US6412012B1
Expired / Lapsed
US
⏱️ 0.0 years remaining
System, method, and article of manufacture for making a compatibility-aware recommendations to a user
Assignee: Cxt Systems Inc
•
Filing: 1998-12-23
•
Granted: 2002-06-25
•
Expires: 2018-12-23
Abstract
Abstract A recommendation process includes the consideration of the compatibility of the items being recommended. An electronic processing system for generating a compatibility-aware recommendation output set to a is user based, at least in part, on a set of item compatibility rules. The system includes a processing system of one or more processors configured to receive applicable data, including i) user preference data, and ii) item compatibility rules, and to produce a compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules. A method and computer-readable storage device containing the method are also presented.
Inventors
- 👤 Paul Bieganski
- 👤 Joseph Konstan
- 👤 John Rauser
- 👤 Dan Frankowski
Bibliographic Details
Application Number
—
Jurisdiction
US
Data Source
google_patents
Last Synchronized
2026-11-03 15:05
CPC Classifications
G; G06; G06Q; G06Q30/00; G06Q30/02
Claims Analysis
Total Claims: 48
Claim 1
Independent Claim
71 words
An electronic processing system for generating a compatibility-aware recommendation output set to a user based, at least in part, on a set of item compatibility rules, the system comprising a processing system of one or more processors configured to: a. receive applicable data including i. user preference data, and ii. item compatibility rules, and b. produce a compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 2
Dependent Claim
71 words
An electronic processing system for generating a compatibility-aware recommendation output set to a user based, at least in part, on a set of item compatibility rules, the system comprising a processing system of one or more processors configured to: a. receive applicable data including i. user preference data, and ii. item compatibility rules, and b. produce a compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 3
Dependent Claim
40 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the processing system is further configured to a. receive match data, and b. produce the compatibility-aware recommendation output set, using the user preference data, the match data and the compatibility rules.
Claim 4
Dependent Claim
35 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , further comprising a ratings interface operatively coupled to the processing system, to receive the user preference data and transmit the user preference data to the processing system.
Claim 5
Dependent Claim
62 words
A system as recited in claim 3 , wherein the ratings interface is further configured to receive user item preference data that includes at least one of unary values, binary values, and numerical values, and the processing system is further configured to produce the compatibility-aware item recommendation set from the at least one of the unary values, binary values and numerical values.
Claim 6
Independent Claim
50 words
A system as recited in 1 , further comprising a recommendation request interface operatively coupled to the processing system to receive a recommendation request from the user, and wherein the processing system is configured to produce the compatibility-aware recommendation set in response to the recommendation request received from the user.
Claim 7
Independent Claim
50 words
A system as recited in 1 , further comprising a recommendation request interface operatively coupled to the processing system to receive a recommendation request from the user, and wherein the processing system is configured to produce the compatibility-aware recommendation set in response to the recommendation request received from the user.
Claim 8
Dependent Claim
47 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , further comprising an output interface operatively coupled to the processing system in order to receive the compatibility-aware recommendation output set, and a display device operatively coupled to the output interface in order to display the compatibility-aware recommendation output set.
Claim 9
Dependent Claim
75 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the processing system is further configured to derive the item compatibility rules from one or more of: a. a marketer specification, b. automatic generation using machine learning, c. automatic generation using a genetic algorithm, d. automatic generation using a neural network, e. automatic generation using a rule inference system, f. data mining, g. an analysis of historical purchase and preference data, and h. a user specification.
Claim 10
Dependent Claim
66 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the processing system is further configured to receive the item compatibility rules represented as at least one of: a. unidirectional rules, b. bidirectional rules, c. generalized rules including multi-way rules, d. rules among items, e. rules among sets, f. rules among collections, g. rules with weight factors, h. rules with priorities, and i. unweighted and unprioritized rules.
Claim 11
Dependent Claim
93 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the processing system is further configured to a. determine whether a match set exists, b. identify items compatible with items in the match set when the match set is determined to exist, where the items compatible with items in the match set are not substitutes for items in the match set, c. obtain recommendation scores for the identified items, d. recommend to the user a subset of the identified compatible items that includes no items that are substitutes for other items in the subset.
