WO2003090141A2

WO2003090141A2 - A data processing apparatus and method for correlation analysis

Info

Publication number: WO2003090141A2
Application number: PCT/SE2003/000620
Authority: WO
Inventors: Stephen J. Carlton; Olle Bliding; Jonas Runesson; Anna Emanuelsson; Lars Knutsson; Joan C. Pritchett
Original assignee: Carlton Stephen J; Olle Bliding; Jonas Runesson; Anna Emanuelsson; Lars Knutsson; Pritchett Joan C
Priority date: 2002-04-19
Filing date: 2003-04-17
Publication date: 2003-10-30
Also published as: US7065345B2; EP1546953A1; US20030199250A1; AU2003230478A1

Description

A DATA PROCESSING APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR CORRELATION

ANALYSIS

Technical Field

The present invention relates to a data processing apparatus, a method and a computer program product for comparing a first object, associated with said data pro- cessing apparatus, with a second object, associated with a remote data processing apparatus . Background Art

There are many areas within which it is desirable to perform correlation analysis between sets of data to find out whether two or more objects match or not. One example of such an area is dating, where there are two objects in the form of two persons, one set of data being information associated with one of the two persons, and another set of data being information associated with the other one of them. Information will be exchanged between the two persons, they will both perform a correlation analysis between their own information and the received information, and then usually they will have a feeling whether there is a match between them or not. Depending on the dating situation, the exchange of information will be performed in different ways. For example, in one situation one of the above persons has inserted a personal advertisement in a newspaper or on the internet, and the other person has replied to it. The exchange of informa- tion is then usually made by writing letters or e-mails. Another example is the situation where the two persons meet in a coffee shop or a nightclub. The exchange of information is then simply made by talking.

A problem with the above dating methods and conven- tional dating in general, is the considerable risk that two partly randomly chosen persons will not match. Not seldom, it takes considerable time before two persons realize that they do not match. If the dates are not supposed to be like quizzes, it will take time for two persons to know enough about each other to tell a match from a mismatch. Therefore, finding the right partner can be very difficult and also very time consuming, since one probably will have to date a number of different persons before one finds the ideal partner.

' From US patents 4 348 740, 4 348 744 to White, a method and an apparatus for comparison of sets of personal data are known. Users can enter data about themselves in the portable apparatuses and then compare their data by physically interconnecting the apparatuses by means of connectors. Scores representing the compatibilities between users are shown on the apparatuses .

From German patent application DE 197 35 045 an in- formation handling unit for comparing personality profiles is known. Like in the White invention above, users physically interconnect their apparatuses to compare stored data. Two interconnected units signal if there is a match between their users . A major disadvantage with both of the above known devices is that users have to carry their devices in full view to be able to find each other, which means that everybody can see who is carrying such a device. Another great disadvantage is that users have to be very active and search for other users. Additionally, when two users have seen each other, if they find each other interesting, they will have to make contact in order to be able to compare their information, an indiscrete situation which in many ways can be very uncomfortable. From US patent 6 150 937 to Rackman, a personal contact "Ice Breaker" is known. One type of contact badges are distributed to the boys in a group and one type to the girls in the group. All badges are provided with a light that can blink, and opposite badges in proximity with each other transmit and receive contact signals. If the lights on two badges blink at the same time, the carriers of the badges should start talking to each other. Whether this happens or not is based on probability and the blinking is therefore no indication of an actual match between the carriers .

From US patent 6 020 810 to Har-Even, a device and a method for finding a date/mate is known. A user enters personal data into his/her device. The data is transmitted to, and other data is received from, another device. The received and the transmitted data is compared, and a percentage match between them is determined. An alarm is activated if the percentage match is greater than a predetermined value .

From German patent DE 44 18 234 to Weiszhar, a unit similar to the Har-Even device is known. Also in this invention, data entered by a user is transmitted to, and other data is received from, another unit. If there is a mutual match between two units, their users will be alerted.

In the devices according to the state of the art briefly described above, the entered information concern- ing the user of a device, and in some of the cases also his/her desired partner, will be transmitted to other devices in order to find a matching partner. Thus, the information will be transferred to complete strangers having a device for receiving such information. This is a threat to the personal integrity of the user, since the information might contain very personal details about him/her that he/she does not wish to share with just anybody, but which details must be shared for the matching to be successful. Additionally, with the above discussed devices, a very high percentage match between two users can be very misleading. As an illustrative example, between two users in the form of a man of the age 45 and a girl of the age 17, who would have each other as ideal partners if it was not for the age difference, since they share the same interests and values, there will be a very high percentage match. This indicates a very successful match, but in reality they would most certainly not make a good couple. The same line of reasoning can be followed regarding gender and sexual orientation. There can be a 90% match between a man and a woman of each other's ideal age. However, if for example the man is a homosexual, the match will not be successful in spite of the high percentage match. Summary of the Invention

In view of the above, a purpose of the present invention is to provide a solution to the problems concern- ed with prior art.

In particular, a purpose is to provide an invention for effective, safe and simple comparison of two objects to see if they match.

Generally, the above objectives are achieved by a data processing apparatus, a method and a computer program product according to the attached independent patent claims .

The basic concept of the invention is to provide two sets of data for each of the two objects, one set de- scribing the object itself, and the other set describing a desired object. Correlation analysis is performed between the objects by "crosswise" comparison of their sets of data, i.e., for each object, the set of data describing the object itself is compared with the set of data describing the desired object for the other object. Thus, not all data for one of the objects will be exposed to the other object. In this way, sensitive data describing the objects themselves will be protected.

A first aspect of the invention is a data processing apparatus for performing the above operations, i.e. for comparing a first object, associated with the data processing apparatus, with a second object, associated with a remote data processing apparatus. To this end, the data processing apparatus comprises an input device, by means of which a first user may input a first and a second set of data associated with the first object. The first set of data describes the first object and the second set of data describes a third object. The first user may himself/herself be the first object, and then the first set of data describes himself/herself . The third object is not a real object, but an object that the first object wants to find. If the first object is the first user, then the third object might be another, ideal user.

A memory is further comprised in the data processing apparatus according to the present invention. The memory is adapted to store the above mentioned first and second sets of data associated with the first object after the input .

The data processing apparatus further comprises a receiver for receiving information from the remote data processing apparatus. The information contains a first subset of a third and a fourth set of data, respectively. The third and the fourth set of data are associated with the second object. The third set of data describes the second object and the fourth set of data describes a fourth object. The second object may be a second user of the remote data processing apparatus. If so, the third set of data describes the second user. Like the third object, the fourth object is not a real object, but an object that the second object wants to find. If the second object is the second user, then the fourth object might be another, ideal user.

Moreover, the data processing apparatus associated with the first object is arranged to transmit a first subset of the first and the second set of data, respectively, to the remote data processing apparatus. For that purpose, the data processing apparatus further comprises a transmitter.

For the correlation analysis mentioned above, a processor is comprised in the data processing apparatus. The processor is arranged to compare the first subset of the first set of data with the first subset of the fourth set of data. The result of this comparison is a first value of correlation between the first and the second object. This first value of correlation is a measure of how much alike the first subset of the fourth object is with the first subset of the first object. In the case discussed above, where the objects are users, if the first value of correlation is high, the first user, at least partly, is very alike the fourth user, i.e. the user that the second user wants to find. On the other hand, if the first value of correlation is low, the fourth user is rather different from the first user. The processor is further arranged to compare the first subset of the second set of data with the first subset of the third set of data. The result of this comparison is a second value of correlation between the first and the second object. This second value of correlation is a measure of how much alike the first subset of the second object is with the first subset of the third object. Like above, if the objects are users, a high second value of correlation means that the second user, at least partly, is very alike the third user, i.e. the user that the first user wants to find. Of course, if the first user is very alike the one that the second user wants to find, and the second user is very alike the one that the first user wants to find, both the first and the second value of correlation will be high. The receiver is preferably also arranged to receive a second subset of the third and the fourth set of data, respectively, from the remote data processing apparatus. Additionally, the transmitter is adapted to transmit the corresponding data to the remote data processing appara- tus, i.e. a second subset of the first and the second set of data, respectively.

If the first and second values of correlation both are sufficiently high, i.e. if they meet or exceed a first and a second threshold value, respectively, the processor is preferably arranged to continue the correlation analysis. Then, the second subset of the first set of data is compared with the second subset of the fourth set of data, and the second subset of the second set of data is compared with the second subset of the third set of data. The results of these comparisons are a third and a fourth value of correlation, respectively, between the first and the second object. The third value of correlation is a measure of how much alike the second subset of the fourth object is with the second subset of the first object. Similarly, the fourth value of correlation is a measure of how much alike the second subset of the second object is with the second subset of the third object.

The receiver is preferably also arranged to receive a third subset of the fourth set of data from the remote data processing apparatus. Additionally, the transmitter is preferably adapted to transmit the corresponding data to the remote data processing apparatus, i.e. a third subset of the second set of data.

If the third and fourth values of correlation both are sufficiently high, i.e. if they meet or exceed a third and a fourth threshold value, respectively, the processor is preferably arranged to continue the correlation analysis. Then, a third subset of the first set of data is compared with the third subset of the fourth set of data. The result of this comparison is a fifth value of correlation between the first and the second object. This fifth value of correlation is a measure of how much alike the third subset of the fourth object is with the third subset of the first object. Since the fifth value of correlation is only calculated if the first, second, third and fourth values of correlation are sufficiently high, if the objects are users, a high fifth value of correlation means that the first user actually is very alike the fourth user, and that the first user complies with the second user's requirements.

