WO2000079453A2 - Product substitution search method - Google Patents

Product substitution search method Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2000079453A2
WO2000079453A2 PCT/US2000/016774 US0016774W WO0079453A2 WO 2000079453 A2 WO2000079453 A2 WO 2000079453A2 US 0016774 W US0016774 W US 0016774W WO 0079453 A2 WO0079453 A2 WO 0079453A2
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
product
products
user
attributes
alternate
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/US2000/016774
Other languages
French (fr)
Other versions
WO2000079453A3 (en
Inventor
Shekhar Iyer
Prashant Soral
Original Assignee
I2 Technologies, Inc.
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Priority claimed from US09/594,852 external-priority patent/US6277851B1/en
Application filed by I2 Technologies, Inc. filed Critical I2 Technologies, Inc.
Priority to AU60519/00A priority Critical patent/AU6051900A/en
Publication of WO2000079453A2 publication Critical patent/WO2000079453A2/en
Publication of WO2000079453A3 publication Critical patent/WO2000079453A3/en

Links

Classifications

    • GPHYSICS
    • G06COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06QINFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q30/00Commerce
    • G06Q30/02Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising

Definitions

  • This invention relates in general to the field of supply chain, enterprise and site planning and, more particularly, to a system and process for providing product alternates to partners in a multi-enterprise collaboration
  • a solution to the problem is to provide the buyer domain with a list of viable alternate products that can be consumed instead of the original product This will also extend the domain of the decision support across multiple enterprises in the supply chain It is desirable for decision support software to cover even larger domains in the decision making process because typically, the larger the domain of the decision support, the more optimal the decision will be It is the purpose of the present invention to develop a system and process for providing such product alternates to partners in a multi-enterprise collaborative supply chain.
  • a system and process for providing product alternates to partners in a multi-enterprise collaborative environment are disclosed that result in increased customer satisfaction, improved demand fulfillment and optimal decision making across multiple enterprises
  • a computer implemented module within the RHYTHM COLLABORATION suite of products is provided for identifying the best products among the alternates available
  • the process involves a two-step approach.
  • a graphical user interface is used to gather product requirements from the user. This includes specification of the level of similarity between the original product and the alternate products required by the user.
  • the process Based on the user's input of the product requirements and the desired similarity level, the process employs an algorithm to retrieve alternate products that satisfy the user requirements when compared to the original product
  • the process involves ranking the alternate products in order of their similarity to the original product.
  • the algorithm For each of the product characteristics identified by the user in the first search step, the algorithm is used to conduct a detailed similarity analysis which compares the more granular attributes because of which a product possesses the particular characteristic.
  • the result of executing the sort algorithm is the generation of a global index value for each alternate product with respect to the original product.
  • the alternate products are then ranked based on the global index.
  • a graphical user interface presents the list of alternate products to the user.
  • FIGURE 1 is a diagram showing an overview of the process used to identify alternate products.
  • FIGURE 2 is a diagram that demonstrates calculation of the Attribute Similarity Index.
  • a user enters requests at some type of user interface 10 as known in the art.
  • the details of the interface 10 are not important to the present invention, and many different known interfaces are suitable for use.
  • a search engine 12 operates to identify similar products, in turn utilizing a database 14 of detailed product information. Operation of the search engine 12 is described in detail below. Search engine 12 generates an output 16 that contains a list of similar parts according to the criteria set forth below. This is not yet presented to the user.
  • a sort engine 18 accepts as input the output 16 from search engine 12, and sorts the list of similar parts in an order that is most likely acceptable to the user. Details of this process are also described below. Once the preferred order is determined, the sorted list is presented to the user through user interface 20. In many cases, interfaces 10 and 20 will actually be one interface, even though they are separated in Figure 1 for conceptual clarity. The user is presented with a broad range of product characteristics. These characteristics are specific to the manufacturing environment being dealt with. The methodology is demonstrated here by applying it to the computer industry. Broad product characteristics for computers may include processing speed, multi-media support, data storage etc.
  • the user inputs the search intent by specifying the desired characteristics that the search is to be based upon, and the level of similarity for each product characteristic.
  • Each product characteristic is broken down into elementary components known as attributes.
  • the processing speed can be broken down into the internal clock speed for the CPU, the bus speed, the type and size of RAM.
  • Two types of attributes can be identified: a. Continuous valued attributes: The values of this class of attributes bear a decisive resemblance with each other, and the magnitude of the attribute similarity index signifies the degree of resemblance. Examples may include processor speed, RAM size, and hard disk size.
  • Binary valued attributes The values of this class of attributes are unique and no consistent similarity can be identified among them. Examples may include distinct types of operating systems.
  • X m is an element of the set X.
  • V(X m P j ) is the value of attribute m for product j.
  • the measure used to quantify the similarity of a substitute to the original product in terms of a specific attribute is called the Attribute Similarity Index. Assume that a user is trying to determine if product P j is a substitute for P,. In addition, the products are being compared with respect to attribute X m .
  • the Attribute Similarity Index is denoted as
  • the first index (i) stands for the original product Pi and the second one (j) for the substitute product P j .
  • the fact that this similarity index is for a specific attribute is denoted by X m in brackets.
  • the measure used to quantify the similarity of a substitute to the original product taking all attributes into consideration is called the Product Similarity Index. Assume that a user is trying to determine if P, is a substitute for P,.
  • the Product Similarity Index is denoted as Slij.
  • the first index (i) stands for the original product P, and the second one (j) tor the substitute product P,.
  • the Product Similarity Index is a weighted sum of Attribute Similarity Indices. Each attribute is assigned a weight. The weights are input obtained from the user through a graphical interface.
  • the list generated in step 2 is arranged in descending order with respect to Product Similarity Index. In case of a tie with respect to Product Similarity Index, the products will be ranked with respect to the Attribute Similarity Index for the attribute with the highest weight. If even this does not eliminate the tie, the attribute with the second highest weight will be used and so on.
  • the final ordered list of substitutes for product Pj will be denoted
  • the Attribute Similarity Index for the substitute is 0. It is 1 if the attribute value for the substitute is equal to that for the original.
  • S1 0Q S/ o ⁇ (X Ptoctmr )xW ftmmr ⁇ + ⁇ SI 0Q (X Memon )*W Memnry ) + ⁇ S1 0Q (X HD )xW HD ⁇ + ⁇ SI OQ (X CDROM )x W CDR0M ⁇ + ⁇ Sl OQ (X Mm ⁇ lor )xW Mo lor ) + ⁇ SI 0Q (X 0S )xW 0S ⁇
  • the list of substitute products for each original product is shortened to include only those substitute products for which excess supply is available.
  • the supply information can be obtained from an available advanced planning engine such as ⁇ 2 TECHNOLOGIES' Supply Chain Planner application
  • the user is presented with the desired number of top- ranking substitutes in the list.
  • An important aspect of the present methodology is extensibility. Areas in which the present invention can be extended include the use of a more extensive analytic process to arrive at the weights for the selection of alternate products, the presentation of broad product characteristics instead of detailed product attributes to the user, and the elimination of the need to calculate substitutes for all products in the first stage of the method described above.

