Source: http://www.google.com/patents/US6701312?dq=6,910,205
Timestamp: 2016-08-24 23:43:10
Document Index: 318562970

Matched Legal Cases: ['art1', 'art1', 'art1', 'art1', 'art1', 'art1', 'art1', 'art1', 'art1', 'art1', 'art1', 'art1', 'art1', 'art1']

Patent US6701312 - Data ranking with a Lorentzian fuzzy score - Google PatentsSearch Images Maps Play YouTube News Gmail Drive More »Sign inPatentsThe present mechanism relates to a method for searching a document database such as the Internet and ranking the results obtained from such a search. The mechanism also relates to ranking of a set of numerical data according to a set of user specified preferences, including target range, fuzziness and...http://www.google.com/patents/US6701312?utm_source=gb-gplus-sharePatent US6701312 - Data ranking with a Lorentzian fuzzy scoreAdvanced Patent SearchPublication numberUS6701312 B2Publication typeGrantApplication numberUS 09/952,518Publication dateMar 2, 2004Filing dateSep 12, 2001Priority dateSep 12, 2001Fee statusLapsedAlso published asUS7257586, US20030065660, US20040139068, US20070271261Publication number09952518, 952518, US 6701312 B2, US 6701312B2, US-B2-6701312, US6701312 B2, US6701312B2InventorsYun-Tung Lau, Marton NagyOriginal AssigneeScience Applications International CorporationExport CitationBiBTeX, EndNote, RefManPatent Citations (8), Non-Patent Citations (32), Referenced by (23), Classifications (10), Legal Events (5) External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, EspacenetData ranking with a Lorentzian fuzzy score
US 6701312 B2Abstract
The present mechanism relates to a method for searching a document database such as the Internet and ranking the results obtained from such a search. The mechanism also relates to ranking of a set of numerical data according to a set of user specified preferences, including target range, fuzziness and bias. A fuzzy score is calculated for each database record satisfying a query and the results ranked according to fuzzy score. The fuzzy score is calculated using a Lorentzian fuzzy score formula.
What is claimed is: 1. A method for searching a database comprising at least one record and ranking search results, comprising:
entering a query, wherein the query comprises one or more numerical search terms; searching the database using the query; determining whether the at least one record in the database satisfies the query; and ranking each record of the at least one record that satisfies the query according to a fuzzy score, wherein the fuzzy score is calculated using a Lorentzian fuzzy score formula. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the query further comprises a fuzziness parameter and a bias parameter.
3. The method of claim 2, wherein at least one of the one or more numerical search terms is a target range having a minimum numeric value and a maximum numeric value.
4. The method of claim 3, wherein the bias parameter is a negative number and wherein the fuzzy score is calculated using the following Lorentzian fuzzy score formula: 1 1 + ( x - x min a1 ) 2  x < x min S  ( x ) = 1 + β * ( x - x min ) x max - x min  x min ≤ x ≤ x max 1 + β 1 + ( x - x max a2 ) 2  x max < x  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}.
5. The method of claim 3, wherein the bias parameter is a positive number and wherein the fuzzy score is calculated using the following Lorentzian fuzzy score formula: 1 - β 1 + ( x - x min a1 ) 2  x < x min S  ( x ) = 1 + β * ( x - x max ) x max - x min  x min ≤ x ≤ x max 1 1 + ( x - x max a2 ) 2  x max < x  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}.
6. The method of claim 2, wherein the bias parameter is a negative number and wherein the fuzzy score is calculated using the following Lorentzian fuzzy score formula: 1 1 + ( x - x _ a1 ) 2 _  x < x _ S  ( x ) = 1  x = x _ 1 + β 1 + ( x - x _ a2 ) 2  x > x _  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}.
7. The method of claim 2, wherein the bias parameter is a positive number and wherein the fuzzy score is calculated using the following Lorentzian fuzzy score formula: 1 - β 1 + ( x - x _ a1 ) 2 _  x < x _ S  ( x ) = 1  x = x _ 1 1 + ( x - x _ a2 ) 2  x > x _  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}.