As apparent from the above paragraphs, the first and second subsets of the first set of data, and the first, second and third subsets of the second set of data, are transferable to the remote processing apparatus. However, the third subset of the first set of data is not transferable to the remote data processing apparatus, and is therefore protected from exposure. This is favorable since very sensitive data describing the first object may be comprised in this third subset of the first set of data. The invention makes it possible not to share all the data associated with the first object but still use it as a valuable part of the comparison with the second object . As described above, correlation analysis is performed in several steps, and depending upon the result of any preceding correlation analysis. This is advantageous since it is unnecessary to perform correlation analysis on all data, if it is clear from just a first part of the data, i.e. the first subsets of each set of data, that there is no match between the two objects. Another advantage with this line of procedure is that it is easy to treat different parts of the data in various ways, i.e. to perform the correlation analysis differently from step to step. This may be desirable if, for example, the data in the different subsets have different characteristics.

Each of the subsets of each of the sets of data preferably comprises at least one information record. The information records are arranged to store data and are associable with a weighting value each. A weighting value indicates an influence, of the corresponding information record, on the result of the comparison between the two objects. A high weighting value means a large influence, and vice versa. The processor is preferably adapted to perform correlation analysis with respect to the associated weighting values.

The weighting values may, according to one embodiment of the invention, be selected by the first and second objects. This is advantageous since the objects themselves are then given an opportunity to prioritize parts of the inputted data that they find most important. According to another embodiment, the weighting values are instead preset by a manufacturer of the data processing apparatuses and are not changeable. According to still another embodiment, there may be more than one weighting value associable with one information record. In such a case, one of the weighting values may be selected by the objects, and the other one may be preset.

The first and second threshold values are preferably both equal to a maximum value. This means that the first and second values of correlation both have to be equal to this maximum value in order for the processor to proceed with the correlation analysis. In other words, the first subset of the fourth set of data must conform completely to the first subset of the first set of data, and the first subset of the third set of data must conform com- pletely to the first subset of the second set of data, for the correlation analysis to continue. This is advantageous since misleading matches between two objects thereby can be avoided. As an illustrative example, if the two objects are men both looking for a woman, the first subsets could comprise information about gender.

Thereby, even if the two men would be each other's ideal partners if it was not for the gender, there will be no match between them.

Additionally, the memory is preferably adapted to store at least one profile kit containing a first and a second profile. The first set of data associated with the first object corresponds to the third set of data associated with the second object, and therefore the first and third sets of data each will contain a respective result of a completion of the first profile, and they will thus have the same structure. Correspondingly, the second and fourth sets of data each will contain a respective result of a completion of the second profile. Preferably, the first and second profiles in every profile kit relate to at least one set of questions, the memory preferably being adapted to store the questions. Then, the above mentioned completions will correspond to answers to these questions. Thus, the first set of data will contain the answers for the first object, the second set of data the answers for the third, desired object, the third set of data the answers for the second object and the fourth set of data the answers for the fourth desired object. In the situation described above, where the objects are users, this means that the first and the second user each have completed a respective first profile with the answers in accordance with themselves, and a respective second profile with the answers in accordance with the user that they want to meet .

When the subsets comprise information records, each information record preferably comprises one of the answers to one of the questions. According to one embodiment of the present invention, the second subsets of the respective sets of data contain no data, i.e. the second subsets are all "empty". Then, the third value of correlation will be set equal to the third threshold value, and the fourth value of corre- lation will be set equal to the fourth threshold value, if the first and the second value of correlation both meet or exceed the first and the second threshold value, respectively. In such a case, after the correlation analysis between the first subsets, the correlation analysis will instead proceed with correlation analysis between the third subsets.

According to another embodiment of the present invention the first subsets of the respective sets of data contain no data, i.e. the first subsets are all "empty". In that case the first and second values of correlation will both be set equal to the first and second threshold value, respectively, and the correlation analysis will instead begin with the correlation analysis between the second subsets . The two above paragraphs describe features of the invention that enable correlation analysis between two objects to be completed even when data corresponding to the first or second subsets, for some reason, is missing.

The data processing apparatus according to the present invention preferably further comprises an antenna. The antenna is coupled to the receiver and the transmitter, and they are jointly adapted for radio frequency communication with the remote data processing apparatus. This means that the data processing apparatus will communicate wirelessly with the remote data processing appa- ratus. Thus, the users of the apparatuses will be able to find partners without having to make direct contact with other users. In this way, users will be able keep their anonymity. Also, the search will not require the users' explicit interaction. The radio frequency communication is preferably in accordance with the Bluetooth™ specification, by means of which the data processing apparatus can be given a range of approximately 10-100 m. Also, radio communication is preferred since it is insensitive to direction, i.e. two apparatuses do not need to be in each others' direct line-of-sight in order to be able to communicate, and relatively insensitive to interference in its frequency band.

Preferably, the data processing apparatus further includes an alert device for emitting an alert if a correlation result meets or exceeds a matching threshold value. In other words, the alert device alerts a user when he/she conforms to whom another user wants to meet. The correlation result is a function of the values of correlation obtained during the different steps of the correlation analysis, such as a sum of all the calculated values of correlation. Depending on the situation, different alerts may be suitable. The alert device is preferably arranged to emit all or at least one of the following: an audible alert, such as a sound or a song, a perceptible alert, such as a vibration, or a visual alert, such as flashing light. The matching threshold value can preferably be chosen by a user. There are two options, either it can be chosen by the user of the data processing apparatus (previously referred to as the first user) , or by the user of the remote data processing apparatus (previously referred to as the second user) .

According to a preferred embodiment, the data processing apparatus is used as a matching apparatus. Then, the questions are of personal character and the objects are human beings. The first and second objects are the first and second users, respectively, and the third and fourth users are desired, ideal users for the first and second users, respectively. A match is considered for the second user with the first user, i.e. the first user com- plies with the requirements of the second user, if the correlation result meets or exceeds the matching threshold value. This embodiment allows for users to, relatively simple, find matching partners for different purposes . The input device of the data processing apparatus preferably comprises a keyboard, by means of which data can be entered. Additionally, or alternatively, the data processing apparatus comprises a connector to an external computer. Data can then first be entered into the comput- er and then be downloaded by the connector into the data processing apparatus. It is also possible for the data processing device to communicate wirelessly with the external computer, i.e. without the use of the connector, by means of, for example, infrared communication. Also, for the interaction with a user, the data processing apparatus preferably includes a display. Preferably it further comprises encryption means for encrypting data prior to transmission, and decryption means for decrypting data after reception. This increases the safety for a user of the apparatus and preserves the user's personal integrity. A data processing apparatus according to the present invention is preferably wireless and portable, allowing a user to discretely carry his/her apparatus with him/her practically anywhere. Finally, a data processing apparatus according to the present invention may advantageously be included in mobile terminals, such as mobile phones, Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) or other handheld devices. Since the ownership of such devices is so widespread, many people will then have access to the present invention.

A second aspect of the invention is a method of comparing a first object, associated with a data processing apparatus, with a second object, associated with a remote data processing apparatus. The method comprises inputting a first and a second set of data into the data processing apparatus, storing the first and the second set of data in the data processing apparatus, and receiving a first subset of a third and a fourth set of data, respectively, from the remote data processing apparatus into the data processing apparatus. The method further comprises transmitting a first subset of the first and the second set of data, respectively, to the remote data processing apparatus from the data processing apparatus, and performing, by means of the data processing apparatus, correlation analysis between the first subsets of the first and the fourth set of data, respectively, and between the first subsets of the second and the third set of data, respectively, to obtain a respective first and a respective second value of correlation. The terms used in the dis- cussion of the second aspect of the invention are the same as the ones used in the discussion of the first aspect of the invention. Therefore, these terms are not explained once again.

A third aspect of the invention is a computer pro- gram product directly loadable into a memory of a processor, where the computer program product comprises pro- gram code for performing the method according to the second aspect when executed by said processor.

The second and third aspects have essentially the same advantages as the first aspect described above. The features that were discussed in connection with the apparatus above are of course transferable to the method and the computer program product according to the invention.

The above features can of course be combined in the same embodiment.

Other objectives, features and advantages of the present invention will appear from the following detailed disclosure, from the attached subclai s as well as from the drawings . Brief Description of the Drawings

Figure la, lb and lc is a perspective view, a top view and a side view, respectively, of a data processing apparatus according to one embodiment of the present invention. Figure 2 is block diagram describing the structure of the data processing apparatus according to figures laic.

Figure 3 shows examples of profile kits according to the present invention. Figure 4 illustrates a completion of profiles in a profile kit according to the present invention.

Figure 5a illustrates the information structure for two data processing apparatuses according to figures laic. Figure 5b shows the result of an exchange of information between the data processing apparatuses in figure 5a .

Figure 6a illustrates correlation analysis in a first step. Figure 6b illustrates correlation analysis in a second step. Figure 6c illustrates correlation analysis in a third step.

Figure 6d illustrates correlation analysis in a fourth step. Figure 7a is a table showing possible answers to complete the profiles with.

Figure 7b shows information for two fictitious users .

Figure 7c shows possible combination of answers, with corresponding points, to some of the questions in figure 4.