Claim 12
Dependent Claim
33 words
A system as recited in claim 9 , further configured to present recommended compatible items in the subset to the user with an indicator of recommendation strength for the items in the subset.
Claim 13
Dependent Claim
193 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the processing system is further configured to: a. initialize the compatibility-aware recommendation set, b. determine whether a match set exists, c. for each particular item in the match set, when the match set is determined to exist, apply rules having the particular item in the match set on the rules' inputs, and add items to the compatibility-aware recommendation set and subtract items from the compatibility-aware recommendation set when the applied rules so determine, d. sort items in the compatibility-aware recommendation output set according to recommendation value, e. for each examined item whose recommendation score exceeds a recommendation value, select a first sub-set of rules whose inputs include the examined item, f. select a second sub-set of rules from the first sub-set of rules where rules in the second sub-set have outputs with items not appearing above the examined item in the compatibility-aware output set, g. apply the rules in the second sub-set, h. sort items in the compatibility-aware recommendation output set below the examined item according to recommendation score, and i. sort all items in the compatibility-aware recommendation output set according to recommendation score.
Claim 14
Dependent Claim
91 words
A system as recited in claim 11 , wherein applying a rule to a selected item includes examining a rule having the selected item on an input to the rule, adding an item on an output of the rule to the compatibility-aware recommendation output set where the item on output of the rule is not already in the compatibility-aware recommendation output set, and applying a neutral recommendation score to the added item, and adding a recommendation score modifier to a recommendation score for all items on the output of the rule.
Claim 15
Dependent Claim
151 words
A system as claimed in claim 1 , further configured to: a. determine that a first and a second item have each been selected a number of times that is greater than a selection threshold, b. determine the number of times the first item has been selected by the user when the user has selected the second item, and c. compare, for one of the first and second items, the number of times that the one of the first and second items has been selected at the same time as the other of the first and second items, with the total number of times the one of the first and second items has been selected to produce a coincidence indicator, and d. infer a substitute rule between the two items when the coincidence indicator indicates coincident selection of the first and second items at a level below a substitute threshold level.
Claim 16
Dependent Claim
151 words
A system as claimed in claim 1 , further configured to: a. determine that a first and a second item have each been selected a number of times that is greater than a selection threshold, b. determine the number of times the first item has been selected by the user when the user has selected the second item, and c. compare, for one of the first and second items, the number of times that the one of the first and second items has been selected at the same time as the other of the first and second items, with the total number of times the one of the first and second items has been selected to produce a coincidence indicator; and d. infer a complementary rule between the two items when the coincidence indicator indicates coincident selection of the first and second items at a level above a coincidence threshold level.
Claim 17
Dependent Claim
26 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the processing system is further configured to produce the compatibility-ware recommendation output set under real-time, interactive time-constraints.
Claim 18
Dependent Claim
32 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the processing system is further configured to produce the compatibility-aware recommendation output set as at least one of unary, unordered and priority-ordered recommendations.
Claim 19
Dependent Claim
55 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the processing system includes a first set of processors configured to a. receive the applicable data including i. the user preference data, and ii. the item compatibility rules, and b. produce the compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 20
Dependent Claim
87 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the processing system includes a. a first set of processors configured to receive the user preference data, b. a second set of processors configured to receive the item compatibility rules, and c. a third set of processors operatively coupled to the first and second sets of processors to receive the user preference data and the item compatibility respectively therefrom and configured to produce the compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 21
Dependent Claim
80 words
A system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the processing system includes a. a first set of processors configured to receive the user preference data, and b. a second set of processors operatively coupled to the first set of processors to receive the user preference data from the first set of processors, and configured to i) receive the item compatibility rules, and ii) produce the compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 22
Independent Claim
74 words
A method of producing a compatibility filtered and weighted recommendation to a user, the method using a computer having a processing system having one or more processors and an input/output interface, the method comprising: a. receiving applicable data, using the processing system, including i. user preference data, and ii. item compatibility rules, and b. producing, using the processing system, a compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 23
Independent Claim
74 words
A method of producing a compatibility filtered and weighted recommendation to a user, the method using a computer having a processing system having one or more processors and an input/output interface, the method comprising: a. receiving applicable data, using the processing system, including i. user preference data, and ii. item compatibility rules, and b. producing, using the processing system, a compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 24
Dependent Claim
42 words
A method as recited in claim 20 , further comprising a. receiving match data, using the processing system, and b. producing, using the processing system, the compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data, the match data and the compatibility rules.
