System and method for predicting the ranking of items

• US 20050210025A1
• Filed: 03/03/2005
• Published: 09/22/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 03/17/2004
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: DALTON, MICHAEL AND DALTON ALLAN
• Original Assignee: DALTON, MICHAEL AND DALTON ALLAN
• Inventors: Dalton, Allan Edward, Dalton, Michael Edward
• Application Number:
  US11/070,881
• Publication Number:
  US 20050210025A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 1/1
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 16/9535 Search customisation based on user profiles and personalisation
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 16/9536 Search customisation based on social or collaborative filtering
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 16/9538 Presentation of query results

Abstract

An interactive method of responding to a request to predict how a user would rank items which may be unfamiliar to that user. The invention uses reports provided by a plurality of users containing the order in which the users ranked a selection from a list of items. Items are selected from one or more of the categories of products, services, performers, competitors, events and the like. The process involves the creation of a group of users where the group can include some users who have not necessarily ranked any of the same items as the requestor.

Claims

1. An interactive method of creating a consolidated ranking in response to a request for a prediction from a requestor where the consolidated ranking predicts how the requestor would rank items, which may be unfamiliar to the requester, using reports that have been provided by a plurality of users containing the order that items are ranked, said items selected from one or more of the categories of products, services, performers, competitors, events and the like;

where the method includes the sequential steps of;

(a) presenting to said users a list containing three or more items, said users may include said requestor;

(b) obtaining from said users, reports ranking three or more of the items presented in step (a);

(c) creating groups of said users by choosing some of the users to be lead users;

calculating correlation between the order that items are ranked in the report of a lead user and the order that the same items are ranked in the report of another user when the reports of both users contain at least three of the same items; and

grouping together all users whose reports have calculated correlation with the lead user in excess of a predefined value;

(d) creating separately for each group formed in step (c), a consolidated ranking of all items included in the reports of at least three users in the group by an iterative process that orders items on the basis of the number of times that users in the group rank an item higher than another item when the number of times such assessment is made is weighted by the sum of weights assigned to the two items where those weights were calculated in the previous iteration and where the items'"'"' weights for the first iteration are predetermined;

(e) calculating correlation between the order in which items are ranked in each user'"'"'s report and the consolidated ranking of every group derived in step (d) and then assigning said user to the group with which the said user is most highly correlated;

(f) repeating step (d) using the new groups formed in step (e);

(g) repeating steps (e) and (f) until there is no change in the membership of any group and no change in the list of items in each group'"'"'s consolidated ranking;

wherein by this process a consolidated ranking for a group, containing predictions based on a request, can be created even though the items in the report of the requester may not overlap with any of the items in the reports of some of the other said users in the same group.

2. An interactive method of creating a consolidated ranking as claimed in claim 1 wherein step (c) comprises the sub-steps of:

(i) initially choosing as a lead user, that user who has recorded the most items in his/her report;

(ii) identifying a group of other users who have at least three items in their reports in common with the items in the report of the lead user;

(iii) calculating the correlation between the order that items are ranked in the lead user'"'"'s report and the order the same items are ranked in the report of another user when there are at least three items in common in their reports;

(iv) creating a group of other users for whom the calculated correlation between items in their reports and items in the report of the said lead user exceeds a predefined value; and

(v) repeating sub-steps (i) through (iv) for all users not included in the previous sub-step (iv) until no new group consisting of a number of users in excess of a predefined value can be formed in sub-step (iv).

3. An interactive method of creating a consolidated ranking as claimed in claim 2 wherein step (d) of claim 1 comprises an iterative process involving the sub-steps of:

(i) checking that each user has ranked in his/her report more than a predefined number of items that are also included in the list of items in a group'"'"'s consolidated ranking and where such check fails that user is excluded from the group;

(ii) checking that each item included in a group'"'"'s consolidated ranking is included in more than a predefined number of reports of users who are members of the group and where such check fails that item is excluded from the group'"'"'s consolidated ranking;

(iii) repeating sub-steps (i) and (ii) until no more users or items are excluded;

(iv) assigning predefined initial weights to all the items in a group'"'"'s consolidated ranking;

(v) multiplying the number of times a particular item is preferred to another item (separately for each other item) by the sum of the weights assigned to the particular item and each other item as described in sub-step (iv);

(vi) summing the values calculated in sub-step (v) for each of the other items;

dividing this value by the number of times users have ranked the particular item; and

assigning the result of this calculation to be the new weight associated with the particular item;

(vii) sequentially for every item repeating sub-step (v) using the initial values assigned in sub-step (iv);

(viii) sequentially for every item repeating sub-step (vi) except that the values to be added up are those calculated in sub-set (vii) not sub-step (v) and the calculated value is assigned to the item with which all comparisons are being made where the latter item is not necessarily the original particular item;

(ix) repeating sub-steps (vii) and (viii) except that the initial values assigned in sub-set (iv) are replaced by values calculated in sub-step (viii); and

until the change in weight value of each other item after a repetition is less than a predefined value.