Figure 7d illustrates determination of a result of correlation analysis between the two fictitious users in figure 7b. Figure 8 is a flowchart illustrating the method according to the present invention. Detailed Description of Embodiments

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described more in detail with reference to the accompanied draw- ings .

Figures la-lc show a data processing apparatus 1 according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention. The data processing apparatus in this embodiment operates as a wireless portable mating/dating apparatus, assisting a person using the data processing apparatus in meeting other people with such data processing apparatuses. Figure 2 is a block diagram corresponding to the data processing apparatus in figures la-lc, schematically showing its components and illustrating its internal structure.

The wireless portable data processing apparatus 1 comprises a casing 2 which is small enough for the data processing apparatus to be held in one hand or carried in, for example, a pocket or a handbag. The casing can have a number of different designs when it comes to shape, colors etc., and it is preferably removable allowing a user to change the appearance of his/her data pro- cessing apparatus by replacing the casing with another one. A power unit 3 is further arranged inside the casing 2.

Further, the apparatus 1 preferably comprises a dis- play 4 for interaction with the user of the data processing apparatus, showing, for example, the power level for the power unit 3, the time and date and icons.

Also, a keyboard 5 is preferably comprised in the data processing apparatus, allowing the user to manage the data processing apparatus 1 by operating a number of keys 6 and a joystick 6' . According to one embodiment, the keyboard 5 have a design similar to the one on a modern mobile phone, i.e. each key 6 corresponds to a number of symbols, such as numerals and/or letters. As an alternative or a complement to the keyboard 5, the data processing apparatus 1 can be supplied with a software kit and a connector 7 for managing the data processing apparatus by an external computer 8.

For the exchange of information between the data processing apparatus according to the present invention and a remote data processing apparatus, the data processing apparatus 1 comprises a transceiver 9. The transceiver 9 is in the preferred embodiment adapted for short- range radio communication in accordance with, e.g., the Bluetooth standard in the 2.4 GHz ISM band ("Industrial, Scientific and Medical") . Thus, the data processing apparatus 1 also has an antenna 10 for transmitting to, and receiving from, remote data processing apparatuses located within the range of the antenna 10, radio frequency signals defining the operating frequencies for the transceiver 9 and transceivers of remote data processing apparatuses, respectively. Preferably, the transceiver 9 and the antenna 10 have a range of approximately 10-100 m (328 ft.), although the range can vary due to environmen- tal conditions.

In alternative embodiments the transceiver can instead be adapted for infrared communication (such as IrDA - "Infrared Data Association") , or essentially any other available standard for short-range communication between a hand-held apparatus and an external apparatus .

A data processing apparatus 1 according to the pre- ferred embodiment is associated with a unique apparatus- specific user-id identifying the data processing apparatus to remote data processing apparatuses within range. If the transceiver 9 is adapted to Bluetooth communication, the unique apparatus-specific user-id will be a unique BD address in accordance with the Bluetooth specification.

Before information is exchanged between the data processing apparatus according to the present invention and a remote data processing apparatus, all information is advantageously encrypted to increase the safety and privacy for users. Therefore, the data processing apparatus 1 preferably comprises encryption and decryption means for encrypting information prior to transmission, and decrypting information after reception. The preferred embodiment uses a data encryption algorithm commonly known as SAFER+ . The encryption means advantageously operates according to any data encryption algorithm known per se, such as an asymmetric algorithm like RSA, or a symmetric algorithm like DES . The decryption means will operate in accordance with the corresponding data decryption algorithm. Advantageously, the encryption and decryption means are implemented as software modules executed by a processor in the data processing apparatus 1, or alternatively as hardware. For the storing of information in the data processing apparatus 1, i.e. information needed for the function of the data processing apparatus, such as program code and static data, information entered by the user of the data processing apparatus, and information received from remote data processing apparatuses, the data processing apparatus comprises a memory 11. Additionally, for further interaction with the user, the data processing apparatus 1 has alerting means 12, such as a buzzer 12a for emitting ring tones, a vibrator 12b for a more discrete alerting and a LED 12c for emitt- ing light.

Finally, a CPU 13 in the data processing apparatus 1 controls all the operations of the data processing apparatus .

A selection of components will now be described in more detail for the embodiment illustrated in Figs la-c. It is to be understood, however, that this selection is in no way limiting to the invention; various other commercially available components may be chosen in place of the ones disclosed, as is readily realized by a skill- ed person. Moreover, a detailed description of hardware and software, by which a portable communication apparatus according to the invention may be implemented, is given in Applicant's US Patent Application No. 10/125,461 as well as in Applicant's co-pending PCT application claiming priority thereof, the contents of which are incorporated herewith by reference . In the preferred embodiment , the transceiver 9 is a BiCMOS class 1 Bluetooth radio module, which is of type PBA31302/1 and is available from Ericsson Microelectronics AB, Isafjordgatan 16, SE-164 81 Kista, Sweden. The radio module has a 13 MHz crystal, which is available from Taitien Electronics Co., Ltd, 5 FI. 76, Po Ai Road, Taipei, Taiwan 100.

The selection of the antenna 10 will depend on the design of the casing 2 as well as its desired size, for- mat and flexibility. In the preferred embodiment, an ICM antenna which fits to the inside of the casing is selected. The IMC antenna is available from gigaAnt, Ideon Science & Technology Park, Ole Rδmers vag 16, SE-223 70 Lund, Sweden. Alternatively, a Flavus/Crispus antenna from the same company may be used.

The CPU 13 is a Bluetooth baseband processor of type PBM99090/1, which is available from Ericsson Micro- electronics AB . It uses a clock frequency derived from the radio clock signal and includes an ARM7 RISC (12-40 MHz) , which provides adequate performance for the functionality of the apparatus 1. The baseband processor has a 64 KB internal RAM memory and handles communication protocols (Bluetooth embedded stack ver 1.00) as well as the higher-level functionality of the apparatus 1, as described throughout this document .

The memory 11 associated with the CPU 13 consists of a 1 MB flash memory, a 512 KB external static RAM

(SRAM) memory and a serial 32 KB EEPROM memory, wherein the latter acts as a scratch-pad memory for the functionality provided by the apparatus 1. The flash memory is of type BGA48, which is available from Silicon Storage Tech- nology, Inc., 1171 Sonora Court, Sunnyvale, CA 94086,

USA, under article number SST39VF800A-70-4C-B3K. The SRAM memory is of type BA48B and is available from Cypress Semiconductor Corporation, 3901 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95134, USA, under article number CY62147CV25LL- 70BAI. The EEPROM memory is of type SOIC-8 and is available from Atmel Corporation, 2325 Orchard Parkway, San Jose, CA 95131, USA, under article number AT24C256N-10SC- 2.7.

The connector provides a serial interface to the external computer 8 and comprises, in the preferred embodiment, an RS-232 interface as well as a USB interface, both of which are supported by the baseband processor. USB provides the most user-friendly interface, is faster and has the cheapest hardware. It also makes it possible to power/charge the apparatus 1 while connected, as USB also provides power through its communication cable. RS- 232, on the other hand, does not provide power. Thus, in that case charging has to be done through the power unit 3. The power unit 3 comprises four AAA battery cells connected in series with each other, and a step-down converter, which is of type MAX1724EZK27-T and is available from Maxim Integrated Products, Inc., 120 San Gabriel Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94086, USA. The battery cells may be of rechargeable type and may receive charging power from either an internal or an external AC/DC converter. Some embodiments of the invention may use battery technologies known from the field of mobile telephones, such as Li ion, Li polymer, NiMH or NiCd batteries.

The display 4 is a 64 x 128 LCD module of type WD- G1206Y-lWNNa, which is available from Wintek Corporation, 427 North Sixth Street, Lafayette, IN 47901-1126, USA. The buzzer 12a is a MQT-03EX buzzer from Star

Micronics Co., Ltd, 20-10, Nakayoshida, Shizuoka 422- 8654, Japan.

The vibrator 12b and the LED indicator 12c may be selected from various appropriate available component manufacturers.

In the memory 11, a number of customized profile kits 14 may be stored, see figure 3, each profile kit corresponding to an area of matchmaking, such as, for example, finding a date ("Dating") or maybe a person with a certain competence on a conference ("Conference"). Each profile kit 14 preferably contains two profiles, one "Who I am"- or "Me" -profile 15 for the user of the data processing apparatus himself/herself, and one "Who I would like to meet"- or "You" -profile 16 for the person the user wishes to find. Each of the two profiles 15, 16 in each of the profile kits 14 contains four parts, one "Must Match" -part 15a, 16a, one "Weighted" -part 15b, 16b, one "Query" -part 15c, 16c and one "Most Important" -part 15d, 16d. Attached to each "Who I would like to meet" -profile 16 is a personal information tag 16e. The personal information tag carries particulars about the user of the data processing apparatus, such as an address, a phone number, etc. For example, the particulars in the personal infor- mation tag for the Dating profile kit might be a description of clothing or a mobile phone number, whereas the particulars in the personal information tag for the Con- ference profile kit instead might be an email address or an internet address for a company's home page.

