Recommendation Systems

• US 20100268661A1
• Filed: 04/20/2010
• Published: 10/21/2010
• Est. Priority Date: 04/20/2009
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: B7 Interactive LLC
• Original Assignee: 4-Tell, Inc.
• Inventors: Levy, Kenneth L., Lofgren, Neil E.
• Application Number:
  US12/764,091
• Publication Number:
  US 20100268661A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/347
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/02 Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0282 Rating or review of business operators or products

Abstract

This invention deals with recommendation systems. The first embodiment is an off-the-shelf recommendation system is described, where it is easy to integrate with the website database and uses a web service for recommendations, as well as easy to integrate with email. The system receives client ID, item ID and user ID, and returns recommended item IDs. The recommendations include similar items, related items, related users, items likely to be acted upon by a given user (labeled likely items), and users likely to act upon an item (labeled likely users). The recommendations include categorical training, where recommended items are based upon similar categories, where the category types include as product type and brand. The recommendations include similar-to-related training, where similar items are used to find related items. These two intelligent methods work for items with no, few or numerous actions.

Claims

1. A method for recommendations, comprising the steps of:

a. obtaining historical data from numerous users'"'"' actions with numerous items,

b. offline training with the historical data to calculate recommendation IDs,

c. saving the recommendation IDs for more than one item or more than one user, and

d. utilizing a recommendation component, which upon a request with a target ID and a client ID, in real-time, looks up the recommendations, and returns the recommendation IDs

wherein at least one of the steps utilizes a computing device.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein a website provides the historical data and utilizes the recommendation component, with the additional step of utilizing programming on the website to convert the recommended IDs to an image or description to display on the website.

3. The method of claim 1 wherein said recommendation component is a web service.

4. The method of claim 1 wherein said offline training is implemented as a computer program, historical data is exported to one or more files from a database, said exported one or more files are listed in a configuration file, and said configuration file is the input to said computer program.

5. The method of claim 1 wherein said recommendation component loads recommendation data for multiple clients and the correct client is chosen from a lookup table using said client ID.

6. The method of claim 1 wherein said historical data is obtained through direct links to a database, and loads all of the action data into memory of a remote computer.

7. The method of claim 1 wherein the historical data includes a category tag, and said category tag is used to determine if each recommendation should be removed if the user has already acted upon the item.

8. The method of claim 1 wherein the target ID is linked to a category ID, the historical actions are linked to categories through the one or more items, related categories are found through these actions, and the top selling items of the related categories are included as recommendations.

9. The method of claim 8 wherein there are more than one category type linked to each item, and within each category type, the related categories are calculated through the historical actions, and the recommendations include the similarity of more than one category with the target ID'"'"'s category from the more than one category types.

10. The method of claim 1 wherein the target ID has one or more similar IDs, and the recommendation IDs for each similar ID is used as a recommendation for the target ID.

11. A method of calculating categorical related items, comprising the steps of:

a. obtaining historical data from numerous users'"'"' actions with numerous items, and a target items is linked to a target category,

b. determining the most related categories to the target category,

c. listing the top acted-upon items in each most related category,

d. calculating the weight based upon the top acted-upon item number of actions and the related category similarity, and

e. determining the categorical related items as the items with the largest weights,

wherein at least one of the steps utilizes a computing device.

12. The method of claim 11 wherein the weight depends upon the log of the number of actions of the top items and the square of the related category similarity.

13. The method of claim 11 wherein the target category may be related to itself depending upon calculating the self-similarity, and the self-similarity depends upon users with multiple actions in the target category.

14. The method of claim 12 wherein the self-similarity depends upon the number of users with multiple actions and by number of unique users, or number of actions by users with multiple actions and by total number of actions.

15. The method of claim 11 wherein there are more than one category type related to each item, and within each category type the related categories are calculated through the historical actions, and the recommendations include the similarity of more than one category type with the target categories from the more than one category type.

16. The method of claim 15 wherein there are two category types, one is brand and the other is product type, and the similarity of each category type is multiplied with each other and depends upon the number of actions for each top item to determine recommendations.

17. A method of calculating related categories, comprising the steps of:

a. obtaining historical data from numerous users'"'"' actions with numerous items, and each item is linked to at least on category,

b. choosing a target category,

c. determining the likelihood of acting on items in other category,

d. determining the likelihood of acting on items in the target category using self-similarity that depends upon users with multiple actions in said target category, and

e. finding the top most related categories to the target category;

wherein at least one of the steps utilizes a computing device.

18. The method of claim 17 wherein step c further includes using correlation based upon users that acted upon items in both categories.

19. The method of claim 17 wherein step d further utilizes the by number of unique users, or total number of actions.

20. The method of claim 17 wherein the results are displayed in a viewer where a computer-user gets to select the target category and view the top related categories.