8. A method for ranking a set of data, wherein the set of data comprises a plurality of data elements and wherein the data elements are associated with a query, the method comprising:
setting or presetting a numeric bias parameter and a numeric fuzziness factor; calculating a fuzzy score for each data element of the plurality of data elements, wherein the fuzzy score is calculated using a Lorentzian fuzzy score formula and wherein when the numeric bias parameter is set or preset to a negative number and the query comprises a numeric target range, the Lorentzian fuzzy score is: 1 1 + ( x - x min a1 ) 2  x < x min S  ( x ) = 1 + β * ( x - x min ) x max - x min  x min ≤ x ≤ x max 1 + β 1 + ( x - x max a2 ) 2  x max < x  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}, wherein when the numeric bias parameter is set or preset to a positive number and the query comprises a numeric target range, the Lorentzian fuzzy score is: 1 - β 1 + ( x - x min a1 ) 2  x < x min S  ( x ) = 1 + β * ( x - x max ) x max - x min  x min ≤ x ≤ x max 1 1 + ( x - x max a2 ) 2  x max < x  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}, wherein when the numeric bias parameter is set or preset to a negative number and the query comprises a single numeric value, the Lorentzian fuzzy score is: 1 1 + ( x - x _ a1 ) 2 _  x < x _ S  ( x ) = 1  x = x _ 1 + β 1 + ( x - x _ a2 ) 2  x > x _  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}, and wherein when the numeric bias parameter is set or preset to a positive number and the query comprises a single numeric value, the Lorentzian fuzzy score is: 1 - β 1 + ( x - x _ a1 ) 2 _  x < x _ S  ( x ) = 1  x = x _ 1 1 + ( x - x _ a2 ) 2  x > x _  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}; and ranking each data element according to the fuzzy score. 9. A method for searching a database and ranking search results, comprising:
entering a query, wherein the query comprises a plurality of numerical search terms; searching the database using the query, wherein the database comprises at least one record; determining whether the at least one record in the database satisfies the query; calculating a fuzzy score using a Lorentzian fuzzy score formula for each numerical search term of the plurality of numerical search terms for each record of the at least one record that satisfies the query; summing the fuzzy score of each numerical search term for each record into an aggregate fuzzy score; ranking each record according to the aggregate fuzzy score. 10. The method of claim 9, wherein after calculating the fuzzy score for each numerical search term for each record, the fuzzy score of at least one numerical search term of the plurality of numerical search terms for each record is multiplied by a weight factor to produce a weighted fuzzy score and wherein the summing of the fuzzy score of each numerical search term for each record comprises the weighted fuzzy score in lieu of the fuzzy score for the at least one numerical search term.
The present invention relates to information retrieval in a data processing system. The present invention further relates to a method for searching a document database such as the Internet and ranking the results obtained from such a search.
A computer's logic is both its strength and its weakness; it can only perform what it is told to do. If an alarm clock is set to go off at 6:00 PM, it will go off at exactly that time, even if it was obviously meant to go off at 6:00 AM. People in the real world can solve problems and make decisions relatively easy, but even the simplest decisions are often too difficult to be handled by computer. Fuzzy logic query processing helps to bridge the gap.
Databases are strategic tools because they support business processes. In order for a database to be useful, data must be compiled into information using tools such as queries. Queries allow a user to specify what data to retrieve from a database, and in what form. Fuzzy querying provides a way to retrieve data that was intended to be retrieved, without requiring exact parameters to be defined.
Non-fuzzy query processing relies on Boolean logic, which limits results to true or false (1 or 0). Fuzzy query processing is a superset of Boolean logic that can handle partial truths. Instead of a search results being limited to return a value of true or false, the query returns values as x% true or x% a member of a subset.
Fuzzy queries rely on the use of fuzzy quantifiers. Dr. Lotfi A. Zadeh, the founder of fuzzy logic theory, defined two kinds of quantifiers: absolute and relative. An absolute quantifier can be represented as fuzzy subsets of the non-negative numbers and use words such as at least three or about five. Relative qualifiers are represented as fuzzy subsets of the unit interval and use words such as most, at least half, or almost all.
Fuzzy queries do not take the place of the more structured queries, but expand the alternatives available. Boolean systems use selection and then ordering as a mechanism, where a fuzzy system relies on a single mechanism of overall membership degree. A fuzzy system allows for compromise between the various criteria, where a Boolean system can produce a subset of previously selected elements. There are times when Boolean logic is too rigid to be meaningful to a user. A fuzzy query allows a user to find elements that satisfy a criterion and ranks the results.
FIG. 1 illustrates the typical flow of a fuzzy database query. After identifying the need for a report 100, the user queries a database 110. The database returns a record, which is matched against predefined criteria 120 to determine the degree to which a match has occurred. The degree is then compared to a threshold value 125 to determine whether the record satisfies the users query 130 or whether the record should be discarded 135. In general, a fuzzy database query differs from a non-fuzzy query by adding steps to match the data to predefined criteria and compare the value to a threshold specified in the query.