A number of sets of questions are also stored in the memory 11. Each set of questions is associated with one profile kit 14, and the character of the questions in one specific set depends on the corresponding area of matchmaking. For example, if the user is on a conference searching for a person with certain skills, a different set of questions is used for the search than if the user instead is on a nightclub looking for a partner. Figure 4 shows an example of a set 17 of questions 18 that can be associated with the Dating profile kit, since the answers to those questions help to reveal a person's personality. As may be apparent from the figure, not all the questions 18 are equally serious when it comes to dating. Therefore, as will be discussed later, each of the questions are associated with a preset weighting value which indicates how important the corresponding question is .

As mentioned earlier, the profiles 15, 16 each con- tains four parts, one "Must Match" -part 15a, 16a, one

"Weighted" -part 15b, 16b, one "Query" -part 15c, 16c and one "Most Important" -part 15d, 16d. The questions 18 in the set 17 are divided into three groups, one group 17a of "Must Match" -questions, one group 17b of "Weighted" - questions and one group 17cd of "Query" -questions . The "Must Match" -questions are associated with the "Must Match" -part 15a, 16a, the "Weighted" -questions are associated with the "Weighted" -part 15b, 16b, and the "Query" -questions are, as the reference numeral indi- cates, associated with both the "Query" -part 15c, 16c, and the "Most Important" -part 15d, 16d, of the respective profiles 15, 16. Each of the parts 15a, 15b, 15c and 16a, 16b, 16c, comprises a number of first information records 19a, which number is equal to the number of questions in the corresponding group of questions 17a, 17b and 17cd. Similarly, each of the parts 15d, 16d comprises a number of second information records 19b, which number is equal to the number of questions in the corresponding group of questions 17cd. Each record 19a in the profiles 15, 16, is to be completed with information, or more particularly, an answer to a corresponding question 18. As an example, each of the records 20a, 20b in the two profiles 15, 16 should be completed with an answer to the question 21, "Gender". Thus, if the user is a man who wants to meet a woman, the record 20a in the "Who I am" -profile 15 should be completed with the answer "Male" , and the record 20b in the "Who I would like to meet" -profile 16 should be completed with the answer "Female" . Also, each record 19b can, if desired, be completed with information, or more particularly, a selected weighting value indicating the priority of the corresponding question according to the user. This will be discussed in more detail below.

As the name implies, the "Must Match" -questions are of crucial nature. In the preferred embodiment, they must be completely fulfilled for two persons, for there to be any chance at all for a match between them. The "Must

Match" -questions has the largest influence on the final decision match/no match between two users. Therefore, they are all associated with the highest preset weighting value. The "Weighted" -questions are essential questions that also have a large effect on the final decision match/no match. Unlike the "Must Match" -questions, they do not need to be completely fulfilled for two persons, but fulfilled up to a certain level, for a match. Further, all the "Weighted" -questions are not, as the name may indicate, considered to be of equal importance, and, are therefore associated with different preset weighting values. Naturally, the higher a preset weighting value is, the more influence the corresponding question has on the final decision match/no match. The "Query" -questions are of "less importance". Just like the "Weighted" -questions, they do not need to be completely fulfilled for two persons, but fulfilled up to a certain level, for a match. The "Query" -questions has the smallest influence on the final decision match/no match. Therefore, they are all associated with the lowest preset weighting value. However, unlike with the groups of "Must Match" -questions and "Weighted" -question, the user has a possibility of affecting the influence of different "Query" -questions on the decision match/no match. This is done by the user associating selected weighting values with a number of chosen "Query" -questions in the "Most Important" -parts of the profiles. The size of a certain selected weighting value indicates how important the corresponding question is to the user and how much influence it will have on the decision whether there is a match between two users or not. Thus, the "Query" -parts of the profiles will contain the user's answers to the "Query" -questions and the "Most Important" -parts of the profiles will contain any corresponding selected weighting values.

In this particular embodiment "Gender" is the only "Must Match" -question. Thus, as in the example with dating and figure 4, if a heterosexual man would like to meet a partner for a friendship that hopefully develops into love, the partner has got to be a woman or there will be no match. Further, it is preferable if the woman is a heterosexual or bisexual. Nevertheless, even if the woman is a homosexual there might still be a match with the man. In such a situation there is a chance of a good friendship which, however, probably will not develop into love. Thus, "Sexual orientation" belongs to the group of "Weighted" -questions 17b. Further, if the man likes music and he would like to meet a partner who also likes music, there is a possibility for a match even with a partner who does not like music. Thus, "Listening to music" belongs to the group of "Query" -questions 17c. However, as described above, if the music question is very important to the man, he has a chance of prioritizing it by assigning it a high selected weighting value. Associated with every record 19a, b in the profiles 15, 16 is a symbol 22 under which there is a number of possible answers to, or possible selected weighting values for, a question 18. The possible selected weigh- ting values are, in this embodiment, "0", "1", "2", "3", "4" and "5", where "0" corresponds to normal importance and "5" corresponds to extreme importance. Of course, these selected weighting values are just exemplary and can be different in alternative embodiments. The type of possible answers to a question depends on which group the question belongs to, i.e. if the question is a "Must Match" -question, "Weighted" -question or a "Query" -question. The possible answers to the "Query" -questions are expressions stating how much a quality or an activity agrees with someone's personal interests, like for instance the expressions "agree" or "yes", "don't care" and "disagree" or "no" . As an example, if the question concerns "Shopping" and the user loves shopping, the answer to the question in the profile 15 should, of course, be "agree" . If the user wants a partner who is also fond of shopping, the answer to the question in the profile 16 should also be "agree" . On the other hand, if the user does not care that much about the shopping interest of a potential partner, the answer to the question in the pro- file 16 could instead be "don't care". Finally, if the user wants a partner who does not like shopping, the answer should, naturally, be "disagree" . The possible answers to each of the "Query" -questions do not have to be the same. To some of the "Query" -questions there may be only two possible answers. As an example, a "Query" - question concerning "Languages Spoken" may, unlike the question concerning "Shopping" , have only the possible answers "agree" and "don't care", i.e. the answer "disagree" may not be possible for this particular question. The possible answers to the "Must Match" -questions and the "Weighted" -questions are a number of alternatives, the number and type of alternatives depending, of course, on the character of the question. This is illustrated below with reference to figure 7a.

All users of a data processing apparatus 1 according to the present invention must personalize their data pro- cessing apparatuses by inputting the information described above. In the preferred embodiment, this is done by the questions, one by one, being shown on the display 4, and the user completing the profiles 15, 16 with answers, selected weighting values and the personal information tag 16e, by operating the keys 6 and the joystick 6' . In the alternative embodiment with the software kit and the connector 7 , and the external computer 8 , the user instead views the questions on the computer screen and completes the profiles, and the personal information tag, by means of the computer keyboard. After completion, the information is being downloaded to the data processing apparatus 1 by means of the connector.

For the sake of simplicity, focus will be kept on the dating aspect of the data processing apparatus in the rest of this description. Thus, for the personalization, the user chooses the Dating profile kit among the stored profile kits 14 in the memory 11. He/she completes his/her "Who I am" -profile 15 about himself/herself with answers to the associated set of questions 17, by choos- ing at least one of the alternative answers to each question, and selected weighting values corresponding to chosen "Query" -questions . In a corresponding way, he/she also completes his/her "Who I would like to meet" -profile 16 about the person he/she would like to meet. Finally, he/she completes the personal information tag 16e with particulars about himself/herself .

In figure 5a the entered information 23 in a first apparatus 24 (data processing apparatus) associated with a first user (first object) is shown schematically to- gether with the entered information 25 in a second apparatus 26 (remote data processing apparatus) associated with a second user (second object) . The information 23 consists of a "Who I am" -profile 27 (first set of data) describing the first user, and a "Who I would like to meet" -profile 28 (second set of data) describing a third user (third object) that the first user would like to meet. In a corresponding way the information 25 consists of a "Who I am" -profile 29 (third set of data) describing the second user, and a "Who I would like to meet" -profile 30 (fourth set of data) describing a fourth user (fourth object) that the second user would like to meet. Thus, the first and the second users are actual, real-world persons, whereas the third and the fourth users are virtual, desired ones only. As described above, each of the profiles consists of a "Must Match" -part (first subset) 27a, 28a, 29a and 30a, a "Weighted" -part (second subset) 27b, 28b, 29b and 30b, a "Query" -part (third subset) 27c, 28c, 29c and 30c, and a "Most Important" -part 27d, 28d, 29d and 30d. Additionally, a personal information tag 28e, 30e is attached to each of the "Who I would like to meet" -profiles 28 and 30. Since the apparatuses are wireless, portable and relatively small, the first and the second user can carry her/his apparatus with her/him practically anywhere. The apparatuses operate without the user's explicit interaction. At regular time intervals, the length and the spacing of which can be chosen individually by the users, each of the first and second apparatuses transmits a radio frequency signal by means of its antenna. This so called inquiry is to be further discussed below with reference to figure 8. If the first and the second user come sufficiently close to each other, i.e. if the distance between them is less than the range of the antennas, the first and the second apparatus will receive each other's transmitted signal and thereby "discover" each other. Upon discovery, if certain circumstances are ful- filled, which circumstances will be discussed in detail later, the first and the second apparatus will exchange information according to the arrows 31, 32 in figure 5a. The "Must Match" -part 27a and the "Weighted" -part 27b of the "Who I am" -profile 27, the "Must Match" -part 28a, the "Weighted" -part 28b, the "Query" -part 28c and the "Most Important" -part 28d of the "Who I would like to meet"- profile 28, and the personal information tag for the first apparatus 28e, are transmitted to the second apparatus (arrow 31) and vice versa (arrow 32) . Thus, the only information not exchanged between the first and the second apparatus upon discovery is the "Query" -parts 27c, 29c and the "Most Important" -parts 27d, 29d of the "Who I am" -profiles 27, 29. The result of the exchange can be seen in figure 5b.