4. An interactive method of creating a consolidated ranking as claimed in claim 3 further including the steps of:

(h) transmitting users'"'"' reports to a central data storage facility;

(i) storing the said users'"'"' reports in a data memory and retrieving the ranking of items in those reports for use in generating a consolidated ranking for the group to which the user is assigned;

(j) storing both the correlation of users'"'"' reports and an identifier of the group to which the user is assigned in a data memory so that the consolidated ranking of the user'"'"'s group can be retrieved and presented to the user; and

(k) transmitting a user'"'"'s request for an additional consolidated ranking to a central processing workstation;

whereby a user can submit a request;

the request can be processed;

the response to the request presented back to the said user; and

the said user can submit a follow up request to the first request.

5. An interactive method of creating a consolidated ranking as claimed in claim 4 further including the steps of:

(l) responding to a user'"'"'s request to create a new consolidated ranking by changing the items to be included in the list presented to users;

(m) responding to a user'"'"'s request to create a new consolidated ranking by selecting which users'"'"' reports can be included in a group; and

(n) responding to a user'"'"'s request to create a new consolidated ranking by assigning predefined variable weights to selected items included in the reports of users.

6. An interactive method of creating a consolidated ranking as claimed in claim 5 further wherein:

the weights to be associated with items included in users'"'"' reports are predefined;

the weights to be associated with all the items in selected users'"'"' reports are predefined;

the difference in correlation to be used in selecting which users are to be included in a group is predefined; and

the maximum number of iterations which can be performed before an iteration process is terminated, is predefined.

7. A interactive method of creating a consolidated ranking as claimed in claim 6 further including the steps of:

(o) presenting to a user the consolidated ranking of the group to which the said user has been assigned; and

(p) responding to a user'"'"'s request to present to other users selected information such as the said user'"'"'s reports which are stored in data memory.

8. A system for creating a consolidated ranking which predicts how a user would rank items as a result of creating a group containing the reports of a plurality of users even when the items in the report of the user who has requested the prediction may not overlap with any of the items in the reports of some of the other said users in the group;

wherein the system includes;

(a) a display arranged to present to said users a list containing three or more items as specified in claim 1(a);

(b) a data entry component arranged to obtain from said users reports ranking three or more of the items presented in step 1(a) as specified in claim 1(b);

(c) a mechanism arranged to compare the correlation of the said user'"'"' reports as specified in claim 1(c);

(d) a mechanism arranged to compare the number of items in a said user'"'"'s report with a predefined number as specified in claim 3 sub-step (i);

(e) a mechanism arranged to compare the number of said users including an item in his/her report with a predefined number as specified in claim 3 sub-step (ii); and

(f) a mechanism arranged to present to a said user a consolidated ranking as specified in claim 7.

9. A system for creating a consolidated ranking as claimed in claim 8 wherein the data entry component arranged to obtain a report from a said user includes a workstation interfaced to a data memory through a network.

10. A system for creating a consolidated ranking as claimed in claim 9 wherein the mechanism arranged to compare the number of items in a said user'"'"'s report is further arranged to reduce to zero the weight for an item when the number of items in the said user'"'"'s report is less than a predefined number.

11. A system for creating a consolidated ranking as claimed in claim 10 wherein the mechanism arranged to compare the number of users including an item in his/her report is further arranged to reduce to zero the weight for a said user when the number of users including a said item in his/her report is less than a predefined number.

12. A system for creating a consolidated ranking as claimed in claim 11 wherein the mechanism arranged to compare the number of users assigned to a group to create a consolidated ranking is further arranged to include users who have correlations with the consolidated ranking of a group that are below the predefined value for his/her inclusion in the group.

13. A system for creating a consolidated ranking as claimed in claim 12 wherein the mechanism arranged to transmit the consolidated ranking to a said user includes a workstation interfaced to a data memory through a network.

14. A data processing system readable medium having code embodied therein, the code including instructions executable by a data processing system for performing the steps of claim 1.

15. The data processing system readable medium in claim 14 further including code for performing the steps of claim 3 and wherein sub-step (i) in claim 3 which compares the number of items in a user'"'"'s report reduces to zero the weight for an item when the number of items in the user'"'"'s report is less than a predefined number.

16. The data processing system readable medium in claim 15 wherein sub-step (ii) of claim 3 which compares the number of users including an item in his/her report reduces to zero the weight for an item when the number of users including a said item in his/her report is less than a predefined number.

17. The data processing system readable medium in claim 16 wherein sub-step (ii) of claim 2 which compares the number of users assigned to a group to create a consolidated ranking includes users who have correlations with the consolidated ranking of a group that are below the predefined value for his/her inclusion in the group.