System and method for advanced rule creation and management within an integrated virtual workspace

• US 20050055433A1
• Filed: 07/12/2004
• Published: 03/10/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 07/11/2003
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Catalystweb LLC
• Original Assignee: Catalystweb LLC
• Inventors: Mathew, Boban, John, Thomas, Evans, Dagny
• Application Number:
  US10/889,711
• Publication Number:
  US 20050055433A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 709/223
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06 Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/10 Office automation; Time management
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 51/00 User-to-user messaging in packet-switching networks, transmitted according to store-and-forward or real-time protocols, e.g. e-mail
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 51/212 using filtering or selective blocking

Abstract

A conflict detection and resolution system and method are described for detecting and resolving conflicts between filtering and/or routing rules within an integrated messaging/document management system. One embodiment of the method comprises evaluating a plurality of rules for routing, filtering and/or storing messages and/or documents to determine whether a conflict exists between two or more of the plurality of rules; detecting a conflict between two or more of the plurality of rules; determining a severity level associated with the detected conflict; and identifying a resolution to the conflict resolution if the severity level associated with the conflict is below a predetermined threshold value.

Claims

1. A computer-implemented method comprising:

evaluating a plurality of rules for routing, filtering and/or storing messages and/or documents to determine whether a conflict exists between two or more of the plurality of rules;

detecting a conflict between two or more of the plurality of rules, the conflict having a particular level of severity associated therewith; and

identifying a resolution to the conflict if the severity associated with the conflict is below a predetermined threshold.

2. The method as in claim 1 further comprising:

rejecting one or more of the plurality of rules involved in the conflict if the severity level associated with the conflict is above the predetermined threshold value.

3. The method as in claim 1 wherein the resolution comprises implementing only one of the rules involved in the conflict.

4. The method as in claim 1 wherein the resolution comprises:

determining an outcome most likely desired by an end user; and

implementing the rules resulting in the desired outcome.

5. The method as in claim 1 wherein the conflict severity comprises either a “

small”

conflict or a “

large”

conflict and wherein resolutions are identified for small conflicts but not for large conflicts.

6. The method as in claim 1 wherein evaluating the plurality of rules comprises:

converting variables of a conditional portion of each rule to a value in a statistical distribution centered at a point in a real line; and

converting each outcome also to a numerical value in the real line.

7. The method as in claim 6 wherein evaluating the plurality of rules further comprises:

mapping all conditions applicable in a particular time and space locality as a region in N-dimensional space (“

time-space region”

), where N represents the number of variables associated with the rule.

8. The method as in claim 7 wherein evaluating the plurality of rules further comprises:

determining the outcome of applicable rules for each time-space region; and

computing the distance of the outcome value from each of the possible values of outcome variables from rule-specified outcomes using a Euclidean metric.

9. The method as in claim 8 wherein evaluating the plurality of rules further comprises:

comparing the distance of outcome variables with a specified threshold to determine if the conflict is below the predetermined threshold.

10. The method as in claim 9 wherein identifying a resolution to the conflict comprises:

if the severity associated with the conflict is below a predetermined threshold value, using the outcome of the resolution as the value of the outcome and using the resultant value to manage the routing, filtering and/or storing of messages and/or documents within the specific time and space.

11. The method as in claim 1 wherein the messages comprise email messages, voice messages, instant messages and/or fax messages.

12. The method as in claim 1 wherein a first of the plurality of rules specifies that messages sent from one of a first defined group of senders to a first device and/or location within a first specified time period are to be forwarded to a second device and/or location;

and

wherein a second of the plurality of rules specifies that messages sent from one of a second defined group of senders to the first device and/or location within a second specified time period are to be forwarded to a third device and/or location, wherein the first specified time period overlaps with the second specified time period, and wherein, in response to receiving a message from a user who is included in both the first and second defined group during the overlap in the first and second specified time periods, resolving the conflict by selecting the outcome most likely desired by the end user.

13. The method as in claim 12 wherein resolving the conflict further comprises:

choosing either the first rule or the second rule based on where, within the overlap in the first and second specified time periods, the message is received.

14. The method as in claim 1 wherein evaluating the plurality of rules comprises performing a fuzzy logic analysis of the plurality of rules to identify conflicts.

15. A system comprising:

a plurality of agents configured to perform message and/or document management functions responsive to a plurality of rules for routing, filtering and/or storing messages and/or documents;

conflict detection logic to determine whether a conflict exists between two or more of the plurality of rules, each detected conflict having a particular level of severity associated therewith; and

conflict resolution logic to identify a resolution to the conflict if the severity associated with the conflict is below a predetermined threshold.

16. The system as in claim 15 wherein the conflict resolution logic rejects one or more of the plurality of rules involved in the conflict if the severity level associated with the conflict is above the predetermined threshold value.

17. The system as in claim 15 wherein the resolution identified by the conflict resolution logic comprises implementing only one of the rules involved in the conflict.

18. The system as in claim 15 wherein the resolution identified by the conflict resolution logic comprises:

determining an outcome most likely desired by an end user; and

implementing the rules resulting in the desired outcome.

19. The system as in claim 15 wherein the conflict severity comprises either a “

small”

conflict or a “

large”

conflict and wherein the conflict resolution logic identifies resolutions for small conflicts but not for large conflicts.

20. The system as in claim 15 wherein the conflict detection logic evaluates the plurality of rules by:

converting variables of a conditional portion of each rule to a value in a statistical distribution centered at a point in a real line; and

converting each outcome also to a numerical value in the real line.