When the exchange of information is completed, correlation analysis between the information entered by the first and the second user will be performed. In figures 6a, 6b, 6c, 6d the analysis is schematically illustrated. For the sake of clarity, the boxes representing the different parts of the information in figures 6a, 6b, 6c, 6d have been provided with facts indicating: type of profile, user described and part of profile.

The first step of the correlation analysis concerns the "Must Match" -parts of the information and is illustrated in figure 6a. The left part of the figure shows the analysis done in the first apparatus 24. The "Must Match" -part 27a of the "Who I am" -profile 27 associated with the first user, which profile describes the first, actual user, is compared to the "Must Match" -part 30a of the "Who I would like to meet" -profile 30 associated with the second user, which profile describes the fourth, desired user. This is done by the answers in the respect- tive information records 19a being compared question by question, which results in a number of points for each question. Addition of these points give the final result of this comparison denoted a first value of correlation, "cvi" . As stated above, the "Must Match" -questions are each associated with the highest preset weighting value which, in this embodiment, is "50". Thus, when the answers in two respective information records 19a for one "Must Match" -question comply with each other, the resulting points for this particular question will be "50" . On the other hand, when there is no compliance be- tween the two answers, the resulting points will instead be "0". Since there is only one "Must Match" -question in this embodiment, the first value of correlation can have the values "0" or "50" . If the first value of correlation is "50", there is a match between the first and the fourth user regarding the "Must Match" -part, i.e. gender. This means that the person that the second user would like to meet, i.e. the fourth user, so far actually is the first user. On the other hand, if the first value of correlation is "0", there is no match between the first and the fourth user regarding the "Must Match" -part, i.e. gender. This means that the person that the second user would like to meet, i.e. the fourth user, is certainly not the first user. Then, by in the same way comparing the "Must Match" -part 28a of the "Who I would like to meet" -profile 28 associated with the first user, which profile describes the third, desired user, with the "Must Match" -part 29a of the "Who I am" -profile 29 associated with the second user, which profile describes the second, actual user, a second value of correlation, "cv₂" , "0" or "50" is obtained. In a corresponding way, a "cv₂" equal to "50" means that the person that the first user would like to meet, i.e. the third user, so far actually is the second user, and a "cv₂" equal to "0" means no match. The right part of figure 6a shows the analysis done in the second apparatus 26. As apparent from the figure, the analysis and results in the second apparatus are the same as in the first apparatus .

The first and the second value of correlation are to be compared with a first and a second threshold value, respectively. If the first and second values of correlation meet or exceed the respective first and second threshold values, the first and second users match each other regarding the "Must Match" -parts, and the correlation analysis proceeds with the second step. However, if the first and second values of correlation do not meet or exceed the respective first and second threshold values, then there is considered no match between the first and the second user and the correlation analysis is terminated. Since there is only one "Must Match" -question in this particular embodiment, which, as stated above, must be completely fulfilled for a match, the first and second threshold values are both equal to "50".

The second analysis step is illustrated in figure 6b. Again, the left part of the figure shows the analysis done in the first apparatus 24. In the way described above, the "Weighted" -part 27b of the "Who I am" -profile 27 associated with the first user is compared to the

"Weighted" -part 30b of the "Who I would like to meet"- profile 30 associated with the second user. The comparison will result in a number of points for each "Weighted" -question. The maximum number of points for each question is the corresponding unique preset weighting value. Thus, when the answers in two respective information records 19a for one "Weighted" -question comply with each other, the resulting points for this particular question will be the corresponding maximum number of points. On the other hand, when there is no compliance between the two answers, the resulting points will instead be set in accordance with some rules that will be discussed further below. Addition of the points for each of the questions give the final result of this comparison denoted a third value of correlation, "cv₃" .

The third value of correlation for the "Weighted" -parts corresponds to the first value of correlation for the "Must Match" -parts . Then, by in the same way comparing the "Weighted" -part 28b of the "Who I am" -profile 28 with the "Weighted" -part 29b of the "Who I would like to meet" -profile 29 a fourth value of correlation, "cv₄" , is obtained. The fourth value of correlation for the "Weighted" -parts corresponds to the second value of correlation for the "Must Match" -parts . The right part of figure 6b shows the analysis done in the second apparatus 26. As apparent from the figure, the analysis and results in the second apparatus are the same as in the first apparatus .

The third and the fourth values of correlation are to be compared with a third and a fourth threshold value, respectively. If the third and fourth values of correla- tion meet or exceed the respective third and fourth threshold values, the first and second users match each other well enough regarding the "Weighted" -parts, and the correlation analysis proceeds with the third step. However, if the third and fourth values of correlation do not meet or exceed the respective third and fourth threshold values, then there is considered no match between the first and the second user and the correlation analysis is terminated. Thus, the requirement for continuing with the third part of the correlation analysis concern- ing the "Query" -parts of the information, is that the first and the second user match each other well enough regarding the "Weighted" -parts .

The third analysis step is illustrated in figure 6c. Again, the left part of the figure shows the analysis done in the first apparatus 24. In the way described above, the "Query" -part 27c of the "Who I am" -profile 27 associated with the first user is compared to the "Query" -part 30c of the "Who I would like to meet" -profile 30 associated with the second user. The comparison will, just like above, result in a number of points,

"Query" -points, for each "Query" -question. The maximum number of "Query" -points for each question is the corresponding preset weighting value. As stated above, the "Query" -questions are each associated with the lowest preset weighting value which, in this embodiment, is "2". The "Query" -points for different combinations of answers will be discussed below in connection with figure 7c. Addition of the "Query" -points for each of the questions give the final result of this comparison denoted a fifth value of correlation, "cv₅" . The fifth value of correlation for the "Query" -parts corresponds to the third value of correlation for the "Weighted" -parts . In the right part of the figure the similar analysis in the second apparatus is illustrated. The "Query" -part 29c of the "Who I am" -profile 29 associated with the second user is compared to the "Query" -part 28c of the "Who I would like to meet" -profile 28 associated with the first user. The result of the comparison is a sixth value of correlation, "cv₅" . The sixth value of correlation for the "Query" - parts corresponds to the fourth value of correlation for the "Weighted" -parts . The fourth analysis step is illustrated in figure

6d. Again, the left part of the figure shows the analysis done in the first apparatus 24. The "Most Important" -part 27d of the "Who I am" -profile 27 is combined with the "Most Important" -part 30d of the "Who I would like to meet" -profile 30. This is done by the selected weighting values in the respective information records 19b being combined, e.g. added, question by question, which results in a total selected weighting value for each "Query" - question. Those information posts not associated with a selected weighting value is treated as if they are associated with the selection weighting value "0" (normal importance) . Then, on the basis of the previously determined (third analysis step) "Query" -points for each "Query" -question and the calculated corresponding total selected weighting value, "Most Important" -points are calculated for each "Query" -question according to the following formula:

"Most Important" -points = "Query" -points + "Query" -points x total selected weighting value Addition of these "Most Important" -points give a seventh value of correlation, "cv₇" . Thus, the seventh value of correlation is based on a combination of the "Most Important" -parts 27d and 30d. An important effect of this combination is that if the first and second users both find one certain "Query" -question to be of particular importance, i.e. if they have both associated one certain "Query" -question with a very high selected weighting value, the influence of that question, on the decision match/no match, will be considerably large. This will be illustrated later by means of an example. In the right part of the figure the similar analysis in the second apparatus is illustrated. The "Most Important" - part 29c of the "Who I am" -profile 29 is compared to the "Most Important" -part 28c of the "Who I would like to meet" -profile 28. The result is an eighth value of correlation, "cv₈".To sum up, for there to be a possibility of a match between two users, the third and fourth values of correlation must meet or exceed the third and fourth values of correlation, respectively. The final decision match/no match is determined by a correlation result which is a function of the values of correlation calculated in an apparatus. In this particular embodiment, the decision of the first apparatus is based on the size of a first correlation result in the form of a sum of the corresponding calculated values of correlation, i.e. c i + cv₂ + cv₃ + cv₄ + cv₅ + cv₇. Similarly, the decision of the second apparatus is based on the size of a second correlation result in the form of a sum of the corresponding calculated values of correlation, i.e. cvi

+ cv₂ + cv₃ + cv₄ + cv_s + cv₈. An example to illustrate the above described analysis will be given later.