Claim 25
Dependent Claim
28 words
A method as recited in claim 20 , further comprising receiving the user preference data by the interface and transmitting the user preference data to the processing system.
Claim 26
Dependent Claim
56 words
A method as recited in claim 22 , further comprising receiving, using the interface, user item preference data that includes at least one of unary values, binary values, and numerical values, and producing the compatibility-aware item recommendation set, using the processing system, from the at least one of the unary values, binary values and numerical values.
Claim 27
Independent Claim
39 words
A method as recited in 20 , further comprising receiving a recommendation request from the user via the interface, and producing, using the processing system, the compatibility-aware recommendation set in response to the recommendation request received from the user.
Claim 28
Independent Claim
39 words
A method as recited in 20 , further comprising receiving a recommendation request from the user via the interface, and producing, using the processing system, the compatibility-aware recommendation set in response to the recommendation request received from the user.
Claim 29
Dependent Claim
24 words
A method as recited in claim 20 , further comprising outputting the compatibility aware recommendation set to a display device via the input/output interface.
Claim 30
Dependent Claim
73 words
A method as recited in claim 20 , further comprising deriving, using the processor system, the item compatibility rules from one or more of: a. a marketer specification, b. automatic generation using machine learning, c. automatic generation using a genetic algorithm, d. automatic generation using a neural network, e. automatic generation using a rule inference system, f. data mining, g. an analysis of historical purchase and preference data, and h. a user specification.
Claim 31
Dependent Claim
64 words
A system as recited in claim 20 , further comprising receiving, using the processing system, the item compatibility rules represented as at least one of: a. unidirectional rules, b. bidirectional rules, c. generalized rules including multi-way rules, d. rules among items, e. rules among sets, f. rules among collections, g. rules with weight factors, h. rules with priorities, and i. unweighted and unprioritized rules.
Claim 32
Dependent Claim
104 words
A method as recited in claim 20 , further comprising a. determining, using the processing system, whether a match set exists, b. identifying items compatible with items in the match set when the match set is determined to exist, where the items compatible with items in the match set are not substitutes for items in the match set, using the processing system, c. obtaining recommendation scores for the identified items, using the processing system, and d. recommending to the user, using the processing system, a subset of the identified compatible items that includes no items that are substitutes for other items in the subset.
Claim 33
Dependent Claim
36 words
A method as recited in claim 28 , further comprising presenting recommended compatible items in the subset to the user with an indicator of recommendation strength for the items in the subset, using the processing system.
Claim 34
Dependent Claim
223 words
A method as recited in claim 20 , further comprising a. initializing the compatibility-aware recommendation set, using the processing system, b. determining, using the processing system, whether a match set exists, c. for each particular item in the match set, when the match set is determined to exist, applying rules having the particular item in the match set on the rules' inputs, and adding items to the compatibility-aware recommendation set and subtracting items from the compatibility-aware recommendation set when the applied rules so determine, using the processing system, d. sorting, using the processing system, items in the compatibility-aware recommendation output set according to recommendation value, e. for each examined item whose recommendation score exceeds a recommendation value, selecting a first sub-set of rules whose inputs include the examined item, using the processing system, f. selecting, using the processing system, a second sub-set of rules from the first sub-set of rules where rules in the second sub-set have outputs with items not appearing above the examined item in the compatibility-aware output set, g. applying the rules in the second sub-set, using the processing system, h. sorting, using the processing system, items in the compatibility-aware recommendation output set below the examined item according to recommendation score, and i. sorting all items in the compatibility-aware recommendation output set according to recommendation score, using the processing system.
