User Interface Operation Based on Similar Spelling of Tokens in Text

• US 20160048488A1
• Filed: 08/15/2014
• Published: 02/18/2016
• Est. Priority Date: 08/15/2014
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Freedom Solutions Group, LLC
• Original Assignee: Freedom Solutions Group, LLC
• Inventors: COOK, David, ZWIERZCHLEJSKI, Jacek, KACEK, Stacey, MAEDER, Jason, BECK, Stewart
• Granted Patent: US 10,061,765 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 1/1
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 16/334 Query execution G06F16/335 takes precedence
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 40/232 Orthographic correction, e.g. spell checking or vowelisation
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 40/242 Dictionaries
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 40/284 Lexical analysis, e.g. tokenisation or collocates
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 40/30 Semantic analysis

Abstract

Operation of a user interface includes performing token based analysis of a baseline text corpus and a targeted text listing. For a selected token in the targeted text listing, a matching baseline token in identified. From a plurality of contexts corresponding to the matching baseline token, context-matched and non-context matched usage data for the matching baseline token is identified and provided to a user interface. Similar processing may be performed on the basis of a related, but matching, baseline token. In another embodiment, instances of similar spelling errors are identified on the basis of a plurality of tokens identified in the targeted text listing.

Claims

1. A method for operating an user interface of a machine comprising at least one processor, the method comprising:

identifying, by the at least one processor, a plurality of tokens in a targeted text listing;

identifying, by the at least one processor, a first token from the plurality of the tokens as an instance of a similar spelling error based on similarity of the first token to a second token of the plurality of tokens; and

providing, by the at least one processor to the user interface, the similar spelling error instance including the first token and the second token.

2. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

receiving, by the at least one processor via the user interface, user input that resolves the similar spelling error instance.

3. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

identifying, by the at least one processor, a third token of the plurality of tokens that has not been identified as an instance of a similar spelling error and that has not been excluded from being identified as an instance of a typographical error, as an instance of a typographical error based on a dictionary; and

providing, by the at least one processor to the user interface, the typographical error instance including the third token.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein identifying the similar spelling error instance further comprises:

identifying, by the at least one processor, an occurrence of a predefined phrase in the plurality of tokens; and

for each token of the plurality of tokens within the occurrence of the predefined phrase, excluding, by the at least one processor, the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein identifying the similar spelling error instance further comprises:

identifying, by the at least one processor, a number of occurrences of each token of the plurality of tokens within the targeted text listing; and

when the number of occurrences for a token of the plurality of tokens is not less than a threshold, excluding, by the at least one processor, the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein identifying the similar spelling error instance further comprises:

for a token of the plurality of tokens, determining, by the at least one processor, whether the token satisfies an exclusion rule; and

when the token satisfies the exclusion rule, excluding, by the at least one processor, the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein identifying the similar spelling error instance further comprises:

for a token of the plurality of tokens that has not been excluded from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error, identifying, by the at least one processor, at least one similar token of the plurality of tokens in the targeted text listing;

determining, by the at least one processor, whether a similar token of the at least one similar token satisfies a similar token exclusion rule;

when the similar token satisfies the similar token exclusion rule, excluding, by the at least one processor, the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error; and

when the similar token does not satisfy any similar token exclusion rule, providing, by the at least one processor, the token as the similar spelling error instance and providing the similar token as the second token.

8. An apparatus comprising:

at least one processor;

a storage device operatively connected to the at least one processor and having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to;

identify a plurality of tokens in a targeted text listing;

identify a first token from the plurality of the tokens as an instance of a similar spelling error based on similarity of the first token to a second token of the plurality of tokens; and

provide the similar spelling error instance including the first token and the second token to a user interface.

9. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the storage device further comprises instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:

receive, via the user interface, user input that resolves the similar spelling error instance.

10. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the storage device further comprises instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:

identify a third token of the plurality of tokens that has not been identified as an instance of a similar spelling error and that has not been excluded from being identified as an instance of a typographical error, as an instance of a typographical error based on a dictionary; and

provide the typographical error instance including the third token to the user interface.

11. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein those instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to identify the similar spelling error instance are further operative to:

identify an occurrence of a predefined phrase in the plurality of tokens; and

for each token of the plurality of tokens within the occurrence of the predefined phrase, exclude the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error.

12. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein those instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to identify the similar spelling error instance are further operative to:

identify a number of occurrences of each token of the plurality of tokens within the targeted text listing; and

when the number of occurrences for a token of the plurality of tokens is not less than a threshold, exclude the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error.

13. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein those instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to identify the similar spelling error instance are further operative to:

for a token of the plurality of tokens, determine whether the token satisfies an exclusion rule; and

when the token satisfies the exclusion rule, exclude the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error.

14. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein those instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to identify the similar spelling error instance are further operative to:

for a token of the plurality of tokens that has not been excluded from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error, identify at least one similar token of the plurality of tokens in the targeted text listing;

determine whether a similar token of the at least one similar token satisfies a similar token exclusion rule;

when the similar token satisfies the similar token exclusion rule, exclude the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error; and

when the similar token does not satisfy any similar token exclusion rule, provide the token as the similar spelling error instance and providing the similar token as the second token.

15. A non-transitory, machine-readable medium having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:

identify a plurality of tokens in a targeted text listing;

identify a first token from the plurality of the tokens as an instance of a similar spelling error based on similarity of the first token to a second token of the plurality of tokens; and

provide the similar spelling error instance including the first token and the second token to a user interface.

16. The machine-readable medium of claim 15, further comprising instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:

receive, via the user interface, user input that resolves the similar spelling error instance.

17. The machine-readable medium of claim 15, further comprising instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:

identify a third token of the plurality of tokens that has not been identified as an instance of a similar spelling error and that has not been excluded from being identified as an instance of a typographical error, as an instance of a typographical error based on a dictionary; and

provide the typographical error instance including the third token to the user interface.

18. The machine-readable medium of claim 15, wherein those instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to identify the similar spelling error instance are further operative to:

identify an occurrence of a predefined phrase in the plurality of tokens; and

for each token of the plurality of tokens within the occurrence of the predefined phrase, exclude the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error.

19. The machine-readable medium of claim 15, wherein those instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to identify the similar spelling error instance are further operative to:

identify a number of occurrences of each token of the plurality of tokens within the targeted text listing; and

when the number of occurrences for a token of the plurality of tokens is not less than a threshold, exclude the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error.

20. The machine-readable medium of claim 15, wherein those instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to identify the similar spelling error instance are further operative to:

for a token of the plurality of tokens, determine whether the token satisfies an exclusion rule; and

when the token satisfies the exclusion rule, exclude the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error.

21. The machine-readable medium of claim 15, wherein those instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to identify the similar spelling error instance are further operative to:

for a token of the plurality of tokens that has not been excluded from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error, identify at least one similar token of the plurality of tokens in the targeted text listing;

determine whether a similar token of the at least one similar token satisfies a similar token exclusion rule;

when the similar token satisfies the similar token exclusion rule, exclude the token from being identified as an instance of a typographical error or an instance of a similar spelling error; and

when the similar token does not satisfy any similar token exclusion rule, provide the token as the similar spelling error instance and providing the similar token as the second token.