Y,W)
where X, Y, and Z are network subsets and W is the resolution function 834. The resolution function 834 designates how duplicative relationships among nodes common to fuzzy network subsets X and Y are resolved.
Specifically, the fuzzy network intersection operator 826 first determines the common nodes of network subsets X and Y, to form a set of nodes, network subset Z. The fuzzy network intersection operator 826 then determines the relationships and associated relationship value and indicators uniquely deriving from X among the nodes in Z (that is, relationships that do not also exist in Y), and adds them into Z (attaching them to the associated nodes in Z). The operator then determines the relationships and relationship indicators and associated values uniquely deriving from Y (that is, relationships that do not also exist in X) and applies them to Z (attaching them to the associated nodes in Z).
For relationships that are common to X and Y, the resolution function 834, is applied. The resolution function 834 may be any mathematical function or algorithm that takes the relationship values of X and Y as arguments, and determines a new relationship value and associated relationship indicator.
The resolution function 834, Resolution_Function may be a linear combination of the corresponding relationship value of X and the corresponding relationship value of Y, scaled accordingly. For example:
Resolution_Function(XRV, YRV)=(c1*XRV+c2*YRV)/(c1+c2)
where XRV and YRV are relationship values of X and Y, respectively, and c1 and c2 are coefficients. If c1=1, and c2=0, then XRV completely overrides YRV. If c1=0 and c2=1, then YRV completely overrides XRV. If c1=1 and c2=1, then the derived relationship is a simple average of XRV and YRV. Other values of c1 and c2 may be selected to create weighted averages of XRV and YRV. Nonlinear combinations of the associated relationships values, scaled appropriately, may also be employed.
The Fuzzy_Network_Union operator 824 may be derived from the Fuzzy_Network_Intersection operator 826, as follows:
Z=Fuzzy_Network_Union(X,Y,W)
where X, Y, and Z are network subsets and W is the resolution function 834. Accordingly,
Z=Fuzzy_Network_Intersection(X,Y,W)+(X−Y)+(Y−X)
That is, fuzzy network unions of two network subsets may be defined as the sum of the differences of the two network subsets (the nodes and relationships that are uniquely in X and Y, respectively) and the fuzzy network intersection of the two network subsets. The resulting network subset of the difference operator contains any unique relationships between nodes uniquely in an originating network subset and the fuzzy network intersection of the two subsets. These relationships are then added to the fuzzy network intersection along with all the unique nodes of each originating network subset, and all the relationships among the unique nodes, to complete the resulting fuzzy network subset.
It should be noted that, unlike the corresponding classic set operators, the fuzzy network intersection 826 and union 824 operators are not necessarily mathematically commutative—that is, the order of the operands may matter. The operators will be commutative if the resolution function or algorithm is commutative.
For the adaptive recombinant system 800, the resolution function 834 that applies to operations that combine multiple networks may incorporate usage behavioral inferences related to one or all of the networks. The resolution function 834 may be instantiated directly by the adaptive recommendations function 240 (
For example, where one of the predecessor networks was used by larger numbers of individuals, or by individuals that members of communities or affinity groups that are inferred to be best informed on the subject of the associated content, then the resolution function 834 may choose to preferentially weight the relationships of that predecessor network higher versus the other predecessor networks. The resolution function 834 may use any or all of the usage behaviors 270, along with associated user segmentations and affinities obtained during usage behavior pre-processing 204 (see
Fuzzy Network Metrics
Special metrics may be used to measure the characteristics of fuzzy networks and fuzzy network subsets. For example, these metrics may provide measures associated with the relationship of a network node or object to other parts of the network, and relative to other network nodes or objects. A metric may be provided that indicates the degree to which nodes are connected to the rest of the network. This metric may be calculated as the sum of the affinities of first degree or less separated directionally distinct relationships or links. The metric may be called a first degree connectedness parameter for the specific node.
The first degree connectedness metric may be generalized for zeroth to Nth degrees of connectedness as follows. The zeroth degree of connectedness is, by definition, zero. The Nth degree of connectedness of Node X is the sum of the affinities among all nodes within N degrees of separation of Node X. For fuzzy networks, N may not necessarily be an integer value. The connectedness parameters may be indexed to provide a convenient relative metric among all other nodes in the network.
As an example, in the fuzzy network 630 of
In networks in which there are multiple types of relationships among nodes, there may be multiple connectedness measures for any specific Node X to the subset of the fuzzy network specified by a degree of separation, N, from X.
In summary, connectedness for a specific Node X may have variations associated with relationship type, the specified directions of the relationships selected for computation, and the degree of separation from the Node X. The general connectedness metric function may be defined as follows:
Connectedness(Node X,T,D,S)
where T is the relationship indicator type, D is the relationship direction, and S is the degree of separation. The Connectedness metric may be normalized to provide a convenient relative measure by indexing the metric across all nodes in a network.
A metric of the popularity of the network nodes or objects, or popularity metric, may also be provided. The fuzzy or non-fuzzy network may be implemented on a computer system, or on a network of computer systems such as the Internet or on an Intranet. The system usage behavioral patterns of users of the fuzzy network may be recorded. The number of accesses of particular nodes or objects of a fuzzy to non-fuzzy network may be recorded. The accesses may be defined as the actual display of the node or object to the user or the accesses may be defined as the display of information associated with the node or object to user, such as access to an associated editorial review. In some of these embodiments, the popularity metric may be based on the number of user accesses of the associated node or object, or associated-information. The popularity metric may be calculated for prescribed time periods. Popularity may be recorded for various user segments, in addition to, or instead of, the usage associated with the entire user community. The usage traffic may be stored so that popularity trends over time may be accessed. In the most general case, popularity for a specific Node X will have variations by user segments and time periods. A general popularity function may therefore be represented as follows:
Popularity(Node X,user segment,time period)
The Popularity metric may be normalized to provide a convenient relative measure by indexing the metric across all nodes in a network.
Metrics may be generated that go beyond the connectedness metrics, to provide information on additional characteristics associated with a node or object within the network relative to other nodes or objects in the network. A metric that combines aspects of connectedness and popularity measures, an influence metric, may be generated. The influence metric may provide a sense of the degree of importance or “influence” a particular node or object has within the fuzzy network.
The influence metric for Node X is calculated by adding the popularity of Node X to a term that is the sum of the popularities of the nodes or objects separated by one degree of separation or less from Node X, weighted by the associated affinities between Node X and each associated related node. The term associated with the weighted average of the popularities of the first degree of separation nodes of Node X is scaled by a coefficient. This coefficient may be defined as the inverse of the first degree connectedness metric of Node X.
For fuzzy networks with directionally distinct relationships and affinities, the influence metric may be calculated based only on the first degree affinities or less for relationships that are oriented in a particular direction. For example, influence may be calculated based on all relationships directed to Node X (as opposed to those directed away from Node X).
A generalized influence metric may also be provided, where the Nth degree of influence of node or object X is defined as the popularity of Node X added to a term that is the weighted average of the popularities of all nodes within N degrees of separation from Node X (where N may be a non-integer, implying a fractional degree of separation). The weights for each node may be a function of the affinities of the shortest path between Node X and the associated node. The generalized influence metric may be a multiplicative function, that is, the affinities along the path from Node X to each node within N degrees separation are multiplied together and then multiplied by the popularity of the associated node. Or, the metric may be a summation function, or any other mathematical function that combines the affinities along the associated network path. The generalized influence metric may be specified as a recursive function, satisfying the following difference equations and “initial condition”:
Nth Degree of Influence(Node X)=(N−1)th Degree of Influence(Node X)+Influence of Nodes of N Degrees of Separation from Node X. (1)
Zeroth Degree of Influence(Node X)=Popularity(Node X) (2)
Where there are directionally distinct affinities, the affinities that are multiplied, summed, or otherwise mathematically operated on, between Node X and all other nodes within a directionally distinct degree of separation (where the degree of separation may be fractional), may be of relationships with a selected directional orientation. The relationship direction term (D, in the connectedness metric function, above, may be scaled by the Nth degree of connectedness (of a given directional orientation) of Node X.
The zeroth degree of influence may be defined as just the popularity of Node X. The Nth degree of influence is indexed to enable convenient comparison of influence among nodes or objects in the network. Where there are multiple types of relationships between any two nodes in the network, influence may be calculated for each type of relationship. An influence metric may also be generated that averages (or applies any other mathematical function that combines values) across multiple influence metrics associated with two or more relationship types.
10+(45*0.3)+(23*0.9)+(85*0.4)+(42*0.3)=90.8
The second degree of influence of Node X is calculated as the first degree of influence of Node X (already calculated) plus the influence contributed by each node that is two degrees of separation from Node X, and may likewise be calculated, as follows:
Table 3 lists the first degree affinities, second degree affinities, popularity, calculated influence, and cumulative influence, relative to Node X, for the fuzzy network 650 of
TABLE 3
Affinity, popularity, & influence data for fuzzy network 650.
cum.
Node
1st° affinities
2nd° affinities
popularity
influence
influence
0th
1
10
10
10
1st
0.4
85
34
1st
0.9
23
20.7
1st
0.3
42
12.6
1st
0.3
45
13.5
90.8
2nd
0.9
0.4
20
7.2
2nd
0.3
0.8
30
7.2
2nd
0.3
0.2
150
9
2nd
0.3
0.9
90
24.3
2nd
0.3
0.8
200
48
2nd
0.3
0.5
20
3
2nd
0.3
0.4
5
0.6
2nd
0.3
0.6
80
14.4
204.5
In summary, the influence metric for Node X may have variations associated with a specific relationship indicator type, a specific direction of relationships for the relationship indicator type, a degree of separation from Node X, and a scaling coefficient that tunes the desired degradation of weighting for nodes and relationships increasingly distant from Node X. The metric function may therefore be represented as follows:
Influence(Node X,relationship indicator type or types,relationship direction,degree of separation,affinity path function,scaling coefficient).