The first apparatus 24 has a first high score list with room for a certain number of personal information tags with corresponding first correlation results. As the name of the list indicates, the personal information tags with the highest scores, i.e. the highest corresponding first correlation results, will be stored on the first high score list. Additionally, the last received personal information tag will always be stored on a certain first last-received-position in the memory of the first appara- tus . Thus, prior to the correlation analysis, the second personal information tag 30e of the second apparatus 26 is stored on the first last-received-position in the memory of the first apparatus 24. After the correlation analysis has been performed, the second personal informa- tion tag 30e with the corresponding first correlation result is also stored on the first high score list if it is not already full, and if the first and second values of correlation meet or exceed the first and second threshold values, respectively. If the first and second threshold values are not met or exceeded, the second personal information tag 30e will not be stored on the list. In the case the first and second threshold values are met or exceeded, and the first high score list is full, the first correlation result corresponding to the second per- sonal information tag 30e is compared with the other first correlation results already in the first high score list. The other first correlation results each correspond to a personal information tag for a remote apparatus. If the first correlation result corresponding to the second personal information tag 30e is higher than any of the other first correlation results already on the first high score list, the lowest other first correlation result on the list will be rejected together with the corresponding personal information tag, and replaced with the second personal information tag 30e and the corresponding first correlation result. On the other hand, if the first correlation result corresponding to the second personal information tag 30e is not high enough it will be rejected. When the first apparatus 24 receives a new personal information tag, the second personal information tag 30e will be replaced with the new one on the first last- received-position in the memory of the first apparatus 24.

Correspondingly, the second apparatus 26 has a second high score list and a second last-received-posi- tion in the memory, which have the same characteristics as the first high score list and the first last-received- position, and which function in a similar way with personal information tags with corresponding second correlation results. The first and second correlation results are final measures of the match between the first and the second user. As above, the first and second correlation results are further to be compared with a first and a second matching threshold value, respectively. According to the preferred embodiment the first and the second matching threshold value can be chosen individually by the respective first and second users themselves. If the first correlation result meets or exceeds the first matching threshold value, the person that the second user would like to meet, i.e. the fourth user, is considered by the first user, who has set the first matching threshold value, to be sufficiently alike him/her. This is shown to the first user by the first apparatus 24 emitting an alert. This does not necessarily mean that the successful match is mutual, as will be shown by examples later on.

Correspondingly, if the second correlation result meets or exceeds the second matching threshold value, the person that the first user would like to meet, i.e. the third user, is considered by the second user, who has set the second matching threshold value, to be sufficiently alike him/her. This is shown to the second user by the second apparatus 26 emitting an alert.

Thus, if there is a mutual match between the first and the second user, both the first and the second apparatus will emit an alert . According to alternative embodiments, the exchange of information is not made in one single step. It is also possible to perform the exchange in two or more steps. In one embodiment, the "Must Match" -parts are first exchang- ed, and the first and the second value of correlation are calculated. Then, only if the first and second values of correlation meet or exceed the first and second threshold values, respectively, the second step of the exchange, i.e. the exchange of "Weighted" -parts, is performed, and so on. Then, only if the first and second correlation results meet or exceed the first and second matching threshold values, respectively, the personal information tags are exchanged.

In the preferred embodiment the apparatus can emit different types of alerts according to the user's choice. For example, the alert can be the user's favorite love song or some other audible signal which allow for two users to find each other directly by match, by simply tracking the sound. A more discrete type of alert is a visual one, such as an indication in the display or a flashing lamp on the apparatus . An even more discrete alert is a perceptible one, such as a vibration which can only be sensed by the user.

Figures 7a-7d illustrate an example of what a corre- lation analysis could look like. Figure 7a is a table of possible answers to the "Must Match" -questions and "Weighted" -questions shown in figure 4. Of course, these answers are just examples and they can be varied in numerous ways . Figure 7b corresponds to the left part of figure 5b. It shows an example of what the information in the first apparatus 24 could look like after the exchange with the second apparatus 26. Figure 7c contains a scheme 39 for the "Query" -questions indicating the points for different combination of answers. Figure 7d illustrates how the result of the correlation analysis between the first and the second user can be calculated. In figure 7b, the information boxes 27a' -27d', 28a'- 28d' , 29a', 29b' and 30a' -30d' correspond to 27a-27d, 28a-28d, 29a, 29b and 30a-30d, respectively, in figure 5b. The questions in the left part of figure 7b are the questions used in figure 4, i.e. the questions associated with the Dating profile kit. As explained with reference to figure 4, group 17a contains the "Must Match" -question (s) . The column 33a in figure 7a contains the corresponding answers to the one and only "Must Match" -ques- tion, which is denoted 33b. Further, group 17b contains the "Weighted" -questions . The columns 34a-38a in figure 7a contain the corresponding answers to each of these "Weighted" -questions, which are denoted 34b-38b. Thus, column 34a contains answers to question 34b and so on. Each of the answers corresponds to a number from 1 and upwards. Group 17cd contains the "Query" -questions as also explained with reference to figure 4. For simplicity, the corresponding possible answers to all of the "Query" -questions are in this example: "agree", "don't care" and "disagree" . However, as mentioned earlier, not all the "Query" -questions must have the same possible answers. The default answer to all of the "Query" - questions is "don't care", which means that if a user does not change an answer it will be "don't care". In figure 7b, each of the questions have been answered by a choice of one of the possible answers for that question. However, for the "Must Match" -questions and the "Weighted" -questions and the "Who I would like to meet"- profile it is possible to choose more than one answer to each question. Like for instance, if the first user wants to meet a partner of the age 17-20, he/she could choose the answers corresponding to number 3 and 4 in column 35a. As another example, if the education of a partner is unimportant to the first user, he/she could choose all the answers, i.e. the answers corresponding to number 1 to 6 , in column 37a. In the preferred embodiment the "Age" -question 35b is treated a little different from the rest of the questions regarding the "Who I am" -profile. When a user begins to use his/her apparatus he/she enters his/her date of birth into the apparatus . The age of the user will therefore automatically be completed in the in the "Who I am" -profile, and updated on the users birthday. This updating function can also be used with the "Age" - question 35b regarding the "Who I would like to meet"- profile. For example, the user might be interested in meeting a partner who is two years older than himself/herself. Then, the age in the "Who I would like to meet" -profile can always be automatically updated with one year on the users birthday. In figure 7d, the result of the correlation analysis, in the first apparatus, has been calculated based on the scheme 39 in figure 7c, and the rules regarding the points for different combinations of two answers to the "Must Match" -questions and "Weighted" -questions, and the corresponding maximum points, that are given below.

• Gender: 50 points (maximum) are given upon conformity between two answers, 0 points are given otherwise.

• Sexual orientation: 20 points (maximum) are given upon conformity between two answers, 0 points are given otherwise.

• Age: 30 points (maximum) are given upon conformity between two answers, 30 - 10 x Δ points are given otherwise. Δ is the differ- ence in corresponding number in figure 7a.

Example: one answer is 15-16 years which corresponds to number "2" in figure 7a, and one answer is 19-20 years which corresponds to number "4" in figure 7a, i.e. Δ = 2 and 30 - 10 x 2 = 10 points are given for this particular combination. • Marital status: 25 points (maximum) are given upon conformity between two answers, 0 points are given otherwise.

• Education: 15 points (maximum) are given upon conformity between two answers, 15 - 5 x Δ points are given otherwise. Δ is the difference in corresponding number in figure 7a.

• Body type: 20 points (maximum) are given upon conformity between two answers, 0 points are given otherwise.

As illustrated by means of the table 40 in figure 7d, correlation analysis has first of all been performed between the "Must Match" -parts as above described. "Points 1" corresponds to the comparison of the parts 27a' and 30a' , "Points 2" corresponds to the comparison of the parts 28a' and 29a' , and "Max" indicates the maximum value for "Points 1" and "Points 2" . Since 27a' equals 30a', and 28a' equals 29a', "Points 1" and "Points 2", and therefore also the first and the second value of correlation, are both equal to 50. The first and second threshold values are both, as mentioned earlier, equal to 50. As a result, correlation analysis has been performed also between the "Weighted" -parts as above described. "Points 1" corresponds to the comparison of the parts 27b' and 30b' , "Points 2" corresponds to the comparison of the parts 28b' and 29b' , and, just like above, "Max" indicates the maximum value for "Points 1" and "Points 2" . As apparent from the figure the third value of correlation is 75, whereas the fourth value of correla- tion is 85. In this particular embodiment, the third and fourth threshold values are both equal to 75. As a result, correlation analysis has been performed also between the "Query" -parts, as above described. "Points" corresponds to the comparison of the parts 27C and 30c' , and "Max" indicates the maximum value for "Points" . As apparent from the figure the fifth value of correlation is 8. Finally, correlation analysis has been performed also for the "Most Important" -parts, as above described. "TSWV" are the total selected weighting value and "Points" are the "Most Important" -points, as described above, for each of the "Query" -questions, and "Max" indicates the maximum value for "Points" . It should be noted, from figure 7b, that the selected weighting value associated with the question regarding "painting" , has been set as high as possible, i.e. to 5, in both of the "Most Important" -parts 27d' and 30d' . As illustrated in figure 7d, the total selected weighting value corresponding to painting will therefore be 10. Since the number of "Query" -points for this question regarding painting is 2, the corresponding number of "Most Important" -points will, in accordance with the formula above, be 22, which is the maximum number of "Most

Important" -points that can be obtained for a "Query- question". If the "Query" -points for the question regarding painting instead had been -1, the corresponding "Most Important" -points would have been -11, which is the minimum number of "Most Important" -points that can be obtained for a "Query-question" . As apparent from figure 7d, the seventh value of correlation is 36. The final result of the correlation analysis, which is denoted the first correlation result, is the sum of the calculated values of correlation (304) . A more illustrative value of the result may be a relative first correlation result which is the first correlation result divided by the sum of the maximal values of correlation, (304/382) . As can be seen, the relative result in this example is 80%, i.e. the first user is to 80% who the second user would like to meet. Now, if the previously discussed conditions are fulfilled, i.e. if the first high score list is not full or if the first correlation result is high enough, the second personal information tag will be stored on the first high score list in the first apparatus. Additionally, depending on the first matching threshold value, which is set by the first user in this embodiment, the first apparatus will emit an alert and alert the first user to the match.

As mentioned earlier, a match in one direction does not necessarily mean a match in the other direction. As an example, if the first user from above has set the first matching threshold value to 300, his/her apparatus will emit an alert. In the second apparatus the corresponding analysis has been performed, resulting in a second correlation result of 305. If also the second user has set the second matching threshold value to 300 there will be a double match, and the second apparatus will emit an alert and alert the second user of the match. However, if the second user instead has set the second matching threshold value to 310, there will be no double match.

In an alternative embodiment the first matching threshold value is instead set by the second user, and the second matching threshold value by the first user. In this latter case, the second user will make the decision if the first user is sufficiently alike the fourth user. In other words, it is up to the second user to decide if there is a match between him/her and the first user, i.e. whether the first apparatus should emit an alert or not . This embodiment means that also the first and second matching threshold values have to be exchanged between the first and the second apparatus for the correlation analysis .

Figure 8 is a flowchart schematically illustrating the method according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention. Each block in the figure 8 corresponds to one step in the method. Initially, data is entered into an apparatus according to the present invention by a user as above described (block 42) , and the data is stored in the memory of the apparatus (block 43) . At time intervals, which are adjustable by the user but also can be handled automatically by the apparatus, the apparatus performs inquiry sessions (blocks 44, 45, 46), i.e. the apparatus searches for remote apparatuses within range. This is done by the apparatus performing inquiries, i.e. transmitting first radio frequency signals to, and receiving second radio frequency signals from, remote apparatuses within range (block 44) . An inquiry session lasts for a predetermined time unless a predetermined maximum number of responses have been obtained from remote apparatuses, i.e. a maximum number of second radio frequency signals have been received. Thus, after an inquiry (block 44) , the number of responses is checked (block 45) . If the number of responses is more than the maximum number (X) , the inquiry session is terminated, and if the responses are less than X, a check of the time is made (block 46) . If there is a timeout, the inquiry session is terminated, if not, a new inquiry is performed. The above continues until the inquiry session is terminated. For the sake of simplicity, in the following it is assumed that the number of responses resulting from the inquiry session is one. The apparatus has a remote apparatus list which contains user-id:s identifying remote apparatuses that the apparatus have had contact with. In the next step, the apparatus acquires the unique apparatus-specific user-id for the remote apparatus that responded in the inquiry session above (block 47) . It is checked whether the acquired unique apparatus-specific user-id is already in the remote apparatus list (block 48) . If it is in the list, the method returns to the inquiry session (block 44, 45, 46) . If it is not, it is added to the remote apparatus list (block 49) . After the addition, information is exchanged with the remote apparatus as described in detail earlier in the text, i.e. the apparatus transmits parts of its entered data (block 50) and receives corresponding parts of data from the remote apparatus (block 51) . As described earlier, the received data contains the personal information tag (p i t) for the remote apparatus. This personal information tag is next stored on the last-received-position in the memory of the apparatus (block 52) . Correlation analysis is thereafter performed between data initially entered into the apparatus by the user, and data received from the remote apparatus (block 53), as thoroughly described earlier in the text. After the correlation analysis, it is checked whether the requirements are met for storing the personal information tag associated with the remote apparatus on the high score list (block 54) , which requirements were discussed in detail earlier. If they are met, the personal information tag is stored on the high score list (block 55) . Thereafter, the result from the correlation analysis is compared with a threshold value (block 56) as discussed above, and depending on the result the apparatus will emit an alert to alert its user (block 57) . Naturally, the steps of the method do not have to be performed in this exact order.

The above described apparatus and method should only be seen as examples. A person skilled in the art realizes that the embodiments discussed can be varied in a number of ways without deviating from the inventive conception.

As an example, in the embodiment described above, in the first and second analysis steps, first and second values of correlation, and third and fourth values of correlation, respectively, has been determined, and to decide whether to proceed with the analysis or not, each of these values of correlation has been compared with a respective first, second, third or fourth threshold value. In an alternative embodiment, one first common value of correlation is instead determined in the first analysis step, and this first common value is compared to a first common threshold value to determine whether to proceed with the second analysis step or not. Correspondingly, one second common value of correlation is determined in the second analysis step, and this second common value of correlation is compared to a second common threshold value to determine whether to proceed with the third analysis step or not.

Further, in the above described embodiment, there is a symbol 22 associated with each of the information records 19b. Under this symbol there are possible selected weighting values, e.g. "0"-"5", for the corresponding question, of which one can be chosen. In an alternative embodiment, each symbol for the information records 19b is instead associated with a "slider" . This "slider" can be moved along a scale to set the selected weighting • value. For example, the "slider" being moved as far to the left as possible may correspond to the selected weighting value "0" , and the "slider" being moved as far to the right as possible may correspond to the selected weighting value "5" .

Additionally, in the above described embodiment, it is possible for a user to associate a selected weighting value with each of the "Query" -questions . In an alternative embodiment, the user is also able to associate the "Must Match" -questions and the "Weighted" -questions with a selected weighted value each. In such an embodiment, the selected weighting values for the "Must Match" - question should preferably be higher than the selected weighting values for the "Weighted" -questions, which preferably should be higher than those for the "Query" - questions .

The apparatus according to the present invention may, for example, be realized as a separate, stand-alone unit, or may alternatively be included in, or combined with, a mobile terminal for a telecommunications network, such as GSM, UMTS, GPS, GPRS, CDMA or D-AMPS .

In one embodiment, the present invention is embodied as application software in a mobile telephone. The mobile telephone may have a 32 bit multitasking operating system (OS) , developed by Symbian Ltd (www■ symbia . com

<http://www. symbian.com>) . The sof ware structure of the mobile telephone is divided into sub layers : the core application software, user interface, application engine, system layer and a core operating system. A predefined application programming interface (API) is provided between the application software and the application engine. The application software includes various segments of program code, which when executed by the CPU will implement all the necessary functionality of the invention. The Symbian OS components provide data management, communications, graphics, multimedia, security, application engines, messaging engine, Bluetooth functionality, browser engines and support for data synchronization and internationalization, together with hardware-dependent functionality such as device drivers and memory handling. The mobile telephone may for in- stance be any one of the models 9200, 7650, 3650 or N- Gage from Nokia, or P800 from Sony Ericsson.

The present invention might be used in an application where an arbitrary personal computer (an apparatus) communicates with a server (a remote apparatus) over a wide area network to compare a user of the personal computer with a person in a database associated with the server .

Of course, the different embodiments described herein may be combined in the sense that one apparatus according to one embodiment (e.g. a stand-alone apparatus as in FIGs la-c) may exhange data with another apparatus according to another embodiment (e.g. a mobile telephone having application software that implements the invention) . Additionally, the invention is not restricted to be used in connection with matchmaking. It can be used in all applications where it is desirable to compare a first object, associated with a first set of data, with a second object, associated with a second set of data. Further, the profiles and the sets of questions must not necessarily comprise one "Must Match" -part (group), one "Weighted" -part (group), one "Query" -part (group) and one "Most Important" -part (group) , but can comprise another number or types of parts (groups) . In an alternative, more simple, embodiment there are only one "Must Match" -part (group) and one "Query" -part (group) for each of a first and a second object. Some or all of the important "Weighted" -questions may then be included as "Must Match" -questions, and, in such a case, they will have to be completely fulfilled for the two objects, for there to be any chance at all for a match between them. In this embodiment, correlation analysis is performed on the "Must Match" -parts in a way similar to the one described above. If the "Must Match" -questions are fulfilled for the two objects, the correlation analysis proceeds by performance of correlation analysis on the "Query" -parts, in a way similar to the one described above. The result of the correlation analysis on the "Query" -parts is a value of correlation on the basis of which it is directly decided whether there is a match (in one way) between the two objects or not. Like in the above described embodiment this is done by this value of correlation being compared to a threshold value which can be set by one of the two objects, or by the manufacturer of the apparatus. If the value of correlation meets or exceeds the threshold value, at least a one-way match is considered between the two objects, and at least one of the two objects will be alerted.

As a another alternative, the profiles and the sets of questions comprise only one part (group) of answers (questions) weighted with respect to their importance. In such an embodiment, like in the above described embodiment, answers (questions) concerning, for example, age, gender and sexual orientation should contribute more in the correlation analysis than answers (questions) concerning less important issues. In a less preferred embodiment, the profiles and the sets of questions comprise one part (group) of answers (questions) all weighted equally. The number of different answers to a "Query" -question does not have to be three or two but can be any number. As an example, if the number is five, the possible answers could be "agree much", "agree", "don't care", "disagree" and "disagree very much".

In the described preferred embodiment, if the first user is sufficiently alike who the second user wants to meet, the first apparatus emits an alert. In another embodiment, it is the other way around, i.e. the second apparatus emits an alert if the first user is sufficiently alike who the second user wants to meet. A third possibility is a mutual emittance of alert in case of a match.

As another example, a central unit can be used to- gether with the present invention. In that case, the central unit will receive information associated with the users, handle the correlation analysis for two users, and transmit the result of the analysis to the two users.As one last example, although there are many more, the objects do not have to be human beings.

