Method and system for identifying expertise

• US 7,395,222 B1
• Filed: 12/05/2001
• Issued: 07/01/2008
• Est. Priority Date: 09/07/2000
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: John G. Sotos
• Original Assignee: John G. Sotos
• Inventors: Sotos, John G.
• Primary Examiner(s): Doren; Beth Van
• Assistant Examiner(s): ROBERTSON, DAVID
• Application Number:
  US10/007,156
• Time in Patent Office: 2,400 Days
• Field of Search: 705/10
• US Class Current: 705/7.34
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/10 Office automation; Time management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0201 Market modelling; Market analysis; Collecting market data
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0205 Location or geographical consideration
• CPC Class Codes: G16H 50/70 for mining of medical data, e.g. analysing previous cases of other patients

Abstract

A system and method of identifying entities having expertise in one or more subjects. Among other features, the method includes querying a database for documents (e.g., articles, papers, periodicals) relevant to a subject; and calculating a first score for each relevant document. The method also identifies entities affiliated with one or more relevant documents; and calculates a second score for each entity based on the one or more first scores of the one or more relevant documents affiliated with the entity. A step of ranking expertise of the entities based on the respective second scores of the entities is included.

Claims

1. An automated method for identifying and displaying entities having expertise in one or more subjects, the method comprising:

querying a database for documents relevant to a subject, the documents being indicative of expertise in one or more subject areas;

calculating a first score for each relevant document based on one or more indicators of expertise in the subject;

determining entities associated with each relevant document, each of the entities being associated with one or more documents in a set of documents, the entities including at least one institution, at least one author, and at least one geographic region;

wherein the determining of the at least one institution associated with a relevant document includes determining from a document in the set of documents an affiliated institution of the at least one author;

wherein determining a geographic region associated with a relevant document includes determining an address of an entity, the address determined at least in part on a document in the set of documents associated with the entity;

calculating a second score for each entity based on the first scores of the one or more documents in the set of documents associated with each entity;

calculating a third score for each of a plurality of geographic regions based on the second scores of each entity located within each geographic region;

ranking expertise associated with the plurality of entities based on the second scores for each entity;

ranking expertise associated with the plurality of geographic regions based on the third scores for each geographic region;

hierarchically displaying to a user the ranking of expertise of the plurality of geographic regions;

wherein the hierarchical displaying includes displaying a user-selectable reference to one or more entities associated with each geographic region, the user-selectable reference to one or more entities further displaying a hierarchical ranking of expertise of the one or more entities associated with the selected geographic region;

wherein the displaying the ranking of expertise includes at least one of graphically or numerically depicting levels of expertise.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein the database comprises one or more of the following:

the Westlaw database;

the Lexis database; and

the Science Citation Index.

3. The method of claim 1 wherein the database is a Medlars database.

4. The method of claim 1 wherein the database is the Pubmed database.

5. The method of claim 1 wherein the database is a subset of the internet.

6. The method of claim 1 wherein the first score for each relevant document is based on a characteristic of the relevant document.

7. The method of claim 6 wherein the characteristic is a length of the relevant document.

8. The method of claim 6 wherein the characteristic is a publication date or age of the relevant document.

9. The method of claim 6 wherein the characteristic is a type of the relevant document.

10. The method of claim 9 wherein the type is a practice guideline.

11. The method of claim 9 wherein the type is a review.

12. The method of claim 9 wherein the type is a correspondence.

13. The method of claim 1 wherein the first score for each relevant document is based on the characteristic comprises an impact factor of a journal.

14. The method of claim 1 wherein the second score for an author entity is based on a number of authors of a document in the set of documents associated with the author entity.

15. The method of claim 1 wherein the second score for an author entity is based on a rank position of the author entity in the list of authors of a document in the set of documents associated with the author entity.

16. The method of claim 1 wherein the second score for an author entity is based on the author entity being the first author in the list of authors of a document in the set of documents associated with the author entity.

17. The method of claim 1 wherein the second score for an geographical entity is based on a distance from the geographical entity to a geographical location.

18. The method of claim 1 wherein the graphically depicting levels of expertise includes displaying alphanumeric symbols.

19. The method of claim 1 wherein the address is a mailing address.

20. The method of claim 1 wherein the address is an email address.

22. The system of claim 1 wherein the server system is coupled to the database via a world wide network of computers.

23. The system of claim 1 wherein the server system is coupled to a world wide network of computers, and further comprising a user computer coupled with the server system via the worldwide network of computers.

24. The system of claim 23 wherein the first code is configured to receive the subject from the user via the world wide network of computers, and wherein the sixth code is configured to provide to the user the second scores or the ranking of the expertise of the entities via the world wide network of computers.

21. A system for assessing expertise associated with an entity in a subject, the system comprising:

a server system coupled to a database of documents, the server system comprising a memory having stored therein computer-readable code, and a processor for executing the computer-readable code stored in the memory, the computer-readable code comprising;

a first code configured to receive a subject from a user;

a second code configured to query the database for documents relevant to the subject, the documents being indicative of expertise in one or more subject areas;

a third code configured to calculate a first score for each relevant document based on one or more indicators of expertise in the subject;

a fourth code configured to determine entities associated with each relevant document, each of the entities being associated with one or more documents in a set of documents, the entities including at least one institution, at least one author, and at least one geographic region;

wherein the determining of the at least one institution associated with a relevant document includes determining from a document in the set of documents an affiliated institution of the at least one author;

wherein determining a geographic region associated with a relevant document includes determining an address of an entity, the address determined at least in part on a document in the set of documents associated with the entity;

a fifth code configured to calculate a second score for each entity based on the first scores of the one or more documents in the set of documents associated with each entity;

a sixth code configured to calculate a third score for each of a plurality of geographic regions based on the second scores of each entity located within each geographic region;

a seventh code configured to rank expertise associated with the plurality of entities based on the second scores for each entity;

an eighth code configured to rank expertise associated with the plurality of geographic regions based on the third scores for each geographic region; and

a ninth code configured to hierarchically display to a user the ranking of expertise of the plurality of geographic regions;

wherein the hierarchically displaying includes displaying a user-selectable reference to one or more entities associated with each geographic region, the user-selectable reference to one or more entities further displaying a hierarchical ranking of expertise of the one or more entities associated with the selected geographic region;

wherein the displaying the ranking of expertise includes at least one of graphically or numerically depicting levels of expertise.