The influence metric may be normalized to provide a convenient relative measure by indexing the metric across all nodes in a network. Metrics associated with nodes of fuzzy networks, such as popularity, connectedness, and influence, may be displayed in textual or graphical forms to users of the fuzzy network-based system. The adaptive recombinant system 800 of
Fuzzy Network Syndication and Combination
The adaptive recombinant system 800 of
The adaptive system 100 of
Similarly, the adaptive recombinant system 800 of
The structural aspect 210 of adaptive system 100 may be comprised of multiple structures, comprising network-based structures, non-network-based structures, or combinations of network-based structures and non-network-based structures. In
The adaptive recombinant system 800 may determine objects, such as the objects 522 and 532 of
The combination of the fuzzy network 520 and the fuzzy network 530 yields fuzzy network 540. In the fuzzy network 540, relationships that were unique in networks 520 and 530 are maintained. Where relationships or relationship indicators are common in fuzzy networks 520 and 530, the resolution function 834 (
For example, object 522 and object 532 are part of both fuzzy network 520 and fuzzy network 530. A relationship 521 is depicted between object 522 and object 532 in the fuzzy network 520, while a relationship 531 is depicted between object 522 and object 532 in the fuzzy network 530. Where relationships 521 and 530 are of the same type, the resulting relationship indicators 541 in the newly created fuzzy network 540 is an average of relationship indicators 521 and 531. That is, for determining the relationship between objects 522 and 532 in the fuzzy network 540, the resolution function 834 is a simple average function. In general, the resolution function 834 may be any mathematical function or algorithm that takes as input two numbers between 0 and 1 inclusive, and outputs a number between 0 and 1 inclusive.
The resolution function 834 may be derived from algorithms that apply appropriate usage behavior inferences. As a simple example, if the relationship value and associated indicator of one network has been derived from the usage behaviors of highly informed or expert users, then this may have more weighting than the relationship value and associated indicator of a second network for which the corresponding relationship value was based on inferences associated with the usage behaviors of a relatively sparse set of relatively uniformed users.
New relationships and associated relationship indicators that do not exist in originating fuzzy networks may also be generated by the adaptive recombinant system 800 upon fuzzy network creation. The adaptive recommendations function 240 may be invoked directly to effect such relationship modifications, or it may be invoked in conjunction with fuzzy network maintenance functions.
For example, in
The determination of a new relationship may be based on fuzzy network structural, usage, or content characteristics, and associated inferencing algorithms. For example, in predecessor network 530, the traffic patterns, combined with the organization of user referenced subsets of 530, as one example, may support adding the relationship 542 in the new network 540 that did not exist in the predecessor networks. The same procedure may be used to delete existing relationships (which may be alternatively viewed as just equivalent to setting a relationship indicator to “0”), as desired. The algorithms for modifying relationships and relationship indicators, including adding and deleting relationships, may incorporate global considerations with regard to optimizing the overall topology of the fuzzy network by creating effective balance of relationships among objects to maximize overall usability of the network.
In
In
In
The adaptive recombinant system 800 of
The adaptive recombinant system 800 may efficiently support multiple adaptive systems 100, without reproducing the components used to support syndication and recombination for each adaptive system.
In addition to the resolution function 834, the adaptive recombinant system 800 may use the object evaluation function 830, to evaluate the “fitness” of the recombined fuzzy networks. The object evaluation function 830 may be completely automated, or it may incorporate explicit human judgment. The networks that are evaluated to be most fit are then recombined among themselves, to create a new generation of fuzzy networks.
The adaptive recombinant system 800 may also create random structural changes to enhance the diversity of the fuzzy networks in the next generation. Or, the adaptive recombinant system 800 may use explicit non-random-based rules to enhance the diversity of the fuzzy networks in the next generation. Preferably, the inheritance characteristics from generation to generation of adaptive recombinant fuzzy networks may be that of acquired traits (Lamarckian). Or, the inheritance characteristics from generation to generation of adaptive recombinant fuzzy networks may be that of non-acquired, or random mutational, traits (Darwinian). For the Lamarckian embodiments, the acquired traits include any structural adaptations that have occurred through system usage, syndications, and combinations.
Through application of these multi-generational approaches, fuzzy networks are able to evolve against the selection criteria that are provided. The fitness selection criteria may be determined through inferences associated with fuzzy network usage behaviors, and may itself co-evolve with the generations of adaptive fuzzy networks.
Fuzzy Content Network
In some embodiments, the structural aspect 210 of the adaptive system 100 and of the adaptive recombinant system 800, as well as the respective structural subsets 280 generated by the adaptive recommendations function 240, are networks of a particular form, a fuzzy content network. A fuzzy content network 700 is depicted in
The fuzzy content network 700, including content sub-networks 700a, 700b, and 700c. The content network 700 includes “content,” “data,” or “information,” packaged in modules known as objects 710.
The content network 700 employs features commonly associated with “object-oriented” software to manage the objects 710. That is, the content network 700 discretizes information as “objects.” In contrast to typical procedural computer programming structures, objects are defined at a higher level of abstraction. This level of abstraction allows for powerful, yet simple, software architectures.
One benefit to organizing information as objects is known as encapsulation. An object is encapsulated when only essential elements of interaction with other objects are revealed. Details about how the object works internally may be hidden. In
Another benefit to organizing information as objects is known as inheritance. The encapsulation of
In the content network 700, the objects 710 may be either topic objects 710t or content objects 710c, as depicted in
Content objects 710c, as shown in
The referenced information 714 may include files, text, documents, articles, images, audio, video, multi-media, software applications and electronic or magnetic media or signals. Where the content object 714c supplies a pointer to information, the pointer may be a memory address. Where the content network 700 encapsulates information on the Internet, the pointer may be a Uniform Resource Locator (URL).
The meta-information 712 supplies a summary or abstract of the object 710. So, for example, the meta-information 712t for the topic object 710t may include a high-level description of the topic being managed. Examples of meta-information 712t include a title, a sub-title, one or more descriptions of the topic provided at different levels of detail, the publisher of the topic meta-information, the date the topic object 710t was created, and subjective attributes such as the quality, and attributes based on user feedback associated with the referenced information. Meta-information may also include a pointer to referenced information, such as a uniform resource locator (URL), in one embodiment.
The meta-information 712c for the content object 710c may include relevant keywords associated with the information 714, a summary of the information 714, and so on. The meta-information 712c may supply a “first look” at the objects 710c. The meta-information 712c may include a title, a sub-title, a description of the information 714, the author of the information 714, the publisher of the information 714, the publisher of the meta-information 712c, and the date the content object 710c was created, as examples. As with the topic object 710t, meta-information for the content object 710c may also include a pointer.
In
The relationship indicator 718 is a numerical indicator of the relationship between objects 710. Thus, for example, the relationship indicator 718 may be normalized to between 0 and 1, inclusive, where 0 indicates no relationship, and 1 indicates a subset relationship. Or, the relationship indicators 718 may be expressed using subjective descriptors that depict the “quality” of the relationship. For example, subjective descriptors “high,” “medium,” and “low” may indicate a relationship between two objects 710.
The relationship 716 between objects 710 may be bi-directional, as indicated by the double-pointing arrows. Each double-pointing arrow includes two relationship indicators 718, one for each “direction” of the relationships between the objects 710.
As
The content networks 700A, 700B, 700C may be related to one another using relationships of multiple types and associated relationship indicators 718. For example, in
Individual content and topic objects 710 within a selected content sub-network 700a may be related to individual content and topic objects 710 in another content sub-network 700b. Further, multiple sets of relationships of multiple types and associated relationship indicators 718 may be defined between two objects 710
For example, a first set of relationships 716 and associated relationship indicators 718 may be used for a first purpose or be available to a first set of users while a second set of relationships 716 and associated relationship indicators 718 may be used for a second purpose or available to a second set of users. For example, in
The relationships among objects 710 in the content network 700, as well as the relationships between content networks 700a and 700b, may be modeled after fuzzy set theory. Each object 710, for example, may be considered a fuzzy set with respect to all other objects 710, which are also considered fuzzy sets. The relationships among objects 710 are the degrees to which each object 710 belongs to the fuzzy set represented by any other object 710. Although not essential, every object 710 in the content network 700 may conceivably have a relationship with every other object 710.
The topic objects 710t encompass, and are labels for, very broad fuzzy sets of the content network 700. The topic objects 710t thus may be labels for the fuzzy set, and the fuzzy set may include relationships to other topic objects 710t as well as related content objects 710c. Content objects 710c, in contrast, typically refer to a narrower domain of information in the content network 700.
The adaptive system 100 of
Similarly, the adaptive recombinant system 800 of
Extended Fuzzy Structures in Fuzzy Networks
The fuzzy network model may be extended to the organizational structure of the meta-information and other affiliated information associated with each network node or object. In a fractional degree of separation system structure, depicted in
Meta-information 754 associated with information or interactive applications 752 may include, but is not limited to, descriptive information about the object such as title, publishing organization, date published, physical location of a physical object, an associated photo or picture, summary or abstracts, a plurality of reviews, etc. Meta-information 754 may also include dynamic information such as expert and community ratings of the information, feedback from users, and more generally, any relevant set of, or history of, usage behaviors described in Table 1. The meta-information 754 may also include information about relationships to other nodes in the network. For example, the meta-information 754 may include the relationships with other nodes in the networks, including an identification code for each related node, the types of relationships, the direction of the relationships, and the degree of relatedness of each relationship.
The meta-information 754 may be defined within tiers of fractional degree of separation between zero and one. For example, the most tightly bound meta-information might be in a tier at degree of separation of 0.1 and less tightly bound meta-information might be in a tier at degree of separation of 0.8.
