Methods and systems for reporting regions of interest in content files

• US 20070260651A1
• Filed: 05/08/2006
• Published: 11/08/2007
• Est. Priority Date: 05/08/2006
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Software Integrity Group Incorporated
• Original Assignee: Black Duck Software, Inc. (Synopsys Incorporated)
• Inventors: Pedersen, Palle
• Granted Patent: US 8,010,538 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 1/1
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 16/30 of unstructured textual data document management systems G06F16/93
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 16/93 Document management systems

Abstract

A content file is examined and compared against one or more comparison files. An indication is provided that the content file is similar to the one comparison file that is the best match with the examined content file.

Claims

1. A method for providing an indication of similar content, comprising the steps of:

examining a content file;

identifying a first portion of the examined content file that is similar to a portion of a first comparison content file;

identifying a second portion of the examined content file that is similar to a portion of a second comparison content file;

determining whether one of the first portion and the second portion of the examined content file is a superset of the other, and if so, determining that the portion of the comparison file that matches the superset is a best match with the first content file; and

providing an indication that the examined content file is similar to the best match.

2. The method of claim 1, further comprising determining whether the first portion and the second portion of the examined content file are the same, and if so, determining which of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file is a best match using additional information about the comparison files.

3. The method of claim 2, further comprising determining whether the first portion and the second portion are partially overlapping, and if so, identifying the best matches for the portions that are different.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the first portion is a contiguous portion of the examined file.

5. The method of claim 1 wherein the first portion of the examined content file is identical to the portion of the first comparison content file, and the second portion of the examined content file is identical to the portion of the second comparison content file.

6. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

identifying a third portion of the examined content file that is similar to a portion of a third comparison content file; and

determining whether one of the first portion, the second portion and the third portion of the examined content file is a superset of one or more of the others, and if so, determining that the portion of the comparison file that matches the superset is a best match with the first content file.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein the second comparison content file and the third comparison file are both determined to be a best match.

8. The method of claim 1 wherein the similarity is determined by one or more of the following techniques, alone, or in combination with others:

comparing tokens, comparing content, comparing data derived from content, comparing text strings, and comparing license text.

9. The method of claim 2, wherein determining which of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file is a best match comprises using information about other matches with the comparison files.

10. The method of claim 2, wherein determining which of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file is a best match comprises using information about other matches with the collection associated with the comparison files.

11. The method of claim 10, wherein determining which of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file is a best match comprises using information about other matches with the collection associated with the comparison files, and selecting the match with the collection that has the most matches with the examined file.

12. The method of claim 10, wherein determining which of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file is a best match comprises using information about other matches with the collection associated with the comparison files, and selecting the match with the comparison content file associated with a collection that has the most matches with the collection with which examined file is associated.

13. The method of claim 2, wherein determining which of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file is a best match comprises using information about directory and/or file names associated with the comparison files.

14. The method of claim 2, wherein determining which of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file is a best match comprises using date information associated with the comparison files.

15. The method of claim 2, wherein determining which of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file is a best match comprises using license information associated with the comparison files.

16. The method of claim 15, wherein the license information is used to determine which license is most appropriate.

17. The method of claim 15 wherein the license information is used to determine which comparison file has a license that is most restrictive.

18. The method of claim 2, wherein determining which of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file is a best match comprises using an indicator that a comparison is believed to be an original.

19. The method of claim 2, wherein determining which of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file is a best match comprises using an indicator that a comparison is believed not to be an original.

20. The method of claim 1 further comprising displaying information identifying the comparison file that is the best match.

21. The method of claim 1, wherein the first portion and the second portion of the examined file overlap.

22. A system for providing an indication of similar content, comprising the steps of:

an examination subsystem for examining a content file;

an identification subsystem for identifying a first portion of the examined content file that is similar to a portion of a first comparison content file, and identifying a second portion of the examined content file that is similar to a portion of a second comparison content file;

a determination subsystem for determining whether one of the first portion and the second portion of the examined content file is a superset of the other, and if so, determining that the portion of the comparison file that matches the superset is a best match with the first content file; and

an indication subsystem for providing an indication that the examined content file is similar to the comparison file that is the best match with the examined content file.

23. The system of claim 22, wherein the determination subsystem determines whether the first portion and the second portion of the examined content file are the same, and if so, determining which of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file is a best match using additional information about the comparison files.

24. The system of claim 22, wherein the determination subsystem determines whether the first portion and the second portion are partially overlapping, and if so, identifies the best matches for the portions that are different.

25. A method for providing an indication of similar content, comprising the steps of:

examining a content file;

identifying a first portion of the examined content file that is similar to a portion of a first comparison content file and a portion of a second comparison content file;

determining whether the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file are in the same collection, and if so, selecting one of the first comparison content file and the second comparison content file as a representative match with the examined content file; and

providing an indication that the examined content file is similar to the representative match.

26. A method for providing an indication of similar content, comprising the steps of:

examining a collection of content files;

identifying a first subset of a collection of comparison content files that are similar to a first subset of the examined content files;

identifying a second subset of a collection of comparison content files that are similar to a second subset of the examined content files;

determining whether one of the matching first subset of comparison content files and the second subset of comparison content files are a superset of the other, and if so, determining that the subset of the collection of comparison files that matches the superset is a best match with the matching subset of the examined content files; and

providing an indication that the subset of the collection of the examined content files is similar to the best match.