An object can be a member of multiple sets with a different degree of membership. The degree of membership is a scale from zero to one. Complete membership has a value of one, and no membership has a value of zero. When running a fuzzy query in a control system, the output is calculated based on the value of membership a given input has in the configured fuzzy sets. Each combination of sets is configured to have a specified output. The output is based on the weighted sum of the amount of membership in each set. The fuzzy models may be used in conjunction with probabilistic models to find a solution.
FIG. 2 shows the three transformations of the system inputs 200 to outputs 205 in a fuzzy system. The process of “fuzzification” 210 is a methodology to generalize any specific theory from a precise form to continuous form. It decomposes a system input or output into one or more fuzzy sets. After the decomposition into fuzzy sets, fuzzy rule association 215 applies a set of rules to a combination of inputs. The rules determine the action and relate the variable into a numeric value. Once the numeric value is determined, de-fuzzification 220 converts the fuzzy result into an exact output value.
For example, telling a driving student to apply the brakes 74 feet from the crosswalk is too precise to be followed. Vague wording like “apply the brakes soon”, however, can be interpreted and acted upon. The instruction is received in a fuzzy form, the person associates the message using past experiences, then defuzzifies the message in order to actually apply the brakes at the appropriate time. Fuzzy queries expand query capabilities by allowing for ambiguity and partial membership.
The invention relates to database searching and the ranking of a set of numerical data according to a set of user specified preferences, including target range, fuzziness and bias.
In many database query applications, data records are returned when certain field data falls into a user specified target range. The introduction of fuzziness in the present invention extends the returned data set by including records that are “close” to the target range. The addition of a bias also increases the usefulness of the database query by providing a means to rank the results of the query in a specified order.
The present invention adapts the Lorentzian function to include variables for fuzziness and bias in order to calculate fuzzy scores, which are used to rank the results of database searches. In one embodiment, only a single input target range is used in the database query. In another embodiment, however, multiple query fields are used. According to another embodiment, when multiple query fields are used fuzzy scores are calculated for each query field in each record. The fuzzy scores of each query field in each record are then aggregated into a composite fuzzy score that is then used to rank the results of the database query.
FIG. 1 shows the typical flow of a fuzzy database query.
FIG. 2 depicts the three main transformations in a fuzzy system.
FIG. 3 shows a graph of the Lorentzian function.
FIG. 4 shows calculated Lorentzian fuzzy scores where the bias is less than zero.
FIG. 5 shows calculated Lorentzian fuzzy scores where the bias is greater than zero.
FIG. 6 shows two graphs of calculated Lorentzian fuzzy scores where the fuzziness parameters are set to zero (i.e. there is no fuzziness).
FIG. 7 shows two graphs of calculated Lorentzian fuzzy scores in the special case where the target range degenerates into a single value.
FIG. 8 shows a table of calculated fuzzy scores for each record based only on selling price.
FIG. 9 shows a table of calculated fuzzy scores for each record based only on number of rooms.
FIG. 10 shows a table of calculated fuzzy scores for each record based only on number of baths.
FIG. 11 shows aggregate fuzzy scores for each record and ranked database records.
As embodied and broadly described herein, the preferred embodiments of the present invention are directed to a method for searching a document database such as the Internet according to a set of user specified preferences, including target range, fuzziness and bias and ranking the results obtained from such a search.
The basic building block of the fuzzy score is the Lorentzian function: 1 1 + [ x - x0 a ] 2 As shown in FIG. 3, the Lorentzian function 300 has a bell-shaped drop off from a central peak. FIG. 3 depicts the Lorentzian function with a=5, x0=0, and x ranging from −10 to 10. The fuzziness of the score is proportional to the width of the Lorentzian function. The bias is introduced by a linear variation within the target range.
The fuzzy score allows a user to rank a set of numerical data according to the user's input. The qualitative behavior of the Lorentzian fuzzy score is described as follows. For data that lies outside the target range, the score is zero without fuzziness and in the range [0,1] with fuzziness. For data that is inside the target range, the score varies linearly, with a bias (higher score) towards either the lower or upper bound of the target range.
The following notation and terminology is used throughout the specification:
x1, x2, . . . , xk The maximal and minimal
data values are Max(xk) and
Min(xk), respectively
(xmin, xmax)
xmax ≧Xmin
β may be greater or smaller
Δ = Max(xk) − Min(xk)
Fuzziness or Closeness
α1 ≧ 0 and α2 ≧ 0
According to an embodiment of the present invention, the present invention can calculate a fuzzy score for a user defined database query and rank the results of the query. The fuzzy score is calculated based on user specified criteria including, but not limited to, target range (xmin, xmax), fuzziness (α1 and α2) and bias (β). In another embodiment, the fuzziness and/or bias is static and set by the software/system performing the search. While the parameters for fuzziness and bias are numeric, it is contemplated in at least one embodiment that these parameters be translated into more easily understood terminology for user selection. For example, instead of having a user specify a numeric value for each of the fuzziness parameters, α1 and α2, the user may select from a list of fuzziness categories (i.e. small, medium, large). The terms small, medium and large would equate to specific values of α1 and α2 and would be used to calculate a fuzzy score as described herein. The same holds true for the bias parameter, β. Instead of having a user specify a numeric bias value, the user may select from a list of bias categories (i.e. toward the lower bound, toward the upper bound). These categories would also be equated to specific numeric values and would be used to calculate a fuzzy score as described herein.
In order to illustrate the application of the Lorentzian function to calculate a fuzzy score, several examples will be given. Each example will illustrate how variations in user input parameters (i.e. target values, fuzziness, bias) affect the Lorentzian function as it is used to calculate a fuzzy score. For consistency, the examples will be based on a user who is shopping for a new home via a web site containing new home data. The web site allows the user to search a database of new homes based on the selling price of the home. For the following examples it is assumed the user is interested in houses between $200,000 and $250,000. Thus, the target range is defined as xmin=200000 and xmax=250000. In addition, the web site allows the user to input fuzziness values, α1 and α2, and a bias value, β.
For bias (β) values less than zero (i.e. biased toward the lower bound of the target range), the Lorentzian fuzzy score has the following formula:
For β<0, 1 1 + ( x - x min a1 ) 2  x < x min S  ( x ) = 1 + β * ( x - x min ) x max - x min  x min ≤ x ≤ x max 1 + β 1 + ( x - x max a2 ) 2  x max < x  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}.
FIG. 4 shows a sample plot 400 of S(x) with xmin=200000, xmax=250000, α1=2, α2=1, and β=−0.1. The negative slope of the graph between the target values $200,000 and $250,000 is the result of the negative bias. The negative bias affects the fuzzy score calculated from data values between the target range by biasing those data values closer to the lower end of the target range. In addition, worth noting are the calculated fuzzy scores for the data points that lie outside the target range. The non-zero scores for those data points lying outside the target range are a direct result of the incorporation of the fuzziness parameters into the Lorentzian function. Consistent with the Lorentzian function is the rapid drop off of the fuzzy scores for the data points that lie farthest from the target range. In this example, and as illustrated in the table of result rankings 410, the query would have returned records for each of the 12 homes in the database. The addition of the fuzzy scores, however, makes it easy for the user to visualize the records that best conform to the original search parameters.
For bias (β) values greater than zero (i.e. biased toward the upper bound of the target range), the Lorentzian fuzzy score has the following formula:
For β>0, 1 - β 1 + ( x - x min a1 ) 2  x < x min S  ( x ) = 1 + β * ( x - x max ) x max - x min  x min ≤ x ≤ x max 1 1 + ( x - x max a2 ) 2  x max < x  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}.
FIG. 5 shows a sample plot 500 of S(x) with xmin=200000, xmax=250000, α1=2, α2=1, and β=0.1. The positive slope of the graph between the target values $200,000 and $250,000 is the result of the positive bias. The positive bias affects the fuzzy score calculated from data values between the target range by biasing those data values closer to the upper end of the target range. In addition, worth noting are the calculated fuzzy scores for the data points that lie outside the target range. The non-zero scores for those data points lying outside the target range are a direct result of the incorporation of the fuzziness parameters into the Lorentzian function. Consistent with the Lorentzian function is the rapid drop off of the fuzzy scores for the data points that lie farthest from the target range. In this example, and as illustrated in the table of result rankings 510, the query would have returned records for each of the 12 homes in the database. The addition of the fuzzy scores, however, makes it easy for the user to visualize the records that best conform to the original search parameters.
In the case of no fuzziness, α1=0, α2=0, and where the bias (β) value is less than zero (i.e. biased toward the lower bound of the target range), the Lorentzian fuzzy score has the following formula:
For β<0, α1=0, and α2=0, 0  x < x min S  ( x ) = 1 + β * ( x - x min ) x max - x min  x min ≤ x ≤ x max 0  x max < x    where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}.
In the case of no fuzziness, α1=0, α2=0, and where the bias (β) value is greater than zero (i.e. biased toward the upper bound of the target range), the Lorentzian fuzzy score has the following formula:
For β>0, α1=0, and α2=0, 0  x < x min S  ( x ) = 1 + β * ( x - x max ) x max - x min  x min ≤ x ≤ x max 0  x max < x    where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}.
FIG. 6 shows a sample plot 600 of S(x) with xmin=200000, xmax=250000, α1=0, α2=0, and β=−0.1. FIG. 6 also shows another sample plot 610 of S(x) with xmin=200000, xmax=250000, α1=0, α2=0, and β=0.1. As with plots 400 and 500, plots 600 and 610 illustrate the effect a negative and positive bias have on the calculated fuzzy scores. As previously stated, a negative bias results in the negative slope of the plot 600 between the target values, while a positive bias results in the positive slope of the plot 610 between the target values. Since the fuzziness parameters, α1 and α2, were set to zero in both plot 600 and plot 610, all data values lying outside of the user defined target range are given a fuzzy score of zero. While the same query produced 12 records with fuzziness (as illustrated in FIGS. 4 and 5), without fuzziness only 4 records are retrieved. Moreover, records that would probably be of interest to the user, i.e. the $252,000 home, are never retrieved when the query does not incorporate the fuzziness parameters.
In the special case where the target range degenerates into a single value (i.e. xmin=xmax=x) and where the bias (β) value is less than zero (i.e. biased toward the lower bound of the target range), the Lorentzian fuzzy score has the following formula:
For β<0 and xmin=xmax=x, 1 1 + ( x - x _ a1 ) 2 _  x < x _ S  ( x ) = 1  x = x _ 1 + β 1 + ( x - x _ a2 ) 2  x > x _  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}.
In the special case where the target range degenerates into a single value (i.e. xmin=xmax=x) and where the bias (β) value is greater than zero (i.e. biased toward the upper bound of the target range), the Lorentzian fuzzy score has the following formula:
For β>0 and xmin=xmax=x, 1 - β 1 + ( x - x _ a1 ) 2 _  x < x _ S  ( x ) = 1  x = x _ 1 1 + ( x - x _ a2 ) 2  x > x _  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}.
FIG. 7 shows a sample plot 700 of S(x) with x=225000, α1=1, α2=1, and β=−0.1. FIG. 7 also shows another sample plot 710 of S(x) with x=225000, α1=1, α2=1, and β=0.1. The affect of the bias in plot 700 and 710 is more difficult to discern since there is no target range. However, a close inspection of plot 700 shows that the negative bias does influence the calculated fuzzy scores for those data values less than the target value and in plot 710 that the positive bias does influence the calculated fuzzy scores for those data values greater than then target value.
While each of the above examples has dealt with single term queries (i.e. where the user is searching based only on the selling price of a home), the present invention is easily extended to include queries with multiple search terms. To illustrate how the Lorentzian function can be used in a multiple-field query a more sophisticated home buying example is explored. The home buying database in this example is on the Internet and the user is given the option to search for new homes based on selling price, number of rooms, and number of baths. For this example, it is assumed the database contains the following records:
of Baths
It is further assumed that the user has entered the following query:
Fuzziness: Medium
Selling Price: $200,000-$230,000
Bias: Lower Priced Homes
Bias: More Rooms
Bias: More Baths
As previously discussed, and as illustrated here, the database or search tool/engine may be set up to allow the user to input non-numeric bias and fuzziness parameters that are more intuitive and user friendly. These non-numeric parameters are then equated to specific numeric parameters by the database application, search tool/engine or other system/software. For this example, the following non-numeric user specified bias parameters are equated to the following numeric parameters: Bias Lower Priced Homes=−0.1, More Rooms=0.1, More Baths=0.1. In addition, for this example, the following non-numeric specified fuzziness parameter is equated to the following numeric parameters: Medium→α1=2, α2=2. While the user, in this example, was only allowed to enter a single fuzziness parameter for the entire query, it is contemplated in another embodiment that each query field (i.e. selling price, number of rooms, number of baths) could have its own separate fuzziness parameter.
The process for searching the database and ranking the results of the query is straightforward. First, a fuzzy score is calculated for each query field and for each record using the appropriate Lorentzian formula. Second, an aggregate fuzzy score is calculated for each record using the fuzzy scores for each query field. Finally, the results are ranked according to the aggregate calculated fuzzy scores for each record.
FIG. 8 shows the fuzzy score 800 for each record based only on selling price. Since the user has specified a bias toward the lower bound of the target range (as indicated by the user's desire for lower priced homes), the following Lorentzian fuzzy score formula is used:
For β<0, 1 1 + ( x - x min a1 ) 2  x < x min S  ( x ) = 1 + β * ( x - x min ) x max - x min  x min ≤ x ≤ x max 1 + β 1 + ( x - x max a2 ) 2  x max < x  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}, xmin=200000, xmax=230000, α1=2, α2=2, and β=−0.1.
FIG. 9 shows the fuzzy score 900 for each record based only on number of rooms. Since the user has specified a bias toward the upper bound of the target range (as indicated by the user's desire for more rooms), the following Lorentzian fuzzy score formula is used:
For β>0 and xmin=xmax=x, 1 - β 1 + ( x - x _ a1 ) 2 _  x < x _ S  ( x ) = 1  x = x _ 1 1 + ( x - x _ a2 ) 2  x > x _  where x represents any data values, i.e., x∈{x1, . . . , xk}, x=3, α1=2, α2=2, and β=0.1.
FIG. 10 shows the fuzzy score 1000 for each record based only on number of baths. Since the user has specified a bias toward the upper bound of the target range (as indicated by the user's desire for more baths), and since a single target value is also specified, the same Lorentzian fuzzy score formula used to calculate the fuzzy scores for each record based on number of rooms is used.
Once a fuzzy score is calculated for each query field for each record, an aggregate fuzzy score is calculated for each record. In one embodiment, this is accomplished by simply adding the fuzzy scores of each query field together. In another embodiment, an aggregate fuzzy score is calculated by using a weighted sum. By using a weighted sum the results of a specific query field(s) can be given more weight. For example, a user may consider the selling price of a home more important than any of the other query fields. In order to incorporate this into the ranking methodology, the fuzzy scores calculated based only on the selling price of the home are multiplied by some factor so that the selling price of the home has more influence on the aggregate fuzzy scores.
The aggregate fuzzy scores 1100 for each record in this example are shown in FIG. 11. In this example the fuzzy scores of each query field have simply been added together. Once the aggregate fuzzy scores are calculated, the database records are ranked according to aggregate fuzzy score. The ranked database records 1110 are also shown in FIG. 11. With the homes ranked, the user can easily identify those homes that best match the user's query.
As would be expected based on the input query, the home selling for $200,000 with 3 rooms and 3 baths is ranked the highest. While a traditional database search would not have retrieved any records outside the user's input target range of $200,000-$230,000, 3 rooms and 3 baths, the present invention has returned all 9 records. Worth noting is the home selling for $195,000 with 3 rooms and 4 baths and the home selling for $235,000 with 4 rooms and 3 baths. Both of these homes would not have been included within the search results in a traditional database search, but in the present invention are ranked high due to the incorporation of the fuzziness parameters in the Lorentzian fuzzy score formulas.
Patent CitationsCited PatentFiling datePublication dateApplicantTitleUS5963940 *Aug 14, 1996Oct 5, 1999Syracuse UniversityNatural language information retrieval system and methodUS5983220 *Nov 14, 1996Nov 9, 1999Bizrate.ComSupporting intuitive decision in complex multi-attributive domains using fuzzy, hierarchical expert modelsUS6014664 *Aug 29, 1997Jan 11, 2000International Business Machines CorporationMethod and apparatus for incorporating weights into data combinational rulesUS6070160Jan 29, 1996May 30, 2000Artnet Worldwide CorporationNon-linear database set searching apparatus and methodUS6131082 *Dec 1, 1997Oct 10, 2000Int'l.Com, Inc.Machine assisted translation tools utilizing an inverted index and list of letter n-gramsUS6202060Oct 29, 1996Mar 13, 2001Bao Q. TranData management systemUS6243713Aug 24, 1998Jun 5, 2001Excalibur Technologies Corp.Multimedia document retrieval by application of multimedia queries to a unified index of multimedia data for a plurality of multimedia data typesUS6269368 *Oct 16, 1998Jul 31, 2001Textwise LlcInformation retrieval using dynamic evidence combination* Cited by examinerNon-Patent CitationsReference1"Are There Fuzzy State Machines?" [online], Apr. 15, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-11.html.2"Elkan's 'The Paraodxical Success of Fuzzy Logic' Paper" [online], [retreived on Jul. 3, 2001], Retrieved from the internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-21.html.3"Fuzzy Logic Research and Life" [online], May, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], pp. 1-2, Retrieved from the Internet: http://itri.loyola.edu/kb/c5_s4.htm.4"Fuzzy Logic" [online], [retrieved on Mar. 28, 2001], pp. 1-4, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.johnsboatstuff.com/Articles/fuzzy.htm.5"Fuzzy Logic" [online], Copyright 1999 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], pp. 1-7, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.attar.com/pages/fuzzy.htm.6"Glossery" [online], [retrieved Jul.3, 2001], Retrieved from Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-22.html.7"How Are Membership Values Determined?" [online], Apr. 15, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], pp. 1-2, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-9.html.8"How Search Engines Rank Web Pages" [online], Copyright 1996-2001 [retrieved on Mar. 28, 2001], pp. 1-4, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.searchenginewatch.com/webmasters/rank.html.9"How Search Engines Work" [online], Copyright 1996-2001 [retrieved on Mar. 29, 2001], pp. 1-2, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.searchenginewatch.com/webmasters/work.html.10"Integration of Problem-Solving Techniques" [online], May, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], Retrieved from the Internet: http://itri.loyola.edu/kb/c6_s3.htm.11"Isn't Fuzzy Logic' an Inherent Contradition? Why Would Anyone Want to Fuzzify Logic?" [online], Apr. 15, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-8.html.12"What are Fuzzy Numbers and Fuzzy Arithmetic?" [online], Apr. 15, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-7.html.13"What is a Fuzzy Expert System?" [online], Apr. 21, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], pp. 1-5, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-4.html.14"What is Fuzzy Control?" [online], Mar. 17, 1995 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], pp. 1-2, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-6.html.15"What is Fuzzy Logic?" [online], Apr. 15, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], pp. 1-4, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs;ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-2.html.16"What is Fuzzy Logic?" [online], Copyright 1996-2000 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.aptronix.com/fide/whatfuzzy.htm.17"What is Possibility Theory?" [online], Apr. 15, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-12.html.18"What is the Relationship Between Fuzzy Truth Values and Probabilities?" [online], Nov. 21, 1994 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], pp. 1-2, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-10.html.19"Where are Fuzzy Expert Systems Used?" [online], Apr. 15, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-5.html.20"Where is Fuzzy Logic Used?" [online], Apr. 15, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-3.html.21"Why Use Fuzzy Logic?" [online], Copyright 1996-2000 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], pp. 106, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.aptronix.com/fide/whyfuzzy.htm.22"Elkan's ‘The Paraodxical Success of Fuzzy Logic’ Paper" [online], [retreived on Jul. 3, 2001], Retrieved from the internet: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/web/Groups/Al/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-21.html.23Clark, Timothy, "Data Access & Mining Tools" [online], Copyright 1997 [retrieved on Mar. 29, 2001], pp. 1-6, Retrieved from the Internet: http://idm.internet.com/idm/vol2/5/idm0397-quest.html.24Dyck, Timothy, "Close is Good Enough With Quest 2.5 Beta" [online], Jul. 1, 1997 [retrieved on Mar. 29, 2001], pp. 1-3, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/reviews/0714/14quest.html.25 *Georgescu, S.-M.; discloses Probability estimation in hybrid NN-HMM speech recognition systems with real-time neural networks ; Intelligence and Systems, 1988. Proceedings., IEEE International Joint Symposia May 21-23, 1998, Page(s):412.*26Gibbs, Mark, "Review: Level Five's Quest 2.5, " [online], Mar. 24, 1997 [retrieved on Mar. 29, 2001], pp. 1-3, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.nwfusion.com/intranet/0324rev.html?nf.27 *Kahraman, C.; Ulukan, Z.; Yenisey, M.M.; Tolga, E. discloses Fuzzy economic and strategic design in emerging Technologies and Factory Automation, 1996. EFTA '96. Proceedings., 1996, IEEE Conference on, vol.: 2, Nov. 18-21, 1996.*28Perny, Practice and Zucker, Jean-Daniel, "Collaberative Filtering Methods Based on Fuzzy Preference Relations," 1999, pp. 1-7, EUROFUSE-SIC '99, Budapest.29Responses to "The Paradoxical Success of Fuzzy Logic" [online], Aug. 3, 1993 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], pp. 1-8, Retrieved from the Internet: ftp://ftp.cs.cmu.edu/user/ai/areas/fuzzy/doc/elkan/response.txt.30Simon, Dan, "Fuzzy Filtering" [online], Mar. 13, 2001 [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2001], pp. 1-5, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.innovatia.com/software/papers/fuzzy.htm.31Williams, Joseph, "DBMS Online" [online], Mar. 1997 [retrieved on Mar. 29, 2001], pp. 1-5, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.dbmsmag.com/9703d08/html.32Zhang, Dell and Yisheng, Dong, "An Efficient Algorithm to Rank Web Resources" [online], [retrieved on Mar. 28, 2001], pp. 1-10, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www9.org/w9cdrom/251/251.html.* Cited by examinerReferenced byCiting PatentFiling datePublication dateApplicantTitleUS7257577 *May 7, 2004Aug 14, 2007International Business Machines CorporationSystem, method and service for ranking search results using a modular scoring systemUS7257586 *Dec 29, 2003Aug 14, 2007Science Applications International CorporationData ranking with a Lorentzian fuzzy scoreUS7281005Oct 20, 2003Oct 9, 2007Telenor AsaBackward and forward non-normalized link weight analysis method, system, and computer program productUS7366668 *Feb 3, 2006Apr 29, 2008Google Inc.Voice interface for a search engineUS7493320Aug 16, 2004Feb 17, 2009Telenor AsaMethod, system, and computer program product for ranking of documents using link analysis, with remedies for sinksUS7536373Feb 14, 2006May 19, 2009International Business Machines CorporationResource allocation using relational fuzzy modelingUS7792811Sep 7, 2010Transaxtions LlcIntelligent search with guiding infoUS8010535Aug 30, 2011Microsoft CorporationOptimization of discontinuous rank metricsUS8352511Jan 8, 2013Partnet, Inc.Systems and methods for providing a confidence-based ranking algorithmUS8380502Feb 19, 2013Google Inc.Voice interface for a search engineUS8495075 *Mar 8, 2006Jul 23, 2013Apple Inc.Fuzzy string matching of media meta-dataUS8515752Mar 12, 2008Aug 20, 2013Google Inc.Voice interface for a search engineUS8768700Sep 14, 2012Jul 1, 2014Google Inc.Voice search engine interface for scoring search hypothesesUS20040139068 *Dec 29, 2003Jul 15, 2004Yun-Tung LauData ranking with a lorentzian fuzzy scoreUS20050086260 *Oct 20, 2003Apr 21, 2005Telenor AsaBackward and forward non-normalized link weight analysis method, system, and computer program productUS20050262050 *May 7, 2004Nov 24, 2005International Business Machines CorporationSystem, method and service for ranking search results using a modular scoring systemUS20070192261 *Feb 14, 2006Aug 16, 2007International Business Machines CorporationResource allocation using relational fuzzy modelingUS20070214130 *Mar 8, 2006Sep 13, 2007Apple Computer, Inc.Fuzzy string matching of media meta-dataUS20070271261 *Jun 22, 2007Nov 22, 2007Science Applications International CorporationData ranking with a lorentzian fuzzy scoreUS20080104047 *Dec 22, 2005May 1, 2008Transaxtions LlcIntelligent search with guiding infoUS20090063471 *Aug 28, 2008Mar 5, 2009Partnet, Inc.Systems and methods for providing a confidence-based ranking algorithmUS20090228472 *Mar 7, 2008Sep 10, 2009Microsoft CorporationOptimization of Discontinuous Rank MetricsUS20100153370 *Dec 15, 2008Jun 17, 2010Microsoft CorporationSystem of ranking search results based on query specific position bias* Cited by examinerClassifications U.S. Classification1/1, 707/999.005, 707/999.01, 707/999.006International ClassificationG06F17/30, G06F7/00Cooperative ClassificationY10S707/99935, Y10S707/99936, G06F17/30542European ClassificationG06F17/30S4P8FLegal EventsDateCodeEventDescriptionSep 12, 2001ASAssignmentOwner name: SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, CAFree format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:LAU, YUN-TUNG;NAGY, MARTON;REEL/FRAME:012172/0920;SIGNING DATES FROM 20010907 TO 20010910Jun 25, 2007FPAYFee paymentYear of fee payment: 4Oct 17, 2011REMIMaintenance fee reminder mailedMar 2, 2012LAPSLapse for failure to pay maintenance feesApr 24, 2012FPExpired due to failure to pay maintenance feeEffective date: 20120302RotateOriginal ImageGoogle Home - Sitemap - USPTO Bulk Downloads - Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - About Google Patents - Send FeedbackData provided by IFI CLAIMS Patent Services