Where the degrees of separation calculated between any two nodes in the fuzzy network are between 0 and 1, the meta-information tiers would more appropriately be designated with negative (possibly fractional) degrees of separation. For example, the most tightly bound meta-information 752 may be in a tier at degree of separation of −5 and less tightly bound meta-information may be in a tier at degree of separation of −1.
The meta-information tiers may distinguish between static meta-information such as the original author of the associated information, and dynamic information such as the total number of accesses of the associated information through a computer system.
The fractional degree of separations of less than one may correspond to compound objects 756. For example, a picture object plus a text biography object may constitute a person object. For typical fuzzy content network operations the compound object would generally behave as if it was one object.
The fractional degree of separations of less than one may correspond to a list of objects with which the present object has a specific sequential relation 758. For example, this may include workflow sequences in processes. These sequential relationships imply a tighter “binding” between objects than the relationships associated with other objects in the fuzzy network 770, hence a smaller fractional degree of separation is employed for sequential relationships.
All meta-information may explicitly be content objects that relate to associated information by a fractional degree of separation of less than one, and may relate to other content objects in the network by a fractional degree of separation that may be greater than or equal to one. This can be described by a degree-of-separation matrix. Every object is arrayed in sequence along both the matrix columns and the matrix rows. Each cell of the matrix corresponds to the degree of separation between the two associated objects. The cells in the main diagonal of the degree of separation matrix are all zeroes, indicating the degree of separation between an object and itself is zero. All other cells will contain a non-zero number, indicating the degree of separation between the associated objects, or a designator indicating that the degree of separation is essentially infinite in the case when there is no linked path at all between the associated objects.
Personalized Fuzzy Content Network Subsets
Recall that users 200 of the adaptive system 100 of
Users of the Epiture software system may select content objects and tag them for storage in their personal fuzzy network. Optionally, related meta-information and links to other objects in the original fuzzy network may be stored with the content object. Users may also store entire topics in their “My World” personal fuzzy network. Furthermore, users may use fuzzy network operators to create synthetic topics. For example, a user might apply an intersection operator to Topic A and Topic B, to yield Topic C. Topic C could then be stored in the personal fuzzy network. Union, difference and other fuzzy network operators may also be used in creating new fuzzy network subsets to be stored in a private fuzzy content network.
Users of the Epiture software system may directly edit their personal fuzzy networks, including the names or labels associated with content objects and topic objects, as well as other meta-information associated with content and topic objects. The screenshot 770 of
Users may selectively share their personal fuzzy networks by allowing other users to have access to their personal networks. Convenient security options may be provided to facilitate this feature.
Usage Behavior Information
Users of the Epiture software system may have the ability to review personal, sub-community or community usage behaviors over time. This may include trends related to popularity, connectedness, influence or any other relevant usage metric.
Navigational histories, such as access paths, may be available for review, with capabilities for making queries against the histories though application of selection criteria.
Users may also have access to system usage information that may be captured and organized to retain temporal information associated with usage behaviors, including the duration of behaviors and the timing of the behaviors, where the behaviors may include those associated with reading or writing of written or graphical material, oral communications, including listening and talking, or duration of physical location of a system user, potentially segmented by user communities or affinity groups may be available for review by users.
The above usage behaviors may be available to users in raw form, or in summarized form, potentially after application of statistical or other mathematical functions are applied to facilitate interpretation. This information may be presented in a graphical format.
Adaptive Recommendations in Fuzzy Content Networks
Adaptive recommendations or suggestions may enable users to more effectively navigate through the fuzzy content network. As with other network embodiments described herein, the adaptive recommendations generated from a fuzzy content network may be in the context of a currently accessed content object or historical path of accessed content objects during a specific user session, or the adaptive recommendations may be without context of a currently accessed content object or current session path.
In the most generalized approach, adaptive recommendations in a fuzzy content network combine inferences from user community behaviors and preferences, inferences of sub-community or expert behaviors and preferences, and inferences of personal user behaviors and preferences. Usage behaviors that may be used to make preference inferences include, but are not limited to, those that are described in Table 1. These usage-based inferences may be augmented by automated inferences about the content within individual and sets of content objects using statistical pattern matching of words or phrases within the content. Such statistical pattern matching may include, but not limited to, Bayesian analysis, neural network-based methods, k-nearest neighbor, support vector machine-based techniques, or other statistical analytical techniques.
Community Preference Inferences
Where the structural aspect 210 of the adaptive system 100 or the adaptive recombinant system 800 is a fuzzy content network, user community preferences may be inferred from the popularity of individual content objects and the influence of topic or content objects, as popularity and influence were defined above. The duration of access or interaction with topic or content objects by the user community may be used to infer preferences of the community.
Users may subscribe to selected topics, for the purposes of e-mail updates on these topics. The relative frequency of topics subscribed to by the user community as a whole, or by selected sub-communities, may be used to infer community or sub-community preferences. Users may also create their own personalized fuzzy content networks through selection and saving of content objects and/or topics objects. The relative frequency of content objects and/or topic objects being saved in personal fuzzy content networks by the user community as a whole, or by selected sub-communities, may be used to also infer community and sub-community preferences. These inferences may be derived directly from saved content objects and/or topics, but also from affinities the saved content and/or topic objects have with other content objects or topic objects. Users can directly rate content objects when they are accessed, and in such embodiments, community and sub-community preferences may also be inferred through these ratings of individual content objects.
The ratings may apply against both the information referenced by the content object, as well as meta-information such as an expert review of the information referenced by the content object. Users may have the ability to suggest content objects to other individuals and preferences may be inferred from these human-based suggestions. The inferences may be derived from correlating these human-based suggestions with inferred interests of the receivers if the receivers of the human-based suggestions are users of the fuzzy content object system and have a personal history of content objects viewed and/or a personal fuzzy content network that they may have created.
The physical location and duration of remaining in a location of the community of users, as determined by, for example, a global positioning system or any other positionally aware system or device associated with users or sets of users, may be used to infer preferences of the overall user community.
Sub-Community and Expert Preference Inferences
Community subsets, such as experts, may also be designated. Expert opinions on the relationship between content objects may be encoded as affinities between content objects. Expert views may be directly inferred from these affinities. An expert or set of experts may directly rate individual content items and expert preferences may be directly inferred from these ratings.
The history of access of objects or associated meta-information by sub-communities, such as experts, may be used to infer preferences of the associated sub-community. The duration of access or interaction with objects by sub-communities may be used to infer preferences of the associated sub-community.
Experts or other user sub-communities may have the ability to create their own personalized fuzzy content networks through selection and saving of content objects. The relative frequency of content objects saved in personal fuzzy content networks by experts or communities of experts may be used to also infer expert preferences. These inferences may be derived directly from saved content objects, but also from affinities the saved content objects have with other content objects or topic objects.
The physical location and duration of remaining in a location of sub-community users, as determined by, for example, a global positioning system or any other positionally aware system or device associated with users or sets of users, may be used to infer preferences of the user sub-community.
Personal Preference Inferences
Users may subscribe to selected topics, for the purposes of, for example, e-mail updates on these topics. The topic objects subscribed to by the user may be used to infer personal preferences. Users may also create their own personalized fuzzy content networks through selection and saving of content objects. The relative frequency of content objects saved in personal fuzzy content networks by the user may be used to infer the individual's personal preferences. These inferences may be derived directly from saved content objects, but also from affinities the saved content objects have with other content objects or topic objects. Users may directly rate content objects when they are accessed, and in such embodiments, personal preferences may also be inferred through these ratings of individual content objects.
The ratings may apply against both the information referenced by the content object, as well as any of the associated meta-information, such as an expert review of the information referenced by the content object. A personal history of paths of content objects viewed may be stored. This personal history may be used to infer user preferences, as well as tuning adaptive recommendations and suggestions by avoiding recommending or suggesting content objects that have already been recently viewed by the individual. The duration of access or interaction with topic or content objects by the user may be used to infer preferences of the user.
The physical location and duration of remaining in a location of the user as determined by, for example, a global positioning system or any other positionally aware system or device associated with the user, may be used to infer preferences of the user.
Adaptive Recommendations and Suggestions
Adaptive recommendations in fuzzy content networks combine inferences from user community behaviors and preferences, inferences of sub-community or expert behaviors and preferences, and inferences of personal user behaviors and preferences as discussed above, to present to a fuzzy network user or set of users one or more fuzzy network subsets (one or more objects and associated relationships) that users may find particularly interesting given the user's current navigational context. These sources of information, all of which are external to the referenced information within specific content objects, may be augmented by search algorithms that use text matching or statistical pattern matching or learning algorithms to provide information on the likely themes of the information embedded or pointed to by individual content objects.
The navigational context for a recommendation may be at any stage of navigation of a fuzzy network (e.g., during viewing a particular content object) or may be at a time when the recommendation recipient is not engaged in directly navigating the fuzzy network. In fact, the recommendation recipient need never have explicitly used the fuzzy network associated with the recommendation. As an example,
Some inferences will be weighted as more important than other inferences in generating a recommendation, and theses weightings may vary over time, and across recommendation recipients, whether individual recipients or sub-community recipients. For example, characteristics of content and topics explicitly stored by a user in a personal fuzzy network would typically be a particularly strong indication of preference as storing network subsets requires explicit action by a user. In most recommendation algorithms, this information will therefore be more influential in driving adaptive recommendations than, say, general community traffic patterns in the fuzzy network.
The recommendation algorithm may particularly try to avoid recommending to a user content that the user is already familiar with. For example, if the user has already stored a content object in a personal fuzzy network, then the content object might be a very low ranking candidate for recommending to the user. Likewise, if the user has recently already viewed the associated content object (regardless of whether it was saved to his personal fuzzy network), then the content object would typically rank low for inclusion in a set of recommended content objects. This may be further tuned through inferences with regard to the duration that an associated content object was viewed (for example, it may be inferred that a lengthy viewing of a content object is indicative of increased levels of familiarity.
The algorithms for integrating the inferences may be tuned or adjusted by the individual user. The tuning may occur as adaptive recommendations are provided to the user, by allowing the user to explicitly rate the adaptive recommendations. The user may also set explicit recommendation tuning controls to tune the adaptive recommendations to her particular preferences. For example, a user might guide the recommendation function to place more relative weight on inferences of expert or other user communities' preferences versus inferences of the user's own personal preferences. This might be particularly true if the user was relatively inexperienced in the particular domain of knowledge. As the user's experience grew, he might adjust the weighting toward inferences of the user's personal preferences versus inferences of expert preferences.
Fuzzy network usage metrics described above such as popularity, connectedness, and influence may be employed by the recommendation algorithm as convenient summaries of community, sub-community and individual user behavior with regard to the fuzzy network. These metrics may be used individually or collectively by the recommendation algorithm in determining the recommended network subset or subsets to present to the recommendation recipient.
Adaptive recommendations which are fuzzy network subsets may be displayed in variety of ways to the user. They may be displayed as a list of content objects (where the list may be null or a single content object), they may include content topic objects, and they may display a varying degree of meta-information associated with the content objects and/or topic objects. Adaptive recommendations may be delivered through a web browser interface, through e-mail, through instant messaging, through XML-based feeds, RSS, or any other approach in which the user visually or acoustically interprets the adaptive recommendations. The recommended fuzzy network subset may be displayed graphically. The graphical display may provide enhanced information that may include depicting linkages among objects, including the degree of relationship, among the objects of the recommended fuzzy network subset, and may optionally indicate through such means of size of displayed object or color of displayed object, designate usage characteristics such as popularity of influence associated with content objects and topic objects in the recommended network subset. Adaptive recommendations may be delivered for interpretation of users by other than visual senses; for example, the recommendation may be delivered acoustically, typically through oral messaging.
The recommended structural subsets 280, combinations of topic objects, content objects, and associated relationships, may constitute most or even all of the user interface, which may be presented to a system user on a periodic or continuous basis. Such embodiments correspond to embodiment variations of 2130, 2140, 2150 and 2160 of the framework 2000 in
In addition to the recommended fuzzy network subset, the recommendation recipient may be able to access information to help gain an understanding from the system why the particular fuzzy network subset was selected as the recommendation to be presented to the user. The reasoning may be fully presented to the recommendation recipient as desired by the recommendation recipient, or it may be presented through a series of interactive queries and associated answers, as a recommendation recipient desires more detail. The reasoning may be presented through display of the logic of the recommendation algorithm. A natural language (such as English) interface may be employed to enable the reasoning displayed to the user to be as explanatory and human-like as possible.
In addition to adaptive recommendations of fuzzy network subsets, adaptive recommendations of some set of users of the fuzzy network may be determined and displayed to recommendation recipients, typically assuming either implicit or explicit permission is granted by such users that might be recommended to other users. The recommendation algorithm may match preferences of other users of the fuzzy network with the current user. The preference matches may include the characteristics of fuzzy network subsets stored by users or other fuzzy network referencing, their topic subscriptions and self-profiling, their collaborative patterns, their direct feedback patterns, their physical location patterns, their fuzzy network navigational and access patterns, and related temporal cues associated with these usage patterns. Information about the recommended set of users may be displayed to a user. This information may include names, as well as other relevant information such as affiliated organizations and contact information. It may also include fuzzy network usage behavioral information, such as, for example, common topics subscribed to, common physical locations, etc. As in the case of fuzzy network subset adaptive recommendations, the adaptive recommendations of other users may be tuned by an individual user through interactive feedback with the system.
Adaptability/Extensibility Framework
The vertical dimension 2002 includes four categories across a range, the first category being least adaptive and the fourth category being the most adaptive. The categories are: non-adaptive (does not dynamically customize); displays adaptive recommendations 250 (where “displays” includes not only visual delivery of adaptive recommendations, but delivery in other modes, such as audio); provides adaptive recommendations 250 that update structure or content (where the structure and/or content of the system are dynamically updated); and provides a continuous, fully adaptive interface. The adaptive system 100 and the adaptive recombinant system 800 are capable of all degrees of adaptiveness depicted in the framework 2000, including providing a continuous, fully adaptive interface.
The horizontal dimension 2004 of the framework 2000 represents the degree of extensibility of the identified system. The “degree of extensibility” or “degree of portability” denotes the ability to “syndicate” the system 100 or subsets of the system 100, as well as the ability to create combinations of systems. Syndication, as used herein, describes ability to share systems or portions of systems, which may include actual transfer of the system structural and content aspects across computer and communications network hardware, or may describe the virtual transfer of a system on a particular set of computer hardware. Recall that a structural subset 280 is a portion of the structural aspect 210 of a system, including one or more objects 212 and their associated relationships 214, which may be replicated (see
The horizontal dimension 2004 includes four categories across a range, the first category being least extensible and the fourth category being the most extensible. The categories are: no syndication (the identified system has no ability to share content); individual content syndication (individual items of content within the identified system can be shared); structural subset syndication (structural subsets of the identified system can be shared); and recombinant structures syndication (structural subsets of the identified system can be shared and combined to create new systems). The adaptive recombinant system 800 is capable of all degrees of extensibility depicted in the framework 2000, including the most portable feature, recombinant structures syndication.
The framework 2000 is divided into sixteen numbered blocks, arranged according to their relationship to the horizontal dimension 2002 (degree of adaptiveness) and the vertical dimension 2004 (degree of extensibility). The majority of prior art systems are confined to the lower left portion of the framework 2000. For example, most prior art system are non-adaptive and include no syndication capabilities (block 2010). Current computer operating systems (e.g. Microsoft XP™), business productivity applications (e.g., Microsoft Office™), enterprise applications (e.g., SAP), and search utilities (e.g., Google®) are associated with block 2010 of the framework 2000.
Some prior art systems syndicate items of content or sets of content files. These may be based on a central syndication clearinghouse (e.g., Napster), or may be more purely peer-to-peer in operation (e.g., Gnutella). Such systems are associated with block 2020 of the framework 2000.
Other prior art systems provide users with merchandise recommendations based on their buying habits, as well as the buying habits of customers who have purchased common merchandise (e.g., Amazon.com®). However, these systems do not truly deliver adaptive recommendations as defined herein, whether by displaying adaptive recommendations 250 (block 2050), updating structure or content (block 2090) or providing a continuous, fully adaptive interface (block 2130). This is because, among other reasons, the scope of the usage behaviors tracked by such prior art systems is limited to purchasing and associated behaviors.
In contrast, for the adaptive system 100 and the adaptive recombinant system 800, more generalized system usage behaviors 247 are tracked and used to deliver adaptive recommendations 250 to the user 200 and to the adaptive (recombinant) system itself. Thus, prior art systems such as Amazon.com are deemed non-adaptive (block 2010) in the framework 2000. Blocks 2010 and 2020 of the framework 2000 thus represent the extent of prior art system capabilities with regard to system adaptation (vertical dimension 2002) and portability (horizontal dimension 2004).
In contrast, the adaptive recombinant system 800 includes the adaptability and portability associated with the remaining blocks of the framework 2000. For example, the adaptive recombinant system 800 is capable of syndicating non-adaptive structural subsets 280 of the system 800 (block 2030), as well as syndicating non-adaptive recombinant structures (block 2040). Thus, the adaptive recombinant system 800 exhibits a high degree of extensibility, fully covering the horizontal dimension 2004 of the framework 2000.
The vertical dimension 2002 is likewise embodied both by the adaptive system 100 and the adaptive recombinant system 800. While the adaptive system 100 displays adaptive recommendations 250 where no syndication occurs (block 2050), the adaptive recombinant system 800 further displays adaptive recommendations 250 where individual content is syndicated (block 2060), where structural subsets 280 are syndicated (block 2070) and where recombinant structures are syndicated (block 2080).
Moving up the vertical dimension 2002, the adaptive system 100 provides adaptive recommendations 250 that update the structural aspect 210 and/or the content aspect 230 of the system where there is no syndication (block 2090), and the adaptive recombinant system 800 provides adaptive recommendations that update the structural or content aspects where individual content is syndicated (block 2100), where structural subsets 280 are syndicated (block 2110), and where recombinant structures are syndicated (block 2120).
Finally, the adaptive recombinant system 800 provides a continuous, fully adaptive interface for all four categories of syndication (blocks 2130, 2140, 2150, and 2160) while the adaptive system 100 does so where there is no syndication (block 2130). Thus, the adaptive system 100 and the adaptive recombinant system 800 provide various degrees of adaptiveness and extensibility, as represented in the framework 2000.
Sample Recommendations Function and Algorithm
In this example, two types of adaptive recommendations are delivered to the user. The adaptive recommendations are calculated by a set of algorithms based on the systems objects being currently navigated, the relationships of the currently accessed object, the user's navigation path, profile preferences, community membership and level of relevance depending on context and the user's personal library of referenced objects. Recall that a ‘user’ may refer to not only humans, but to another system or adaptive network. In other words, two or more adaptive systems may be “users” of each other.
Two types of adaptive recommendations based on a fuzzy content network structure are described in Table 4. One skilled in the art may apply other variations of adaptive recommendations and associated algorithms.
TABLE 4
Two Recommendations Algorithms
Type
Delivery
characteristics
in-context
when user is accessing or
may be delivered in real-
(suggestions)
interacting, accessing, or
time
updating content object
available in display pages
for retrieval/editing
may be optimized for
responsiveness and “fast”
learning of user
preferences
out-of-context
no explicit access of
inferences may be
(recommendations)
content object by user
updated in real time or
periodically
available in display pages
for retrieval
may be optimized for
accuracy and
understanding of user
preferences
The first adaptive recommendations type, in-context recommendations, or suggestions, are delivered to the user when the user is interacting, accessing, or updating a content object. In-context recommendations may be delivered in real time, may be displayed for retrieval and editing, and may be optimized for responsiveness and the “fast” learning of the user's preferences.