Claim 35
Dependent Claim
104 words
A method as recited in claim 30 , wherein applying a rule to a selected item includes examining a rule having the selected item on an input to the rule, using the processing system, adding an item on an output of the rule to the compatibility-aware recommendation output set where the item on the output of the rule is not already in the compatibility-aware recommendation output set, and applying a neutral recommendation score to the added item, using the processing system, and adding a recommendation score modifier to a recommendation score for all items on the output of the rule, using the processing system.
Claim 36
Dependent Claim
165 words
A method as claimed in claim 20 , further comprising a. determining, using the processing system, that a first and a second item have each been selected a number of times that is greater than a selection threshold, b. determining, using the processing system, the number of times the first item has been selected by the user when the user has selected the second item, c. comparing, for one of the first and second items, the number of times that the one of the first and second items has been selected at the same time as the other of the first and second items, with the total number of times the one of the first and second items has been selected to produce a coincidence indicator, using the processing system, and d. inferring a substitute rule, using the processing system, between the two items when the coincidence indicator indicates coincident selection of the first and second items at a level below a substitute threshold level.
Claim 37
Dependent Claim
165 words
A method as claimed in claim 20 , further comprising a. determining, using the processing system, that a first and a second item have each been selected a number of times that is greater than a selection threshold, b. determining, using the processing system, the number of times the first item has been selected by the user when the user has selected the second item, c. comparing, for one of the first and second items, the number of times that the one of the first and second items has been selected at the same time as the other of the first and second items, with the total number of times the one of the first and second items has been selected to produce a coincidence indicator, using the processing system, and d. inferring a complementary rule, using the processing system, between the two items when the coincidence indicator indicates coincident selection of the first and second items at a level above a coincidence threshold level.
Claim 38
Dependent Claim
24 words
A method as recited in claim 20 , further comprising producing the compatibility-aware recommendation output set under real-time, interactive time-constraints, using the processing system.
Claim 39
Dependent Claim
30 words
A method as recited in claim 20 , further comprising producing, using the processing system, the compatibility-aware recommendation output set as at least one of unary, unordered and priority-ordered recommendations.
Claim 40
Dependent Claim
68 words
A method as recited in claim 20 , wherein the processing system includes a first set of processors, and further comprising a. receiving, with the first set of processors, the applicable data including i. the user preference data, and ii. the item compatibility rules, and b. producing, with the first set of processors, the compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 41
Dependent Claim
94 words
A method system as recited in claim 20 , wherein the processing system includes first, second and third sets of processors operatively coupled together, and further comprising a. receiving the user preference data using the first set of processors, b. receiving the item compatibility rules using the second set of processors, and c. receiving, using the third set of processors, the user preference data and the item compatibility respectively from the first and second sets of processors, and producing the compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 42
Dependent Claim
92 words
A method as recited in claim 20 , wherein the processing system includes first and second sets of operatively coupled processors, and further comprising a. receiving the user preference data using the first set of processors and b. receiving, using the second set of processors, the user preference data from the first set of processors, and i) receiving, using the second set of processors, the item compatibility rules, and ii) producing, using the second set of processors, the compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 43
Dependent Claim
62 words
A computer-readable program storage device, having a set of program instructions physically embodied thereon, executable by a computer, to perform a method of producing a compatibility-aware recommendation, the method comprising: a. receiving applicable data including i. user preference data, and ii. item compatibility rules, and b. producing a compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 44
Dependent Claim
62 words
A computer-readable program storage device, having a set of program instructions physically embodied thereon, executable by a computer, to perform a method of producing a compatibility-aware recommendation, the method comprising: a. receiving applicable data including i. user preference data, and ii. item compatibility rules, and b. producing a compatibility-aware recommendation output set using the user preference data and the item compatibility rules.
Claim 45
Dependent Claim
37 words
A storage device as recited in claim 39 , the method further comprising a. receiving match data; and b. producing the compatibility-aware recommendation output set, using the user preference data, the match data and the compatibility rules.