Abstract

A system and method for responding to user requests for a product provides a selection of alternate products that are similar to the requested product. Available products each have a plurality of attributes, which are compared to corresponding attributes of the requested product. Available products having attributes which are similar to those of the requested product are ranked in order of a similarity measure, and presented to the user.

Description

Product Substitution Search Method
Technical Field
This invention relates in general to the field of supply chain, enterprise and site planning and, more particularly, to a system and process for providing product alternates to partners in a multi-enterprise collaboration
Description of the Prior Art
Supply chain, enterprise and site planning applications and environments are widely used by manufacturing industries for decision support and to help manage complex manufacturing operations In contrast with conventional planning software applications that provide a monolithic application architecture, products are becoming available to support multi-domain, distributed and heterogeneous planning environments that characterize present day supply chains One such product is the RHYTHM COLLABORATION suite of software products available from ι2 Technologies, Inc
An inherent characteristic of such products, and in particular the multi-domain heterogeneous architecture of the RHYTHM COLLABORATION suite, is that they support products spanning multiple domains The products supplied by the seller domain in the collaboration are consumed by the buyer domain It is not uncommon that the product supply is constrained and does not meet the buyer demand This, in general, leads to lost sales and customer dissatisfaction for the seller domain and can be further detrimental to the multi-enterprise supply chain as the buyer domain may not be able to satisfy its own customers in a timely fashion.
A solution to the problem is to provide the buyer domain with a list of viable alternate products that can be consumed instead of the original product This will also extend the domain of the decision support across multiple enterprises in the supply chain It is desirable for decision support software to cover even larger domains in the decision making process because typically, the larger the domain of the decision support, the more optimal the decision will be It is the purpose of the present invention to develop a system and process for providing such product alternates to partners in a multi-enterprise collaborative supply chain.
Summary of the Invention
In accordance with the present invention, a system and process for providing product alternates to partners in a multi-enterprise collaborative environment are disclosed that result in increased customer satisfaction, improved demand fulfillment and optimal decision making across multiple enterprises A computer implemented module within the RHYTHM COLLABORATION suite of products is provided for identifying the best products among the alternates available The process involves a two-step approach. In the first step, a graphical user interface is used to gather product requirements from the user. This includes specification of the level of similarity between the original product and the alternate products required by the user. Based on the user's input of the product requirements and the desired similarity level, the process employs an algorithm to retrieve alternate products that satisfy the user requirements when compared to the original product The process involves ranking the alternate products in order of their similarity to the original product. For each of the product characteristics identified by the user in the first search step, the algorithm is used to conduct a detailed similarity analysis which compares the more granular attributes because of which a product possesses the particular characteristic. The result of executing the sort algorithm is the generation of a global index value for each alternate product with respect to the original product. The alternate products are then ranked based on the global index Finally, a graphical user interface presents the list of alternate products to the user. In practice, there generally exist numerous feasible alternates to a product and in the absence of an expert system, such as that detailed in the present invention, the user must rely on subjective judgment and experience for trimming the set of feasible alternates to a manageable number There is a high probability that the optimum alternates will be eliminated in such a subjective process The system and process in the present invention provide a systematic procedure that will objectively select the best feasible alternates for a product Another technical advantage of the present invention is that it eliminates the need for the user to know the details of the methodology and performs the search and sort operations based on user specifications through a menu operated graphical user interface
Additional technical advantages should be readily apparent to one skilled in the art from the following figures, descriptions, and claims.
Brief Description of the Drawings A more complete understanding of the present invention and advantages thereof may be acquired by referring to the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which like reference numbers indicate like features, and wherein-
FIGURE 1 is a diagram showing an overview of the process used to identify alternate products; and
FIGURE 2 is a diagram that demonstrates calculation of the Attribute Similarity Index.
Description of the Preferred Embodiment In important objective of the present invention is to identify alternate products with adequate supply, which are similar to a candidate product with inadequate supply A two- step procedure is adopted in the system in order to make it efficient and practical The first step rapidly identifies a set of potentially useful alternate products based on product attributes that are desired in the candidate product. The second step evaluates only those alternate products that have been identified in the first step and ranks them based on an analysis of detailed product attributes. Thus the user can review only the few most relevant alternates and satisfy demand for the candidate by increasing the forecasted quantity for one or more of the alternates.
Referring to Figure 1 , a user enters requests at some type of user interface 10 as known in the art. The details of the interface 10 are not important to the present invention, and many different known interfaces are suitable for use. A search engine 12 operates to identify similar products, in turn utilizing a database 14 of detailed product information. Operation of the search engine 12 is described in detail below. Search engine 12 generates an output 16 that contains a list of similar parts according to the criteria set forth below. This is not yet presented to the user.