The second adaptive recommendations type, out-of-context recommendations, is a “push” recommendation approach. Based on inferences about the user's preferences, the network is aligned to adapt to the preferences. The out-of-context recommendations thus “surprise” the user with recommendations of relevant objects of interest without specific explicit context from the user. Relevant characteristics for out-of-context recommendations include the real-time or periodic updating of inferences and the ability to provide adaptive recommendations in display pages or via other modes of communication for retrieval. Further, the out-of-context recommendations algorithm may be optimized for accuracy and understanding of user preferences.
The following data is used by the adaptive recommendations function 900 in generating recommendations:
The adaptive recommendations function 900 begins by determining personal highest recommendation areas, or PHRAs of the user (block 902). PHRAs are generated by determining the highest relevance sums of co-topic-community relationships. To illustrate this step, Table 5 includes an abbreviated matrix of topics and communities on one axis versus content objects and topic objects on the other matrix, with numerical relationships between the two axes,
TABLE 5
Relationships between objects in fuzzy content network
topic A
topic B
topic C
community X
object 1 (article)
5
3
2
0
object 2 (presentation)
1
4
—
5
object 3 (book)
3
3
5
2
topic A
—
3
—
5
total
9
12
7
12
In Table 5, topic B and community X have the highest relationship sums thus two PHRAs are found in this example. This method will often generate many PHRAs, which sometimes may be too many to make useful suggestions from. For example, there may be a dozen or more PHRAs with the same value. In this case, the tie breakers are the data that informs on relationships between topics and communities.
For example, in Table 5, topic A has a strong relationship (5) to community X. Topic A itself has a high total score. Thus, the adaptive recommendations function 900 assigns a dynamic weighting to topic A's relevance to community X, to strengthen community X's result. In this case, if it was desirable to have only one PHRA, community X would be chosen. In some embodiments, the top 3-5 PHRAs are selected by the adaptive recommendations function 900.
Building on this procedure, the storing of the dynamic weightings generated in this process can be useful as an additional recommendation mechanism. This approach allows the adaptive recommendations function 900, at the end of processing, to compare which recommendation is actually selected by the user from the top suggestions generated. If there is a discrepancy or convergence, the weightings may be examined and used as a way to strengthen or weaken the relationships between topics, objects and communities for this user's particular context.
The adaptive recommendations function 900 also determines Epiture's highest recommendation area, or EHRA (block 904). Recall that, in the adaptive recombinant system 800, relationships between objects, topics and communities, may be made by experts. There may also be explicit business rules in the system to conform) to, for example in the form of a business process. In addition, the relationship context may be delivered from another fuzzy content network or instance of the adaptive recombinant system, in particular when ‘traininig’ a new knowledge network or integrating existing networks. The Epiture software system includes these features in determining EHRAs.
A set of Epiture's highest recommendation areas (EHRA) may be generated by selecting related topics or communities with higher relevance values to the current object. The EHRAs are weighted appropriately to the situation, either by system rules, or by user preferences.
The adaptive recommendations function 900 also determines Epiture's highest recommended objects (block 906). Again, this step uses relationships already in existence in the system, either an average across all relationships and quality ratings, or tuned to select a particular set of relationship types or quality ratings. From these data, a set of Epiture's highest recommendation objects (EHRO) may be generated by selecting related content objects with higher relevance values (with relevance defined by context of both the object in question and system ‘priorities’) to the current object.
Although steps 902, 904, and 906 are presented in a particular order in
If not, however, the adaptive recommendations function 900 determines whether it can find any objects in EHRO that also exist in the PHRA. If so, those results will be returned and the operation ends even though the selected objects are a second tier of the recommended objects. To ensure that the user realizes this, a relevance weighting may be assigned, and graphically indicated if needed.
A third tier of recommended objects may be found by finding any objects in the EHRO that exist in the EHRA, using quality, relationships types and values and other attributes as guides for making the selection.
If a sufficient set of recommendation objects have been found (the “yes” prong of block 910), the adaptive recommendations function 900 removes duplicated objects in the potential recommendation is determined thus far (block 908). This step is particularly relevant where the users of the Epiture software system are human users who have been browsing the system for some time period. Such users generally do not wish to be recommended content they have already read, visited, or used. If the user has already visited some of the selected recommended objects within a predetermined time period, say, in the last 24 hours, or, if some of recommended objects are already in the user's personal topic library, the adaptive recommendations function 900 determines the object to be unnecessary to recommend. Thus, such objects are removed from the recommendation object set.
Where objects removed in this manner cause the available adaptive recommendations to be insufficient or empty (the “no” prong of block 914), or where enough adaptive recommendations were not produced initially (the “no” prong of block 910), the adaptive recommendations function 900 proceeds to determine the most popular jump objects in the path of a community (block 916).
The adaptive recommendations function 900 examines the paths of other users who have browsed the object. Given criteria such as similar community membership to the current user, content quality rating and distribution, overall popularity, and other attributes, it is determined which objects to recommend based on prior usage. This fourth tier of recommendation objects (besides PHRAs, EHRAs, and EHROs) is designated as a second set of Epiture's highest recommended objects or EHRO2.
This step (block 916) may be helpful in the case of integrating two or more networks together. Since the relationship context and attributes of the objects in the network may be ‘carried’ over or ported into the new network, the objects may ‘look’ for their prior relationships and segment based on usage criteria. In addition, influence and other metrics and attribute patterns may be used to determine similarities between objects. Thus, the adaptive recommendations function 900 may connect objects which have not been in contact before, providing the user a targeted recommendation, and generating a relationship between those objects. That newly formed relationship may cascade to affect other objects in the system such as communities and topics.
Finally, the adaptive recommendations function 900 may track usage of adaptive recommendations (block 918). As the embedded algorithms are optimized for speed and real-time performance for in-context recommendations, the ‘understanding’ and true relevance (as inferred from user usage behavior) of the adaptive recommendations may be processed later. As such, tracking the selection and usage of adaptive recommendations at this time may be beneficial. Criteria such as placement position on a list or other display mechanism, determined (estimated) relevance as predicted by the algorithm versus first selections by the user, and choice of object type (such as article, subject matter expert, multimedia, image etc), are just a few examples of how the adaptive recommendations function may self-monitor its performance. This performance analysis may ultimately generate better quality recommendations for the user, and be used in updating system structure such as EHRA inputs. Or, the system may be self-policing, in effect, making changes as usage data builds up.
It should be noted that the adaptive recommendations function 900 depicted in
The screenshot 770 also depicts a user personal library function 714, denoted “My Personal Topics,” for a particular user. A screenshot 720 in
In the screen mage 790 of
Path data can be used to strengthen adaptive recommendations on an automatic basis, while also contributing to input of an automatic or semi-automatic recommendation for the setup of a new community or new topical area.
Cumulative usage data may also be of interest to users of the system as illustrated in the screen image 780 of
Automatic Fuzzy Content Network Maintenance
The adaptive recommendations function and related sets of algorithms, in conjunction with the fuzzy network maintenance functions, may be used to automatically or semi-automatically update and enhance the fuzzy content network. These functions may be employed to determine new affinities and the appropriate degree of relationship among fuzzy network objects in the fuzzy network as a whole, within personal fuzzy network subsets, or sub-community-specific fuzzy network subsets. The automatic updating may include potentially setting a relationship between any two objects to zero (effectively deleting a relationship link).
The recommendation function and fuzzy network maintenance functions may operate completely automatically, performing in the background and updating affinities independently of human intervention, or the function may be used by users or special experts who rely on the adaptive recommendations to provide guidance in maintaining the fuzzy network as a whole, or maintaining specific fuzzy network subsets.
In either an autonomous mode of operation, or in conjunction with human expertise, the recommendation function may be used to integrate new content or content objects into the fuzzy content network.
As in the case of adaptive recommendations that are delivered to recipients to enhance their ability to effectively navigate and use the system, adaptive recommendations that function to update the fuzzy content network include algorithms that make inferences from the usage behaviors of system users. These inferences may be at the community level, sub-community level, or individual user level. Usage behaviors that may be included in the inferencing include online information accesses, traffic patterns and click streams associated with navigating the system structure, including buying and selling behaviors; physical locational information associated with stationary or mobile use of the system; collaborative behaviors among system users or systems users and people outside the system, that include written and oral communications; referencing behaviors of system users—for example, the tagging of information for future reference; subscription and other self-profiling behavior of users; and direct feedback behaviors, such as the ratings or direct written feedback associated with objects or their attributes such as the objects' author, publisher, etc. The algorithms may also use information associated with temporal information associated with usage behaviors, including the duration of behaviors and the timing of the behaviors, where the behaviors may include those associated with reading or writing of written or graphical material, oral communications, including listening and talking, or duration of physical location of a system user.
In some embodiments, inferences regarding a plurality of usage behaviors may be used to adjust relationships and associated relationship values and indicators, as explained in the sample embodiment above. These fuzzy network structural modifications may be applied to multiple relationship types. Navigational access information may be used by the algorithms; that is, the relative level of traffic between two objects (each either a content object or a topic object) will influence the degree of relationship between the two objects. However, access information alone is likely to be insufficient for best results as navigation accesses are highly influenced by the current system structure, and therefore current structures would tend to be reinforced, limiting the level of adaptation. Therefore, other or additional behavioral information is preferentially used to overcome this bias. For example, duration of viewing objects typically provides a better indication of value of an object to a user than does just an object access, as does, for example, reference and reference organization cues, collaboration cues, and direct feedback. Therefore, this additional behavioral information may be used to adjust the strengths of relationships among objects.