21. The system as in claim 20 wherein the conflict detection logic further evaluates the plurality of rules by:

mapping all conditions applicable in a particular time and space locality as a region in N-dimensional space (“

time-space region”

), where N represents the number of variables associated with the rule.

22. The system as in claim 21 wherein the conflict detection logic further evaluates the plurality of rules by:

determining the outcome of applicable rules for each time-space region; and

computing the distance of the outcome value from each of the possible values of outcome variables from rule-specified outcomes using a Euclidean metric.

23. The system as in claim 22 wherein the conflict detection logic further evaluates the plurality of rules by:

comparing the distance of outcome variables with a specified threshold to determine if the conflict is below the predetermined threshold.

24. The system as in claim 23 wherein, if the severity associated with the conflict is below a predetermined threshold value, the conflict resolution logic uses the outcome of the resolution as the value of the outcome and uses the resultant value to manage the routing, filtering and/or storing of messages and/or documents within the specific time and space.

25. The system as in claim 15 wherein the messages comprise email messages, voice messages, instant messages and/or fax messages.

26. The system as in claim 15 wherein a first of the plurality of rules specifies that messages sent from one of a first defined group of senders to a first device and/or location within a first specified time period are to be forwarded to a second device and/or location;

and

wherein a second of the plurality of rules specifies that messages sent from one of a second defined group of senders to the first device and/or location within a second specified time period are to be forwarded to a third device and/or location, wherein the first specified time period overlaps with the second specified time period, and wherein, in response to receiving a message from a user who is included in both the first and second defined group during the overlap in the first and second specified time periods, the conflict resolution logic resolves the conflict by selecting the outcome most likely desired by the end user.

27. The system as in claim 26 wherein the conflict resolution logic resolves the conflict by choosing either the first rule or the second rule based on where, within the overlap in the first and second specified time periods, the message is received.

28. The system as in claim 15 wherein the conflict detection logic evaluates the plurality of rules by performing a fuzzy logic analysis of the plurality of rules to identify conflicts.

29. A machine-readable medium including program code which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the operations of:

evaluating a plurality of rules for routing, filtering and/or storing messages and/or documents to determine whether a conflict exists between two or more of the plurality of rules;

detecting a conflict between two or more of the plurality of rules, the conflict having a particular level of severity associated therewith; and

identifying a resolution to the conflict if the severity associated with the conflict is below a predetermined threshold.

30. The machine-readable medium as in claim 29 comprising additional program code to cause the processor to perform the additional operations of:

rejecting one or more of the plurality of rules involved in the conflict if the severity level associated with the conflict is above the predetermined threshold value.

31. The machine-readable medium as in claim 29 wherein the resolution comprises implementing only one of the rules involved in the conflict.

32. The machine-readable medium as in claim 29 wherein the resolution comprises:

determining an outcome most likely desired by an end user; and

implementing the rules resulting in the desired outcome.

33. The machine-readable medium as in claim 29 wherein the conflict severity comprises either a “

small”

conflict or a “

large”

conflict and wherein resolutions are identified for small conflicts but not for large conflicts.

34. The machine-readable medium as in claim 29 wherein evaluating the plurality of rules comprises:

converting variables of a conditional portion of each rule to a value in a statistical distribution centered at a point in a real line; and

converting each outcome also to a numerical value in the real line.

35. The machine-readable medium as in claim 34 wherein evaluating the plurality of rules further comprises:

mapping all conditions applicable in a particular time and space locality as a region in N-dimensional space (“

time-space region”

), where N represents the number of variables associated with the rule.

36. The machine-readable medium as in claim 35 wherein evaluating the plurality of rules further comprises:

determining the outcome of applicable rules for each time-space region; and

computing the distance of the outcome value from each of the possible values of outcome variables from rule-specified outcomes using a Euclidean metric.

37. The machine-readable medium as in claim 36 wherein evaluating the plurality of rules further comprises:

comparing the distance of outcome variables with a specified threshold to determine if the conflict is below the predetermined threshold.

38. The machine-readable medium as in claim 37 wherein identifying a resolution to the conflict comprises:

if the severity associated with the conflict is below a predetermined threshold value, using the outcome of the resolution as the value of the outcome and using the resultant value to manage the routing, filtering and/or storing of messages and/or documents within the specific time and space.

39. The machine-readable medium as in claim 29 wherein the messages comprise email messages, voice messages, instant messages and/or fax messages.

40. The machine-readable medium as in claim 29 wherein a first of the plurality of rules specifies that messages sent from one of a first defined group of senders to a first device and/or location within a first specified time period are to be forwarded to a second device and/or location;

and

wherein a second of the plurality of rules specifies that messages sent from one of a second defined group of senders to the first device and/or location within a second specified time period are to be forwarded to a third device and/or location, wherein the first specified time period overlaps with the second specified time period, and wherein, in response to receiving a message from a user who is included in both the first and second defined group during the overlap in the first and second specified time periods, resolving the conflict by selecting the outcome most likely desired by the end user.

41. The machine-readable medium as in claim 40 wherein resolving the conflict further comprises:

choosing either the first rule or the second rule based on where, within the overlap in the first and second specified time periods, the message is received.

42. The machine-readable medium as in claim 29 wherein evaluating the plurality of rules comprises performing a fuzzy logic analysis of the plurality of rules to identify conflicts.

43. A system comprising:

means for performing message and/or document management functions responsive to a plurality of rules for routing, filtering and/or storing messages and/or documents;

conflict detection means to determine whether a conflict exists between two or more of the plurality of rules, each detected conflict having a particular level of severity associated therewith; and

conflict resolution means to identify a resolution to the conflict if the severity associated with the conflict is below a predetermined threshold.