Claims

1. A data processing apparatus for comparing a first object, associated with said data processing apparatus, with a second object, associated with a remote data processing apparatus, said data processing apparatus comprising: an input device operable to accept a first and a second set of data associated with said first object, said first set of data describing said first object and said second set of data describing a third object; a memory, wherein said memory is adapted to store said first and said second set of data; a receiver, wherein said receiver is adapted to ob- tain a first subset of a third and a fourth set of data, respectively, from said remote data processing apparatus, said third and said fourth set of data being associated with said second object, said third set of data describing said second object and said fourth set of data de- scribing a fourth object; a transmitter, wherein said transmitter is adapted to send a first subset of said first and said second set of data, respectively, to said remote data processing apparatus ; and a processor, wherein said processor is adapted to perform correlation analysis between said first subsets of said first and said fourth set of data, respectively, to obtain a first value of correlation between said first and said second object, and correlation analysis between said first subsets of said second and said third set of data, respectively, to obtain a second value of correlation between said first and said second object.

2. A data processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: said receiver is further adapted to obtain a second subset of said third and said fourth set of data, respectively, from said remote data processing apparatus; said transmitter is further adapted to send a second subset of said first and said second set of data, respectively, to said remote data processing apparatus,- and wherein, if said first value of correlation meets or exceeds a first threshold value and said second value of correlation meets or exceeds a second threshold value, said processor is further adapted to perform correlation analysis between said second subsets of said first and said fourth set of data, respectively, to obtain a third value of correlation between said first and said second object, and correlation analysis between said second subsets of said second and said third set of data, respectively, to obtain a fourth value of correlation between said first and said second object.

3. A data processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein said first and said second threshold value are equal to a maximum value, said first and said second value of correlation both equal to said maximum value representing that said first subset of said second set of data conforms completely to said first subset of said third set of data, and that said first subset of said fourth set of data conforms completely to said first subset of said first set of data.

4. A data processing apparatus according to claim 2 or 3 , wherein said first subsets contain no data, wherein said first and said second value of correlation is set equal to said first and second threshold value, respectively.

5. A data processing apparatus according to any one of claims 2-4, wherein: said receiver is further adapted to obtain a third subset of said fourth set of data from said remote data processing apparatus; said transmitter is further adapted to send a third subset of said second set of data to said remote data processing apparatus; and wherein, if said third value of correlation meets or exceeds a third threshold value and said fourth value of correlation meets or exceeds a fourth threshold value, said processor is further adapted to perform correlation analysis between a third subset of said first set of data and said third subset of said fourth set of data, to obtain a fifth value of correlation between said first and said second object.

6. A data processing apparatus according to claim 5, wherein said second subsets contain no data, wherein said third value of correlation is set equal to said third threshold value, and said fourth value of correlation is set equal said fourth threshold value, if the first and the second value of correlation both meet or exceed the first and the second threshold value, respectively.

7. A data processing apparatus according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein each of said subsets of each of said sets of data comprises at least one information record being associable with a weighting value indi- eating an influence on a result of the comparison of said first object with said second object, wherein said processor is adapted to perform correlation analysis with respect to associated weighting values.

8. A data processing apparatus according to claim 7, wherein said associated weighting values are selectable by said first and second objects.

9. A data processing apparatus according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein said memory is further adapted to store at least one profile kit containing a first and a second profile, said first and said third set of data each containing a respective result of a completion of said first profile, and said second and said fourth set of data each containing a respective result of a completion of said second profile.

10. A data processing apparatus according to claim 9, wherein said first and second profiles relate to at least one set of questions, said completion corresponding to answers to said at least one set of questions.

11. A data processing apparatus according to claim 10, wherein said memory is further adapted to store said at least one set of questions.

12. A data processing apparatus according to any one of the preceding claims, further comprising an antenna, wherein said antenna is coupled to said receiver and said transmitter and is adapted for radio frequency communica- tion with said remote data processing apparatus.

13. A data processing apparatus according to claim 12, wherein said radio frequency communication is in accordance with the Bluetooth standard.

14. A data processing apparatus according to any one of the preceding claims, further comprising an alert device operable to alert if a correlation result meets or exceeds a matching threshold value, said correlation result being a function of said obtained values of correlation.

15. A data processing apparatus according to claim

14, wherein said alert device is adapted to emit an audible alert.

16. A data processing apparatus according to any one of claims 14 or 15, wherein said alert device is adapted to emit a perceptible alert.

17. A data processing apparatus according to any one of claims 14-16, wherein said alert device is adapted to emit a visual alert.

18. A data processing apparatus according to any one of claims 14-17, wherein said matching threshold value can be selected by a user.

19. A data processing apparatus according to any one of claims 10 or 11, wherein said questions are of personal character and said objects are human beings, wherein said first object is a first user of said data processing apparatus, said second object is a second user of a remote data processing apparatus, said third object is a first desired person who said first user wishes to find, and said fourth object is a second desired person who said second user wishes to find, a match occurring for said second user with said first user if a correlation result meets or exceeds a matching threshold value, said correlation result being a function of said obtained values of correlation, said data processing apparatus being used as a matching apparatus .

20. A data processing apparatus according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein said input device comprises a keyboard.

21. A data processing apparatus according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein said input device comprises a connector to an external computer.

22. A data processing apparatus according to any one of the preceding claims, further comprising a display.

23. A data processing apparatus according to any one of the preceding claims, further comprising encryption means adapted to encrypt data prior to transmission, and decryption means adapted to decrypt data after reception.

24. A data processing apparatus according to any one of the preceding claims, being wireless and portable.

25. A data processing apparatus according to any one of the preceding claims, being included in a mobile ter- minal for a telecommunications network.

26. A method of comparing a first object, associated with a data processing apparatus, with a second object, associated with a remote data processing apparatus, comprising: inputting a first and a second set of data associated with said first object into said data processing apparatus, said first set of data describing said first object and said second set of data describing a third obj ect ; storing said first and said second set of data in said data processing apparatus; _„-.,,_-

PCT/SE03/00620

52 receiving a first subset of a third and a fourth set of data, respectively, from said remote data processing apparatus into said data processing apparatus, said third and said fourth set of data being associated with said second object, said third set of data describing said second object and said fourth set of data describing a fourth object; transmitting a first subset of said first and said second set of data, respectively, to said remote data processing apparatus from said data processing apparatus; and performing, by means of said data processing apparatus, correlation analysis between said first subsets of said first and said fourth set of data, respectively, to obtain a first value of correlation between said first and said second object, and correlation analysis between said first subsets of said second and said third set of data, respectively, to obtain a second value of correlation between said first and said second object.

27. A method according to claim 26, further comprising: receiving a second subset of said third and said fourth set of data, respectively, from said remote data processing apparatus into said data processing apparatus, transmitting a second subset of said first and said second set of data, respectively, to said remote data processing apparatus from said data processing apparatus; and if said first value of correlation meets or exceeds a first threshold value and said second value of correlation meets or exceeds a second threshold value, performing, by means of said data processing apparatus, correlation analysis between said second subsets of said first and said fourth set of data, respectively, to obtain a third value of correlation between said first and said second object, and correlation analysis between said second subsets of said second and said third set of data, respectively, to obtain a fourth value of correlation between said first and said second object.

28. A method according to claim 27, further comprising setting said first and said second threshold value equal to a maximum value, said first and said second value of correlation both equal to said maximum value representing that said first subset of said second set of data conforms completely to said first subset of said third set of data, and that said first subset of said fourth set of data conforms completely to said first subset of said first set of data.

29. A method according to any one of claims 27 or 28, further comprising: receiving a third subset of said fourth set of data from said remote data processing apparatus into said data processing apparatus; transmitting a third subset of said second set of data to said remote data processing apparatus from said data processing apparatus; and if said third value of correlation meets or exceeds a third threshold value and said fourth value of correlation meets or exceeds a fourth threshold value, performing, by means of said data processing apparatus, correlation analysis between a third subset of said first set of data and said third subset of said fourth set of data, to obtain a fifth value of correlation between said first and said second object.

30. A method according to any one of claims 26-29, wherein each of said subsets of each of said sets of data comprises at least one information record being associable with a weighting value indicating an influence on a result of the comparison of said first object with said second object, the method further comprising performing correlation analysis with respect to associated weighting values.

31. A method according to claim 30, further comprising selecting said associated weighting values.

32. A method according to any one of claims 26-31, further comprising storing, in said data processing apparatus, at least one profile kit containing a first and a second profile, said first and said third set of data each containing a respective result of a completion of said first profile, and said second and said fourth set of data each containing a respective result of a completion of said second profile.

33. A method according to claim 32, further compris- ing storing, in said data processing apparatus, at least one set of questions, said first and second profiles relating to said at least one set of questions, said completion corresponding to answers to said at least one set of questions.

34. A method according to any one of claims 26-33, further comprising radio frequency communicating, in accordance with the Bluetooth standard, with said remote data processing apparatus.

35. A method according to any one of claims 26-34, further comprising alerting if a correlation result meets or exceeds a matching threshold value, said correlation result being a function of said obtained values of correlation.

36. A method according to any one of claims 26-35, further comprising encrypting data prior to transmission, and decrypting data after reception.

37. A computer program product directly loadable into a memory of a processor, the computer program product comprising program code for performing any of claims 26- 36 when executed by said processor.