As an example, where referenced or tagged information can be organized by users, the system may scan the referenced information and how it is organized, and the frequency of the organizational structures among users, to determine a preliminary degree of relationships in the system. This may be augmented by information associated with navigational accesses and the duration of the accesses.
As a simplified example,
The fuzzy network 670a may have a popular access path 672a from Node X to Node Y, which in turn has a popular access path 674a to Node Z. Assuming the existing relationships along that path are of similar strength, it might suggest, without any additional information, that these relationships should perhaps be strengthened due to the high popularity of the path. However, more usage behavioral information may suggest a different fuzzy network updating approach. For example, the duration of accesses of Node X and Node Z were generally significantly higher than for Node Y, a better structural update might be to increase, or establish, the relationship between Node X and Node Z, as is shown in the fuzzy network 670b. After application of an algorithm that incorporates the durational usage behavioral cues, a relationship 676b is established between Node X and Node Z. In addition, in this example, the former relationship 672a between Node X and Node Y is deleted (in practice, it might just be weakened in strength).
The structural transformation from fuzzy network 670a to 670b as shown would be even more reinforced if additional usage behavioral information supported reinforced the access durational-based inferences on preferences. For example, if Node X and Node Z were more frequently referenced by users than Node Y, and were organized such as to imply close affinity (for example, stored in the same personal topical area). This would be more confirming information to strengthen the relationship between Node X and Node Z, and to weaken or eliminate the relationship between Node X and Node Y.
The relationship updating algorithm may temper potential relationship updating, including adding new relationships, with global considerations related to optimal connections among network objects. For example, too few relationships, or relationships with insufficient spread of strength values tend to inhibit effective navigation, but on the other hand too many relationships also is not optimal. The algorithm may strive to maintain an optimal richness of relationships while updating the fuzzy content network based on usage characteristics. The algorithm may use preferential distributions based on fuzzy network metrics such as connectedness and influence to optimize the fuzzy network relationship topologies.
The recommendation function or related algorithms, in conjunction with the fuzzy content network maintenance functions, may also be extended to scan, evaluate, and determine fuzzy network subsets that have special characteristics. For example, the recommendation function or related algorithms may suggest that certain of the fuzzy network subsets that have been evaluated are candidates for special designation. This may include being a candidate for becoming a topical area. The recommendation function may suggest to human users or experts the fuzzy network subset that is suggested to become a topical area, along with existing topical areas that are deemed by the recommendation function to be “closest” in relationship to the new suggested topical area. A human user or expert may then be invited to add a topic, along with associated meta-information, and may manually create relationships between the new topic and existing topics. Statistical pattern matching or learning algorithms used to identify such fuzzy network subsets may include, but are not limited to, semantic network techniques, Bayesian analytical techniques, neural network-based techniques, k-nearest neighbor, support vector machine-based techniques, or other statistical analytical techniques.
The algorithms may apply fuzzy network usage behaviors, along with user community segmentations, to determine new topical areas. The algorithms may be augmented with global considerations related to optimal topologies of fuzzy network structures so as to deliver the most effective usability. For example, too many topics, or topics not sufficiently spread across the over domain of information or knowledge addressed by the system, tend to inhibit effective navigation and use. The algorithm may strive to maintain an optimal richness of topical areas. The algorithm may use preferential distributions based on fuzzy network metrics such as connectedness and influence to optimize the fuzzy network relationship topologies. This approach may also be employed in suggesting topical areas for deletion.
Or, the recommendation function or related algorithms, in conjunction with the fuzzy content network maintenance functions, may automatically generate the topic object and associated meta-information, and may automatically generate the relationships and relationship indicators and their values between the newly created topic object and other topic objects in the fuzzy network.
In some embodiments this capability may be extended such that the recommendation function or related algorithms, along with fuzzy network maintenance functions, automatically maintain the fuzzy network and identified fuzzy network subsets. The recommendation function may not only identify new topical areas, generate associated topic objects, associated relationships and relationship indicators among the new topic objects and existing topic objects, and the associated values of the relationships indicators, but also identify topic objects that are candidates for deletion, and in some embodiments may automatically delete the topic object and its associated relationships.
The adaptive recommendations function, in conjunction with the fuzzy network maintenance functions, may likewise identify content objects that are candidates for deletion, and may automatically delete the associated content objects and their associated relationships.
In this way the adaptive recommendations function or related algorithms, along with the fuzzy content network maintenance functions, may automatically adapt the structure of the fuzzy network itself on a periodic or continuous basis to enable the best possible experience for the fuzzy network's users.
As in network embodiments, when a new fuzzy content network is initialized, the adaptive recommendation function may also serve as a training mechanism for the new network. Given a distribution of content, relationships and relationships types, metrics and usage behaviors associated with scope, subject and other experiential data of other fuzzy content networks, a module of the adaptive recommendation function may automatically begin assimilation of content objects into a fuzzy content network, with intervention as required by humans. Clusters of newly assimilated content objects may enable inferences resulting in the suggestion of new topical objects and communities, and associated relationship types and indicators may also be automatically created and updated. This functionality of the adaptive recommendation engine may also be applied when two or more fuzzy content networks are brought together and require integration.
Each of the automatic steps listed above may be interactive with human users and experts as desired.
Social Network Analysis in Fuzzy Content Object Networks
Social network analysis may be conducted with adaptive recombinant system 800 in multiple ways. First, the representation of a person or people may be explicitly through content objects in the fuzzy content network. Special people-type content objects may be available, for example. Such a content object may have relevant meta-information such as an image of the person, and associated biography, affiliated organization, contact information, etc. The content object may be related to other content objects that the person or persons personally contributed to, topics that they have particular interest or expertise in, or any other system objects with which the person or persons have an affinity. Tracking information associated with access to these content objects by specific users, and/or user sub-communities may be determined as described above.
Furthermore, collaborative usage patterns may be used to understand direct communications interactions among persons, in addition to indirect interactions (e.g., interactions related to the content associated with a person). The physical location of people may be tracked, enabling an inference of in-person interactions, in addition to collaborations at a distance.
Second, specific people may be associated with specific content and topic objects—for example, the author of a particular content object. These people may or may not have explicit associated people-type content objects. Metrics related to the popularity, connectedness, and influence of a person's associated content may be calculated to provide measurement and insights associated with the underlying social network. The associations with content objects may be with a group of people rather than a single individual such as an author. For example, the metrics may be calculated for organizations affiliated with content objects. An example is the publisher of the associated content.
In either of the approaches described above, report-based and graphical-based formats may be used to display attributes of the underlying social network. These may include on-line or printed displays that illustrate how communities or sub-communities of users directly access a set of people (through the associated content objects), or indirectly through associated content affiliated with the set of people.
Adaptive Processes and Process Networks
The adaptive system 100 and the adaptive recombinant system 800 enable the effective implementation of computer-based or computer-assisted processes. Processes involve a sequence of activity steps or stages that may be explicitly defined, and such sequences are sometimes termed “workflow.” These processes may involve structures that require, or encourage, a step or stage to be completed before the next step or stage may be conducted. Additional relevant details on process-based applications and implementations of adaptive networks is disclosed in U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/572,565, entitled “A Method and System for Adaptive Processes,” which is incorporated herein by reference, as if set forth in its entirety.
A set of relationships and associated relationship indicators may be employed to designate process flows among objects in a fuzzy network, or fuzzy content network. The existence of a process relationship between object x and object y implies that x precedes y in a specified process. A process relationship may exist between object x and a plurality of other objects. In these embodiments, a user may have a choice of multiple process step options from an originating process step. The values of a plurality relationship indicators associated with the process relationships between an object and a plurality of objects may be different.
A plurality of process relationship indicators may be designated among the objects in a fuzzy content network, which enables objects to be organized in a plurality of processes.
Display functions enable a user to navigate through a fuzzy network or fuzzy network subset via objects that have process relations between them. At each process step, corresponding to accessing the corresponding object, the user may have the ability to navigate to other related objects, which can be advantageous in providing the user with relevant information to facilitate executing the corresponding process step.
Fuzzy processes may be organized into fuzzy sub-processes through selection of a subset of objects corresponding to a contiguous set of process steps, along with all other objects related to the process step objects, or more generally, as the set of all objects within a specified fractional degrees of separation from each of the process step objects.
New fuzzy processes may be generated by combining fuzzy process sub-networks into new fuzzy process networks using the fuzzy network union, intersection and other operators.
Computing system 966 represents a PC or other computing system which connects through a gateway or other host in order to access the server 952 on which the systems 100 or 800 reside. An appliance 968, includes software “hardwired” into a physical device, or may utilize software running on another system that does not itself host the systems 100 or 800. The appliance 968 is able to access a computing system that hosts an instance of the system 100 or 800, such as the server 952, and is able to interact with the instance of the system 100 or 800.
While the present invention has been described with respect to a limited number of embodiments, those skilled in the art will appreciate numerous modifications and variations therefrom. It is intended that the appended claims cover all such modifications and variations as fall within the true spirit and scope of this present invention.
Flinn, Steven Dennis, Moneypenny, Naomi Felina
Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
10142428, | Jul 05 2007 | Invent.ly, LLC | Observation-based user profiling and profile matching |
10320938, | Feb 02 2016 | International Business Machines Corporation | Monitoring and maintaining social group cohesiveness |
10331726, | Sep 26 2016 | THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY SWITZERLAND GMBH | Rendering and interacting with transmedia content data |
10423880, | Sep 28 2011 | Nara Logics, Inc. | Systems and methods for providing recommendations based on collaborative and/or content-based nodal interrelationships |
10467677, | Sep 28 2011 | NARA LOGICS, INC | Systems and methods for providing recommendations based on collaborative and/or content-based nodal interrelationships |
10789526, | Mar 09 2012 | Nara Logics, Inc. | Method, system, and non-transitory computer-readable medium for constructing and applying synaptic networks |
11151617, | Mar 09 2012 | Nara Logics, Inc. | Systems and methods for providing recommendations based on collaborative and/or content-based nodal interrelationships |
11272020, | Oct 19 2004 | Verizon Patent and Licensing Inc | Social network for mapping gradations to target intent |
11283885, | Oct 19 2004 | Verizon Patent and Licensing Inc | System and method for location based matching and promotion |
11422996, | Apr 26 2018 | SNAP INC | Joint embedding content neural networks |
11651412, | Sep 28 2011 | Nara Logics, Inc. | Systems and methods for providing recommendations based on collaborative and/or content-based nodal interrelationships |
11715132, | Nov 28 2003 | Gula Consulting Limited Liability Company | Adaptive and recursive system and method |
11727249, | Sep 28 2011 | Nara Logics, Inc. | Methods for constructing and applying synaptic networks |
12093983, | Nov 28 2003 | World Assets Consulting AG, LLC | Adaptive and recursive system and method |
12118464, | Apr 26 2018 | Snap Inc. | Joint embedding content neural networks |
8909583, | Sep 28 2011 | Nara Logics, Inc. | Systems and methods for providing recommendations based on collaborative and/or content-based nodal interrelationships |
9009088, | Mar 15 2013 | Nara Logics, Inc. | Apparatus and method for providing harmonized recommendations based on an integrated user profile |
9043257, | Jul 05 2007 | INVENT LY, LLC | Observation-based user profiling and profile matching |
9449336, | Mar 15 2013 | Nara Logics, Inc. | Apparatus and method for providing harmonized recommendations based on an integrated user profile |
RE44966, | Nov 28 2003 | Gula Consulting Limited Liability Company | Adaptive recommendations systems |
RE44967, | Nov 28 2003 | Gula Consulting Limited Liability Company | Adaptive social and process network systems |
RE44968, | Nov 28 2003 | Gula Consulting Limited Liability Company | Adaptive self-modifying and recombinant systems |
RE45770, | Nov 28 2003 | Gula Consulting Limited Liability Company | Adaptive recommendation explanations |
Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
5099426, | Jan 19 1989 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for use of morphological information to cross reference keywords used for information retrieval |
5132915, | Oct 30 1989 | FIRST PACIFIC EQUITY, INC | Document dispensing apparatus and method of using same |
5206951, | Aug 21 1987 | Eastman Kodak Company | Integration of data between typed objects by mutual, direct invocation between object managers corresponding to object types |
5375244, | May 29 1992 | AT&T Corp.; AMERICAN TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH COMPANY, A CORP OF NEW YORK | System and method for granting access to a resource |
5499366, | Aug 15 1991 | Borland Software Corporation | System and methods for generation of design images based on user design inputs |
5600835, | Aug 20 1993 | Canon Inc. | Adaptive non-literal text string retrieval |
5706497, | Aug 15 1994 | NEC Corporation | Document retrieval using fuzzy-logic inference |
5754939, | Nov 29 1994 | Apple Inc | System for generation of user profiles for a system for customized electronic identification of desirable objects |
5788504, | Oct 16 1995 | CAPITAL ANALYTICS, INC | Computerized training management system |
5790426, | Apr 30 1996 | VIRTUAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION | Automated collaborative filtering system |
5809506, | Jan 22 1996 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for creating an object base of persisent application objects in an object oriented programming environment and apparatus related thereto |
5812691, | Feb 24 1995 | Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania | Extraction of fuzzy object information in multidimensional images for quantifying MS lesions of the brain |
5815710, | Mar 22 1995 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for managing relationships among objects in a distributed object environment |
5867799, | Apr 04 1996 | HUDSON BAY MASTER FUND LTD | Information system and method for filtering a massive flow of information entities to meet user information classification needs |
5875446, | Feb 24 1997 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for hierarchically grouping and ranking a set of objects in a query context based on one or more relationships |
5893085, | Jun 10 1997 | Lockheed Martin Corporation | Dynamic fuzzy logic process for identifying objects in three-dimensional data |
5899992, | Feb 14 1997 | International Business Machines Corporation | Scalable set oriented classifier |
5903478, | Mar 10 1997 | NCR Voyix Corporation | Method for displaying an IT (Information Technology) architecture visual model in a symbol-based decision rational table |
5907846, | Jun 07 1996 | Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP | Method and system for accessing relational databases using objects |
5950200, | Jan 24 1997 | SPARK NETWORKS USA, LLC | Method and apparatus for detection of reciprocal interests or feelings and subsequent notification |
5963965, | Feb 18 1997 | AMOBEE, INC | Text processing and retrieval system and method |
5966126, | Dec 23 1996 | ZARBAÑA DIGITAL FUND LLC | Graphic user interface for database system |
5974415, | Nov 10 1997 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for computer-aided heuristic adaptive attribute matching |
5983214, | Apr 04 1996 | HUDSON BAY MASTER FUND LTD | System and method employing individual user content-based data and user collaborative feedback data to evaluate the content of an information entity in a large information communication network |
5999942, | Feb 11 1993 | Visa International Service Association; VISA U S A INC | Method and apparatus for enforcement of behavior of application processing systems without modifying application processing systems |
6012070, | Nov 15 1996 | HIGH QUALITY PRINTING INVENTIONS, LLC | Digital design station procedure |
6016394, | Sep 17 1997 | VERSATA, INC | Method and system for database application software creation requiring minimal programming |
6024505, | Oct 22 1996 | Seiko Epson Corporation | Printing system |
6029195, | Nov 29 1994 | Pinpoint Incorporated | System for customized electronic identification of desirable objects |
6038668, | Sep 08 1997 | Leidos, Inc | System, method, and medium for retrieving, organizing, and utilizing networked data |
6041311, | Jun 30 1995 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC | Method and apparatus for item recommendation using automated collaborative filtering |
6049799, | May 12 1997 | RPX Corporation | Document link management using directory services |
6134559, | Apr 27 1998 | Oracle International Corporation | Uniform object model having methods and additional features for integrating objects defined by different foreign object type systems into a single type system |
6154723, | Dec 06 1996 | ILLINOIS, UNIVERSITY OF, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, THE | Virtual reality 3D interface system for data creation, viewing and editing |
6195657, | Sep 26 1996 | IMANA, INC | Software, method and apparatus for efficient categorization and recommendation of subjects according to multidimensional semantics |
6269369, | Nov 02 1997 | AMAZON COM HOLDINGS, INC | Networked personal contact manager |
6285999, | Jan 10 1997 | GOOGLE LLC | Method for node ranking in a linked database |
6314420, | Apr 04 1996 | HUDSON BAY MASTER FUND LTD | Collaborative/adaptive search engine |
6321221, | Jul 17 1998 | CALLSTAT SOLUTIONS LLC | System, method and article of manufacture for increasing the user value of recommendations |
6326946, | Sep 17 1998 | Xerox Corporation | Operator icons for information collages |
6374290, | Apr 01 1999 | CA, INC | Self moderated virtual communities |
6438579, | Jul 16 1999 | Microsoft Corporation | Automated content and collaboration-based system and methods for determining and providing content recommendations |
6468210, | Feb 14 2000 | HEALTHWAYS SC, LLC | Automated diagnostic system and method including synergies |
6556951, | Nov 26 1997 | GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, THE | System and method for intelligent quality control of a process |
6571279, | Dec 05 1997 | Fred Herz Patents, LLC | Location enhanced information delivery system |
6611822, | May 05 1999 | Accenture Global Services Limited | System method and article of manufacture for creating collaborative application sharing |
6647257, | Jan 21 1998 | Intel Corporation | System and method for providing targeted messages based on wireless mobile location |
6675237, | Aug 07 2000 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and intelligent dock using a symmetric extended bus bridge and method therefor |
6766366, | Aug 07 1997 | UNIFY GMBH & CO KG | Method for loading a function provided by a first computer (server) onto a second computer (client) |
6771765, | Dec 29 1999 | AVAYA Inc | Multimedia queuing in a customer contact or call center |
6775664, | Apr 04 1996 | HUDSON BAY MASTER FUND LTD | Information filter system and method for integrated content-based and collaborative/adaptive feedback queries |
6795826, | May 25 2000 | MANYWORLDS, INC | Fuzzy content network management and access |
6801227, | Jan 16 2001 | CERNER INNOVATION, INC | System and user interface supporting user navigation and concurrent application operation |
6826534, | Jun 07 1999 | HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY L P | Agent and method for dynamically scheduling publication in an automated document delivery system |
6834195, | Apr 04 2000 | Wireless Agents, LLC | Method and apparatus for scheduling presentation of digital content on a personal communication device |
6845374, | Nov 27 2000 | QUEST SOFTWARE INC F K A DELL SOFTWARE INC ; Aventail LLC | System and method for adaptive text recommendation |
6871163, | May 31 2002 | SAP SE | Behavior-based adaptation of computer systems |
6873967, | Jul 17 2000 | PayPal, Inc | Electronic shopping assistant and method of use |
6912505, | Sep 18 1998 | Amazon Technologies, Inc | Use of product viewing histories of users to identify related products |
6922672, | Jan 15 1999 | International Business Machines Corporation | Dynamic method and apparatus for target promotion |