Claim 46
Dependent Claim
33 words
A storage device as recited in 39 , further comprising receiving a recommendation request from the user and producing the compatibility-aware recommendation set in response to the recommendation request received from the user.
Claim 47
Dependent Claim
33 words
A storage device as recited in 39 , further comprising receiving a recommendation request from the user and producing the compatibility-aware recommendation set in response to the recommendation request received from the user.
Claim 48
Dependent Claim
27 words
A storage device as recited in claim 39 , further comprising receiving the compatibility-aware recommendation output set, and displaying the compatibility-aware recommendation output set to the user.
References Cited (Backward Citations)
US4996642A
Cited
US5201010A
Cited
US5353219A
Cited
US5383111A
Cited
US5311424A
Cited
US5974396A
Cited
EP0643359A2
Cited
JPH07234881A
Cited
US5515269A
Cited
JPH07152771A
Cited
US5459306A
Cited
US5774868A
Cited
US5794209A
Cited
US5749081A
Cited
JPH08331077A
Cited
US5768142A
Cited
US6112186A
Cited
US6092049A
Cited
US6049777A
Cited
EP0751471A1
Cited
JPH11509019A
Cited
US6041311A
Cited
JPH09153027A
Cited
US6119101A
Cited
US5704017A
Cited
JPH09265478A
Cited
US5867799A
Cited
JPH1091647A
Cited
JPH1032797A
Cited
JPH1063680A
Cited
JPH1063749A
Cited
JPH1063681A
Cited
JPH1074206A
Cited
US5825651A
Cited
JPH10143541A
Cited
JPH10143540A
Cited
JPH1091686A
Cited
JPH1091642A
Cited
US6108493A
Cited
US6016475A
Cited
US5842199A
Cited
JPH10198706A
Cited
JPH10162028A
Cited
JPH10162027A
Cited
JPH10162025A
Cited
JPH10228482A
Cited
JPH10228487A
Cited
JPH10240749A
Cited
US6006218A
Cited
JPH10247198A
Cited
JPH10257405A
Cited
JPH10260955A
Cited
JPH10283403A
Cited
JPH10289245A
Cited
JPH117453A
Cited
JPH10301950A
Cited
JPH10307845A
Cited
JPH10320415A
Cited
JPH10340270A
Cited
JPH117472A
Cited
JPH1115840A
Cited
JPH1145289A
Cited
JPH1145284A
Cited
JPH1145290A
Cited
JPH1145265A
Cited
JPH1145286A
Cited
JPH1153394A
Cited
JPH1166081A
Cited
JPH1166097A
Cited
JPH1166098A
Cited
JPH1196164A
Cited
JPH11110410A
Cited
JPH11120189A
Cited
JPH11134361A
Cited
JPH11134345A
Cited
JPH11143900A
Cited
JPH11164217A
Cited
JPH11161670A
Cited
JPH11175546A
Cited
JPH11184891A
Cited
JPH11184890A
Cited
JPH11195035A
Cited
JPH11205706A
Cited
US6018738A
Cited
JPH11212996A
Cited
JPH11232287A
Cited
JPH11232278A
Cited
JPH11250091A
Cited
JPH11259497A
Cited
US6064980A
Cited
JPH11272574A
Cited
JPH11282874A
Cited
JPH11282875A
Cited
JPH11308547A
Cited
JPH11312177A
Cited
JPH11316759A
Cited
JPH11328266A
Cited
JPH11338869A
Cited
JPH11338872A
Cited
JPH11338879A
Cited
USPTO Annuity & Maintenance Windows
| Annuity Stage | Window Opens | Payment Deadline | Surcharge Period Until | Estimated Fee | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.5 Years (Year 4) | 2005-06-24 | 2005-12-24 | 2006-06-25 | $2000.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |
| 7.5 Years (Year 8) | 2009-06-24 | 2009-12-24 | 2010-06-25 | $3760.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |
| 11.5 Years (Year 12) | 2013-06-24 | 2013-12-24 | 2014-06-25 | $7700.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |