Delegated authority evaluation system

• US 20050131722A1
• Filed: 05/25/2004
• Published: 06/16/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 12/12/2003
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Google LLC (Alphabet Inc.)
• Original Assignee: Google Inc. (Alphabet Inc.)
• Inventors: Hillis, W. Daniel, Ferren, Bran
• Granted Patent: US 7,844,610 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/10
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/00 Commerce

Abstract

The invention provides an evaluation system for reliably evaluating large amounts of content. The evaluation system is managed by a primary authority that designates one or more contributing authorities by delegating to each a specific quantity of authority. Each contributing authority may in turn designate and delegate authority to one or more additional contributing authorities, subject to the restriction that the total quantity of authority delegated does not exceed the quantity of authority the contributing authority was itself delegated. Each contributing authority, and optionally the primary authority itself, may evaluate one or more portions of content by associating a rating with each evaluated portion of content. A composite rating for a particular portion of content may then be determined based upon the ratings associated with the portion of content. Preferably, the ratings are combined in a manner that affords a higher priority to the ratings provided by contributing authorities to which a greater quantity of authority was delegated.

Claims

1. Apparatus for evaluating content, comprising:

a primary authority;

a plurality of contributing authorities, wherein each of said contributing authorities is delegated one or more quantities of authority from a total of available authority via designation by any of;

said primary authority, and

at least one other of said contributing authorities;

a plurality of ratings, each rating associated with said content by any of;

said primary authority, and

one of said contributing authorities; and

a composite rating based on said ratings; and

wherein said composite rating comprises a value of said content as judged by said primary authority.

2. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein said composite rating is determined by combining said ratings, wherein a level of influence is conferred upon each of said contributing authorities in accord with each of said contributing authorities'"'"' respective delegated quantity of authority.

3. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein said composite rating comprises a count of said ratings.

4. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein each of said one or more quantities of authority is specified numerically.

5. The apparatus of claim 4, wherein each of said one or more quantities of authority is a positive number.

6. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein each of said ratings is specified numerically.

7. The evaluation system of claim 6, wherein each of said ratings is a number between −

1 and 1, inclusively.

8. The apparatus of claim 6, wherein each of said ratings is a number between 0 and 1, inclusively.

9. The apparatus of claim 6, wherein determining said composite rating comprises an additive combination of said ratings.

10. The apparatus of claim 6, wherein determining said composite rating comprises a computation of any of:

a mean;

a mode; and

a median of said ratings.

11. The apparatus of claim 6, wherein said composite rating comprises a weighted average of said ratings, wherein each of said ratings is weighted in proportion to a respective delegated quantity of authority held by said contributing authority.

12. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein each of said ratings indicates any of:

reliability;

trustworthiness;

accuracy;

impartiality; and

quality.

13. The apparatus of claim 1, said primary authority further comprising:

means for limiting evaluation of content to content of a particular form.

14. The apparatus of claim 1, said primary authority further comprising:

means for limiting evaluation of content to content of a particular topic.

15. The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising:

means for said primary authority to add a new contributing authority by delegating authority to said new contributing authority.

16. The apparatus of claim 1, said further comprising:

means for said primary authority to remove a contributing authority by withdrawing authority previously delegated to said contributing authority.

17. The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising:

means for said primary authority to adjust relative authority of any of said contributing authorities by any of;

delegating additional authority to at least one of said contributing authorities; and

withdrawing authority from at least one of said contributing authorities.

18. The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising:

means for any of said contributing authorities to add a new contributing authority by delegating authority to said new contributing authority.

19. The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising:

means for any of said contributing authorities to remove a contributing authority by withdrawing authority previously delegated to said contributing authority.

20. The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising:

means for any of said contributing authorities to adjust relative authority of said contributing authorities by any of;

delegating additional authority to at least one of said contributing authorities; and

withdrawing authority from at least one of said contributing authorities.

21. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein a sum of authority delegated by a contributing authority can not exceed a respective quantity of authority delegated to said contributing authority.

22. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein a sum of authority delegated by a contributing authority cannot exceed a respective quantity of authority delegated to said contributing authority, reduced by an attenuation factor.

23. The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising:

means for preventing each contributing authority from designating another of said contributing authorities to avoid creating a loop of designated authorities.

24. The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising:

means for referencing said composite rating by a personalized evaluation profile to provide a user an indication of value of said content to said user.

25. The apparatus of claim 24, wherein said apparatus comprises an evaluation system, further comprising:

means for combining said composite rating with at least one other composite rating from at least one other evaluation system according to said personalized evaluation profile.

32. The method of claim 25, wherein each of said ratings indicates any of:

reliability;

trustworthiness;

accuracy;

impartiality; and

quality.

26. A method for evaluating content, comprising the steps of:

providing a primary authority;

delegating one or more quantities of authority from a total of available authority to each of a plurality of contributing authorities via designation by any of;

said primary authority, and

at least one other of said contributing authorities;

associating a plurality of ratings with said content, each rating associated by any of;

said primary authority, and

one of said contributing authorities; and

determining a composite rating based on said ratings;

wherein said composite rating comprises a value of said content as judged by said primary authority.

27. The method of claim 26, wherein said determining step comprises combining said ratings, wherein a level of influence is conferred upon each of said contributing authorities in accord with each of said contributing authorities'"'"' respective delegated quantity of authority.

28. The method of claim 26, wherein each of said at least one quantity of authority is specified numerically.

29. The method of claim 26, wherein each of said ratings is specified numerically.

30. The method of claim 29, wherein said determining step comprises a computation of any of:

a mean;

a mode; and

a median of said ratings.

31. The method of claim 29, wherein said determining step comprises a calculation of a weighted average of said ratings, wherein each of said ratings is weighted in proportion to a respective delegated quantity of authority held by said contributing authority.

33. The method of claim 26, wherein a sum of authority delegated by a contributing authority cannot exceed a respective quantity of authority delegated to said contributing authority.

34. The method of claim 26 further comprising the step of:

preventing each contributing authority from designating another of said contributing authorities to thereby avoid creating a loop of designated authorities.