6934748, | Aug 26 1999 | Accenture Global Services Limited | Automated on-line experimentation to measure users behavior to treatment for a set of content elements |
6947922, | Jun 16 2000 | Xerox Corporation | Recommender system and method for generating implicit ratings based on user interactions with handheld devices |
6970871, | Apr 11 2002 | Sprint Spectrum LLC | System and method of sorting information based on a location of a mobile station |
6981040, | Dec 28 1999 | PERSONALIZED USER MODEL PUM | Automatic, personalized online information and product services |
7065532, | Oct 31 2002 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for evaluating information aggregates by visualizing associated categories |
7071842, | Jun 27 2002 | Intellectual Ventures II LLC | System and method for locating and notifying a user of a person, place or thing having attributes matching the user's stated preferences |
7073129, | Dec 18 1998 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC | Automated selection of appropriate information based on a computer user's context |
7080082, | Oct 31 2002 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for finding the acceleration of an information aggregate |
7081849, | Oct 28 2004 | Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation | Process for sensor resources management |
7103609, | Oct 31 2002 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for analyzing usage patterns in information aggregates |
7110989, | Dec 27 2000 | Fujitsu Limited; Osamu, Iemoto | Computer-assisted education apparatus and method for adaptively determining presentation pattern of teaching materials |
7130844, | Oct 31 2002 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for examining, calculating the age of an document collection as a measure of time since creation, visualizing, identifying selectively reference those document collections representing current activity |
7149736, | Sep 26 2003 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC | Maintaining time-sorted aggregation records representing aggregations of values from multiple database records using multiple partitions |
7162508, | Sep 20 1999 | FINTEGRAPH, LLC | Systems, methods, and software for building intelligent on-line communities |
7167844, | Dec 22 1999 | Accenture Global Services Limited | Electronic menu document creator in a virtual financial environment |
7188153, | Jun 16 2003 | Meta Platforms, Inc | System and method for managing connections in an online social network |
7212983, | May 15 2001 | AGILE JOURNEYS LLC | Method and apparatus for providing visitors with a personalized itinerary and managed access to attractions |
7272586, | Sep 27 2001 | British Telecommunications public limited company | Method and apparatus for data analysis |
7324963, | Nov 08 2001 | AT&T Intellectual Property I, L P | Methods and systems for offering bundled goods and services |
7343364, | Feb 04 2005 | Fidelity Information Services, LLC | Rules-based system architecture and systems using the same |
7366759, | Feb 22 2001 | Parity Communications, Inc.; PARITY COMMUNICATIONS, INC | Method and system for characterizing relationships in social networks |
7373389, | Aug 27 2003 | Spoke Software | Periodic update of data in a relationship system |
7375838, | Nov 17 2003 | III Holdings 1, LLC | Method and system for customized print publication and management |
7401121, | Jun 28 2001 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC | Transportable identifier and system and method to facilitate access to broadcast data |
7403901, | Apr 13 2000 | Accenture Global Services Limited | Error and load summary reporting in a health care solution environment |
7433876, | Feb 23 2004 | FIVER LLC | Semantic web portal and platform |
7454464, | Sep 10 2001 | Intel Corporation | Peer discovery and connection management based on context sensitive social networks |
7461058, | Sep 24 1999 | CDN INNOVATIONS, LLC | Optimized rule based constraints for collaborative filtering systems |
7467212, | Dec 28 2000 | Intel Corporation | Control of access control lists based on social networks |
7493294, | Nov 28 2003 | Gula Consulting Limited Liability Company | Mutually adaptive systems |
7512612, | Aug 08 2002 | Spoke Software | Selecting an optimal path through a relationship graph |
7519912, | Jan 22 2004 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and system for sensing and communicating the use of communication modes by remote users |
7526458, | May 22 2006 | World Assets Consulting AG, LLC | Adaptive recommendations systems |
7526459, | May 22 2006 | World Assets Consulting AG, LLC | Adaptive social and process network systems |
7526464, | Nov 28 2003 | Gula Consulting Limited Liability Company | Adaptive fuzzy network system and method |
7539652, | Nov 04 2004 | World Assets Consulting AG, LLC | Adaptive self-modifying and recombinant systems |
7558748, | Dec 17 1999 | CORELOGIC INFORMATION RESOURCES, LLC F K A CORELOGIC US, INC AND F K A FIRST ADVANTAGE CORPORATION ; CORELOGIC DORADO, LLC F K A CORELOGIC DORADO CORPORATION AND F K A DORADO NETWORK SYSTEMS CORPORATION ; CORELOGIC, INC F K A FIRST AMERICAN CORPORATION ; CORELOGIC SOLUTIONS, LLC F K A MARKETLINX, INC AND F K A CORELOGIC REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS, LLC F K A FIRST AMERICAN REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS LLC AND F K A CORELOGIC INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC F K A FIRST AMERICAN CORELOGIC, INC ; CoreLogic Tax Services, LLC; CORELOGIC VALUATION SERVICES, LLC F K A EAPPRAISEIT LLC ; CORELOGIC REAL ESTATE INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC F K A FIRST AMERICAN REAL ESTATE INFORMATION SERVICES, INC | Purpose-based adaptive rendering |
7567916, | Sep 12 2000 | Capital One Services, LLC | System and method for performing Web based in-view monitoring |
7568148, | Sep 20 2002 | GOOGLE LLC | Methods and apparatus for clustering news content |
7571183, | Nov 19 2004 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC | Client-based generation of music playlists via clustering of music similarity vectors |
7596597, | Aug 31 2006 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC | Recommending contacts in a social network |
7606772, | May 22 2006 | World Assets Consulting AG, LLC | Adaptive social computing methods |
7630986, | Oct 27 1999 | STRIPE, INC | Secure data interchange |
7680770, | Jan 21 2004 | GOOGLE LLC | Automatic generation and recommendation of communities in a social network |
7818392, | Apr 07 2004 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC | Hierarchical posting systems and methods with social network filtering |
7860811, | May 22 2006 | Gula Consulting Limited Liability Company | Adaptive recommendation explanations |
7890871, | Aug 26 2004 | Concert Technology Corporation | System and method for dynamically generating, maintaining, and growing an online social network |
7904341, | May 20 2004 | ManyWorlds, Inc.; MANYWORLDS, INC | Adaptive commerce systems and methods |
7904511, | Sep 30 2001 | ZOOM VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS, INC | Personal contact network |
7921036, | Apr 30 2002 | ACCESSIFY, LLC | Method and system for dynamically targeting content based on automatic demographics and behavior analysis |
7958457, | Dec 20 1999 | Wireless Agents, LLC | Method and apparatus for scheduling presentation of digital content on a personal communication device |
7966224, | Apr 27 2006 | AMDOCS DEVELOPMENT LIMITED; Amdocs Software Systems Limited | System, method and computer program product for generating a relationship-based recommendation |
8001008, | Oct 24 2006 | NYTELL SOFTWARE LLC | System and method of collaborative filtering based on attribute profiling |
8010458, | May 26 2004 | Meta Platforms, Inc | System and method for managing information flow between members of an online social network |
8015119, | Jan 21 2004 | GOOGLE LLC | Methods and systems for the display and navigation of a social network |
8060463, | Mar 30 2005 | Amazon Technologies, Inc | Mining of user event data to identify users with common interests |
8065383, | May 17 2004 | Simplefeed, Inc.; SIMPLEFEED, INC | Customizable and measurable information feeds for personalized communication |
8069076, | Mar 25 2003 | COX COMMUNICATIONS, INC | Generating audience analytics |
8108245, | Sep 17 1999 | COX COMMUNICATIONS, INC | Method and system for web user profiling and selective content delivery |
20010047290, | |||
20010047358, | |||
20010049623, | |||
20020016786, | |||
20020049617, | |||
20020049738, | |||
20020052873, | |||
20020062368, | |||
20020069102, | |||
20020093537, | |||
20020161664, | |||
20020180805, | |||
20020194161, | |||
20030023427, | |||
20030028498, | |||
20030055666, | |||
20030101449, | |||
20030154126, | |||
20030216960, | |||
20030225550, | |||
20030233374, | |||
20040068552, | |||
20040107125, | |||
20040122803, | |||
20040186776, | |||
20050097008, | |||
20050097204, | |||
20050197922, | |||
20050267973, | |||
20060036476, | |||
20060042483, | |||
20060092074, | |||
20060136589, | |||
20060184482, | |||
20060230021, | |||
20070150470, | |||
20070203872, | |||
20070250653, | |||
20070287473, | |||
20080172461, | |||
20080249968, | |||
20080288354, | |||
20090018918, | |||
20090144075, | |||
20110153452, | |||
EP1311980, | |||
EP1397252, | |||
EP1630700, | |||
EP1630701, | |||
WO14625, | |||
WO75798, | |||
WO193112, | |||
WO2094566, | |||
WO2005052738, | |||
WO2005054982, | |||
WO2005103983, | |||
WO2005116852, | |||
WO9858473, |
Executed on | Assignor | Assignee | Conveyance | Frame | Reel | Doc |
May 22 2006 | FLINN, STEVEN D | MANYWORLDS, INC | ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 027803 | /0979 | |
May 22 2006 | MONEYPENNY, NAOMI F | MANYWORLDS, INC | ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 027803 | /0979 | |
Jul 27 2011 | MANYWORLDS, INC | World Assets Consulting AG, LLC | ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 027804 | /0067 | |
Oct 19 2011 | World Assets Consulting AG, LLC | (assignment on the face of the patent) | / | |||
Aug 26 2015 | World Assets Consulting AG, LLC | Gula Consulting Limited Liability Company | MERGER SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 036807 | /0359 |
Date | Maintenance Fee Events |
Mar 27 2017 | M1552: Payment of Maintenance Fee, 8th Year, Large Entity. |
Mar 11 2021 | M1553: Payment of Maintenance Fee, 12th Year, Large Entity. |
Date | Maintenance Schedule |
Oct 22 2016 | 4 years fee payment window open |
Apr 22 2017 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Oct 22 2017 | patent expiry (for year 4) |
Oct 22 2019 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 4) |
Oct 22 2020 | 8 years fee payment window open |
Apr 22 2021 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Oct 22 2021 | patent expiry (for year 8) |
Oct 22 2023 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 8) |
Oct 22 2024 | 12 years fee payment window open |
Apr 22 2025 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Oct 22 2025 | patent expiry (for year 12) |
Oct 22 2027 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 12) |