A sort engine 18 accepts as input the output 16 from search engine 12, and sorts the list of similar parts in an order that is most likely acceptable to the user. Details of this process are also described below. Once the preferred order is determined, the sorted list is presented to the user through user interface 20. In many cases, interfaces 10 and 20 will actually be one interface, even though they are separated in Figure 1 for conceptual clarity. The user is presented with a broad range of product characteristics. These characteristics are specific to the manufacturing environment being dealt with. The methodology is demonstrated here by applying it to the computer industry. Broad product characteristics for computers may include processing speed, multi-media support, data storage etc. Through a graphical interface, the user inputs the search intent by specifying the desired characteristics that the search is to be based upon, and the level of similarity for each product characteristic. Each product characteristic is broken down into elementary components known as attributes. For example, the processing speed can be broken down into the internal clock speed for the CPU, the bus speed, the type and size of RAM. Consider products Pj and P, X denotes the set of all attributes for a product e.g. a computer may have the following set of attributes: X = {Processor Speed, Memory Size, Hard File Size, Monitor, CDROM, Operating System}. Two types of attributes can be identified: a. Continuous valued attributes: The values of this class of attributes bear a decisive resemblance with each other, and the magnitude of the attribute similarity index signifies the degree of resemblance. Examples may include processor speed, RAM size, and hard disk size. b. Binary valued attributes: The values of this class of attributes are unique and no consistent similarity can be identified among them. Examples may include distinct types of operating systems.
Xm is an element of the set X. V(XmPj) is the value of attribute m for product j. In trying to assess whether a product can act as a substitute for another product, the value of each attribute of the candidate substitute is compared with the value of the corresponding attribute for the original product.
The measure used to quantify the similarity of a substitute to the original product in terms of a specific attribute is called the Attribute Similarity Index. Assume that a user is trying to determine if product Pj is a substitute for P,. In addition, the products are being compared with respect to attribute Xm. The Attribute Similarity Index is denoted as
Slij(Xm). The first index (i) stands for the original product Pi and the second one (j) for the substitute product Pj. The fact that this similarity index is for a specific attribute is denoted by Xm in brackets. The measure used to quantify the similarity of a substitute to the original product taking all attributes into consideration is called the Product Similarity Index. Assume that a user is trying to determine if P, is a substitute for P,. The Product Similarity Index is denoted as Slij. The first index (i) stands for the original product P, and the second one (j) tor the substitute product P,. The Product Similarity Index is a weighted sum of Attribute Similarity Indices. Each attribute is assigned a weight. The weights are input obtained from the user through a graphical interface.
Algorithm
1. For each continuous valued attribute in the set X, the maximum and minimum values over all products are determined. 2. Consider a single product, P,. Calculate Product Similarity Indices, S,,, for all other products, PJιJ≠, Steps involved in doing so are given below. a. Consider a product P, other than Pj. b. The Attribute Similarity Index Slij(Xm) is calculated for each attribute in the set X. c. The Product Similarity Index Slij is calculated. d. Slij is compared with a user-defined threshold value for Product Similarity Index Sli, mm- Sli, mln holds for any product relative to original product P,. e. Include Pj as a substitute only if the Product Similarity Index exceeds Sli, min. 3. The list generated in step 2 is arranged in descending order with respect to Product Similarity Index. In case of a tie with respect to Product Similarity Index, the products will be ranked with respect to the Attribute Similarity Index for the attribute with the highest weight. If even this does not eliminate the tie, the attribute with the second highest weight will be used and so on. The final ordered list of substitutes for product Pj will be denoted
4. Generate the list for all products. Similarity Index Calculation
Attribute Similarity Index for Attributes with Numerical Values
Consider the following scenario. The user requests substitutes for product Po- Assume product P0 has an attribute XA with value V(XAPO) = o- The maximum and minimum attribute values for attribute XA have already been generated and are equal to Vmax(XA) = Amax and Vmin(XA) = Amιn respectively.
Product PQ and Product PR are being considered as substitutes for Product Po- The value of attribute XA for Product PQ is V(XAPQ) = AQ and AR for Product PR. The system will compare the attribute value for the substitute, AQ with that for the original product, A0- If A0 is less than A0, the Attribute Similarity Index for Product PQ and attribute XA, SI0Q(XA) is calculated as follows:
Figure imgf000008_0001
If AQ is greater than A0, the Attribute Similarity Index for Product PQ and attribute XA, SIQQ(XA) is calculated as follows:
Figure imgf000008_0002
If AQ equals A0, the Attribute Similarity Index for Product PQ and attribute XA, SIOQ(XA) equals 1. As an example, consider FIGURE 2, which is a graph of the Attribute Similarity Index for the "Processor3' attribute Here A0 is 233 MHZ for which the Product Attribute Similarity Index is 1. Amax is 400 MHZ and Amιn is 133 MHZ The following equations hold:
S1 (χ )- 2-1332
Figure imgf000009_0001
S*OQ X Processor) ~ 1 for x = 233
SI (χ )- ^-400'
•JiOQ Processor > 233: -40Q2 for 233 <x<400
Attribute Similarity Index for Binary Valued Attributes
If the attribute value for a substitute is not the same as that for the original product, the Attribute Similarity Index for the substitute is 0. It is 1 if the attribute value for the substitute is equal to that for the original.
Product Similarity Index
The Product Similarity Index for Product PQ IS calculated as follows:
S10Q = S/ (XPtoctmr)xWftmmr } + {SI0Q (XMemon )*WMemnry ) + {S10Q (XHD )xWHD } + {SIOQ(XCDROM )x WCDR0M } + {SlOQ(XMmιlor)xWMo lor ) + {SI0Q(X0S)xW0S }
The above assumes that the weights are normalized to one, i.e. ∑W, =1
The list of substitute products for each original product is shortened to include only those substitute products for which excess supply is available. The supply information can be obtained from an available advanced planning engine such as ι2 TECHNOLOGIES' Supply Chain Planner application The user is presented with the desired number of top- ranking substitutes in the list.
Extension of the Methodology
An important aspect of the present methodology is extensibility. Areas in which the present invention can be extended include the use of a more extensive analytic process to arrive at the weights for the selection of alternate products, the presentation of broad product characteristics instead of detailed product attributes to the user, and the elimination of the need to calculate substitutes for all products in the first stage of the method described above.
Although the present invention has been described in detail, it should be understood that various changes, substitutions can be made hereto without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims.

Claims

Claims
1. A system for offering to a user alternate products similar to a requested product, comprising: a first user interface to receive a user request for a product such product having product attributes, a search procedure to select a set of candidate alternate products having attributes similar to the requested product attributes; a sort procedure to rank the candidate alternate products in order of decreasing similarity to the requested product; and; a second user interface to present the candidate products to the user.
2. The system of Claim 1 , wherein the first and second user interfaces are combined to function as a single interface.
3. The system of Claim 1 , further comprising: a database connected to the search procedure, the database containing information identifying available products, the availability of such products, and the attributes of such products.
4. The system of Claim 3, wherein the second user interface, when the user selects an alternate product, causes information regarding the availability of the selected alternate product to be updated.
5. A method for offering, to a user, alternate products similar to a requested product, comprising the steps of: receiving from the user a request for a preferred product; selecting a set of alternative products having attributes similar to the preferred product;
rank ordering the alternative products according to their degree of similarity with the preferred product; and presenting to the user the list of alternative products.
6. The method of Claim 5, wherein the selecting step comprises the steps of: determining a set of attributes of the desired product; calculating values representing measures of similarity for attributes of products other than the preferred product; calculating product similarities for the other products as a function of the attribute similarities; and selecting as the set of alternative products those other products having a product similarity greater than a selected threshold.
PCT/US2000/016774 1999-06-18 2000-06-16 Product substitution search method WO2000079453A2 (en)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
AU60519/00A AU6051900A (en) 1999-06-18 2000-06-16 Product substitution search method

Applications Claiming Priority (4)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US14012099P 1999-06-18 1999-06-18
US60/140,120 1999-06-18
US09/594,852 US6277851B1 (en) 1999-06-15 2000-06-15 Bicyclic amino-pyrazinone compounds
US09/594,852 2000-06-15

Publications (2)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2000079453A2 true WO2000079453A2 (en) 2000-12-28
WO2000079453A3 WO2000079453A3 (en) 2002-09-12

Family

ID=26837886

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/US2000/016774 WO2000079453A2 (en) 1999-06-18 2000-06-16 Product substitution search method

Country Status (2)

Country Link
AU (1) AU6051900A (en)
WO (1) WO2000079453A2 (en)

Cited By (12)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
GB2372852A (en) * 2000-10-12 2002-09-04 Hewlett Packard Co Product ordering system
WO2003075205A2 (en) * 2002-03-01 2003-09-12 Micro Motion, Inc. Method, system and software for fluid process system selection
US6694330B2 (en) 2001-05-09 2004-02-17 Row 2 Technologies, Inc. System and method for identifying the raw materials consumed in the manufacture of a chemical product
EP1513087A1 (en) * 2002-06-12 2005-03-09 Asahi Kasei Chemicals Corporation Medicine trial production supporting system
US7220781B2 (en) 1997-08-29 2007-05-22 Tularik Limited Meta-benzamidine derivatives as serine protease inhibitors
US20130054410A1 (en) * 2001-07-17 2013-02-28 Incucomm, Incorporated System and Method for Providing Requested Information to Thin Clients
US9706258B2 (en) 2008-02-26 2017-07-11 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. System and method for promoting marketable items
US10262297B1 (en) 2013-09-25 2019-04-16 Entercoms, Inc. Part chain management in an aftermarket services industry
US10349147B2 (en) 2013-10-23 2019-07-09 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. Method and apparatus for promotional programming
US10423968B2 (en) 2011-06-30 2019-09-24 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. Method and apparatus for marketability assessment
CN111026966A (en) * 2019-12-06 2020-04-17 创新奇智(成都)科技有限公司 Search recommendation ranking method based on user, product portrait and correlation degree of user and product portrait
US10832282B2 (en) 2011-06-24 2020-11-10 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. Method and apparatus for targeted advertising

Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4996642A (en) * 1987-10-01 1991-02-26 Neonics, Inc. System and method for recommending items
WO1996012238A1 (en) * 1994-10-14 1996-04-25 Danish International, Inc. Method and system for executing a guided parametric search
WO1997002537A1 (en) * 1995-06-30 1997-01-23 Massachusetts Institute Of Technology Method and apparatus for item recommendation using automated collaborative filtering
US5819245A (en) * 1995-09-05 1998-10-06 Motorola, Inc. Method of organizing data into a graphically oriented format
US6266649B1 (en) * 1998-09-18 2001-07-24 Amazon.Com, Inc. Collaborative recommendations using item-to-item similarity mappings

Patent Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4996642A (en) * 1987-10-01 1991-02-26 Neonics, Inc. System and method for recommending items
WO1996012238A1 (en) * 1994-10-14 1996-04-25 Danish International, Inc. Method and system for executing a guided parametric search
WO1997002537A1 (en) * 1995-06-30 1997-01-23 Massachusetts Institute Of Technology Method and apparatus for item recommendation using automated collaborative filtering
US5819245A (en) * 1995-09-05 1998-10-06 Motorola, Inc. Method of organizing data into a graphically oriented format
US6266649B1 (en) * 1998-09-18 2001-07-24 Amazon.Com, Inc. Collaborative recommendations using item-to-item similarity mappings

Cited By (22)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US7220781B2 (en) 1997-08-29 2007-05-22 Tularik Limited Meta-benzamidine derivatives as serine protease inhibitors
US7928137B2 (en) 1997-08-29 2011-04-19 Tularik Limited Meta-benzamidine derivatives as serine protease inhibitors
GB2372852A (en) * 2000-10-12 2002-09-04 Hewlett Packard Co Product ordering system
US6694330B2 (en) 2001-05-09 2004-02-17 Row 2 Technologies, Inc. System and method for identifying the raw materials consumed in the manufacture of a chemical product
US20130054410A1 (en) * 2001-07-17 2013-02-28 Incucomm, Incorporated System and Method for Providing Requested Information to Thin Clients
US8224703B2 (en) 2002-03-01 2012-07-17 Micro Motion, Inc. Fluid process system selection
WO2003075205A2 (en) * 2002-03-01 2003-09-12 Micro Motion, Inc. Method, system and software for fluid process system selection
WO2003075205A3 (en) * 2002-03-01 2003-11-13 Micro Motion Inc Method, system and software for fluid process system selection
US7565309B2 (en) 2002-03-01 2009-07-21 Micro Motion, Inc. Method, system and software for fluid process system selection
EP1513087A4 (en) * 2002-06-12 2006-09-13 Asahi Kasei Chemicals Corp Medicine trial production supporting system
US8126582B2 (en) 2002-06-12 2012-02-28 Asahi Kasei Chemicals Corporation Medicine trial production supporting system
EP1513087A1 (en) * 2002-06-12 2005-03-09 Asahi Kasei Chemicals Corporation Medicine trial production supporting system
US9706258B2 (en) 2008-02-26 2017-07-11 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. System and method for promoting marketable items
US10587926B2 (en) 2008-02-26 2020-03-10 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. System and method for promoting marketable items
US10832282B2 (en) 2011-06-24 2020-11-10 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. Method and apparatus for targeted advertising
US10423968B2 (en) 2011-06-30 2019-09-24 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. Method and apparatus for marketability assessment
US11195186B2 (en) 2011-06-30 2021-12-07 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. Method and apparatus for marketability assessment
US10262297B1 (en) 2013-09-25 2019-04-16 Entercoms, Inc. Part chain management in an aftermarket services industry
US10349147B2 (en) 2013-10-23 2019-07-09 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. Method and apparatus for promotional programming
US10951955B2 (en) 2013-10-23 2021-03-16 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. Method and apparatus for promotional programming
CN111026966A (en) * 2019-12-06 2020-04-17 创新奇智(成都)科技有限公司 Search recommendation ranking method based on user, product portrait and correlation degree of user and product portrait
CN111026966B (en) * 2019-12-06 2023-12-22 创新奇智(成都)科技有限公司 Search recommendation ordering method based on user and product portrait and association degree of user and product portrait

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
WO2000079453A3 (en) 2002-09-12
AU6051900A (en) 2001-01-09

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US7117163B1 (en) Product substitution search method
US10834123B2 (en) Generating data clusters
US7308421B2 (en) System and method for grouping products in a catalog
US7720720B1 (en) System and method for generating effective recommendations
US20170124612A1 (en) Catalog taxonomy for storing product information and system and method using same
US9336314B2 (en) Dynamic facet ordering for faceted search
US8019659B2 (en) Catalog taxonomy for storing product information and system and method using same
US20080040341A1 (en) Computer processes for adaptively selecting and/or ranking items for display in particular contexts
US7979375B2 (en) Engines, methods, and systems for normalizing heterogeneous parameters for scoring proposals
WO2008005796A2 (en) System and method for generating a display of tags
WO2000079453A2 (en) Product substitution search method
US20040267553A1 (en) Evaluating storage options
WO2011087904A1 (en) Matching of advertising sources and keyword sets in online commerce platforms
US10585931B1 (en) Dynamic determination of data facets
US7428500B1 (en) Automatically identifying similar purchasing opportunities
US20110295763A1 (en) Multi-attribute system for project planning
JP2010277571A (en) Commodity selection system and method, and commodity selection computer program
Chandrasekaran et al. Efficient Web Service Discovery and Selection Model
JP6229988B1 (en) Information processing apparatus, information processing method, and information processing program
JP7103433B2 (en) Information processing equipment and lineage program
JP4829441B2 (en) Constraint satisfaction problem solving apparatus and solution
TW494332B (en) Product substitution search method
CN117529717A (en) Visual query matching method realized by computer and realizing system thereof
US20070094218A1 (en) Apparatus and method for using fuzzy case-based reasoning to generate a sales order
Rajagopal QoS Based Service Selection for Ranking of Cloud Services

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AK Designated states

Kind code of ref document: A2

Designated state(s): AE AL AM AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BY CA CH CN CU CZ DE DK EE ES FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KP KR KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MD MG MK MN MW MX NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SG SI SK SL TJ TM TR TT UA UG UZ VN YU ZA ZW

AL Designated countries for regional patents

Kind code of ref document: A2

Designated state(s): GH GM KE LS MW MZ SD SL SZ TZ UG ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GW ML MR NE SN TD TG

121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application
DFPE Request for preliminary examination filed prior to expiration of 19th month from priority date (pct application filed before 20040101)
REG Reference to national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: 8642

122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase
AK Designated states

Kind code of ref document: A3

Designated state(s): AE AL AM AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BY CA CH CN CU CZ DE DK EE ES FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KP KR KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MD MG MK MN MW MX NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SG SI SK SL TJ TM TR TT UA UG UZ VN YU ZA ZW

AL Designated countries for regional patents

Kind code of ref document: A3

Designated state(s): GH GM KE LS MW MZ SD SL SZ TZ UG ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GW ML MR NE SN TD TG

NENP Non-entry into the national phase in:

Ref country code: JP