WO2006012122A2 - Real-time selection of survey candidates - Google Patents
Real-time selection of survey candidates Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- WO2006012122A2 WO2006012122A2 PCT/US2005/021948 US2005021948W WO2006012122A2 WO 2006012122 A2 WO2006012122 A2 WO 2006012122A2 US 2005021948 W US2005021948 W US 2005021948W WO 2006012122 A2 WO2006012122 A2 WO 2006012122A2
- Authority
- WO
- WIPO (PCT)
- Prior art keywords
- candidate
- survey
- percentage
- candidates
- decision objects
- Prior art date
Links
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q30/00—Commerce
- G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06N—COMPUTING ARRANGEMENTS BASED ON SPECIFIC COMPUTATIONAL MODELS
- G06N3/00—Computing arrangements based on biological models
- G06N3/12—Computing arrangements based on biological models using genetic models
- G06N3/126—Evolutionary algorithms, e.g. genetic algorithms or genetic programming
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q30/00—Commerce
- G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
- G06Q30/0201—Market modelling; Market analysis; Collecting market data
- G06Q30/0203—Market surveys; Market polls
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q30/00—Commerce
- G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
- G06Q30/0201—Market modelling; Market analysis; Collecting market data
- G06Q30/0204—Market segmentation
- G06Q30/0205—Location or geographical consideration
Definitions
- the present invention relates generally to surveys and more specifically to evaluating and selecting candidates for participation in an online survey.
- a survey typically consists of a survey presenter, or surveyor, providing a survey respondent, or participant, with a series of questions, the answers to which provide insight into the participant's preferences for particular choices or consumer goods.
- a typical survey may include a series of oral questions, a written multiple-choice questionnaire, or interactive online exercises.
- the survey format often relieves the surveyor of the burden of actually manufacturing physical product models to test the market, instead allowing him to convey verbal choices or graphical illustrations of choices to gauge potential customer affinity. Consequently, development costs are often significantly reduced, and a given product may be brought to a market in which it should theoretically succeed.
- Computers specifically those connected to electronic networks such as the Internet, are ideal as survey communication mediums because they allow participants to be remotely located and asynchronously queried.
- a survey is presented over an electronic network, a participant is able to interact with the survey over a large geographical distance, at a time that is convenient to him. Since computers used by participants and surveyors need not be physically close nor administered by a surveyor during the survey, this greatly expands the pool of possible participants and simplifies survey administration overhead.
- these survey programs rely on logic, between object presentations, similar to: "if the participant gave response A, display decision object C instead of B.”
- Typical survey programs cannot process rales equivalent to "if the participant gave response A, display a decision object previously unconceived of because they lack the means to create decision objects not entered by the surveyor.
- online evolutionary surveys that modify or evolve populations of decision objects in real-time based upon participant preference. For those surveys, participants may join, participate, and leave asynchronously. In such surveys, calculations, inferences, and decisions regarding group and subgroup preferences are performed dynamically, that is, in real-time, during the survey fielding period.
- variable participant population and variable decision object survey model leads to a convergence of preferences about the presented decision objects that can be greatly affected depending upon the characteristics of the past and active survey participants at any given point in time. In essence, if at any time an excessive number of homogenous participants interact with an evolutionary survey, they may substantially alter the natural evolution of the decision objects under consideration.
- the present invention provides systems and methods for ensuring proper participant representation, by only allowing candidates to participate in the survey that will neither cause over-representation nor under- representation of certain participant groups.
- avoidance of under or over representation may be accomplished either by allowing participation by the candidate but excluding the collected data from the survey's real ⁇ time computations, or simply by excluding the candidate from participating.
- a method of evaluating a candidate for participation in a survey is provided. Through execution of this method, information describing the candidate is initially obtained over an electronic network. Based on the obtained information, the candidate is categorized as a potential member of one or more predetermined groups. For each predetermined group, if adding the candidate to that particular group would increase the population in that group beyond a specified representation threshold, then the candidate is excluded from participating in the survey. Otherwise, the candidate is added as a member of each predetermined group and allowed to participate in the survey.
- a method of evaluating a candidate for participation in a survey is provided. Through execution of this method, information describing the candidate is initially obtained over an electronic network. Based on the obtained information, the candidate is categorized as a potential member of one or more predetermined groups. For each predetermined group, if adding the candidate to that particular group would decrease the population of any other group below a specified representation threshold, then the candidate is excluded from participating in the survey. Otherwise, the candidate is added as a member of each predetermined group and allowed to participate in the survey.
- a system for evaluating a candidate for participation in a survey includes a computer, connected to an electronic network, configured to obtain, over the electronic network, information describing the candidate. Based on the obtained information, the candidate is categorized as a potential member of one or more predetermined groups. For each predetermined group, if adding the candidate to that particular group would decrease the population of any group below a specified representation threshold, then the candidate is excluded from participating in the survey. Otherwise, the candidate is added as a member of each predetermined group and allowed to participate in the survey.
- a method for assessing the preferences of an objectively predefined consumer group from among decision objects.
- decision objects include various forms of a product, or different product options.
- a potential new candidate is permitted to request participation in the survey.
- data is obtained, through the network, relevant to determining whether the candidate may be classified as a member of an objectively predefined consumer group.
- the candidate is then excluded from participating in the survey if either adding the candidate would result in over-representation of a subtype of consumer in the group, or the candidate is objectively not includable on the group.
- the candidate is allowed to participate in the survey and to provide preference information indicative of his or her affinity for one or more decision objects.
- preference information indicative of his or her affinity for one or more decision objects.
- FIG. 1 depicts an electronic network in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.
- FIG. 2 depicts an electronic network connecting potential candidates to a central host.
- FIG. 3 A is a flowchart depicting a method of either allowing or excluding candidates from a survey.
- FIG. 3B depicts one possible method of excluding a candidate in accordance with the embodiment depicted in FIG. 3 A.
- FIG. 3 C depicts an another method of excluding a candidate in accordance with the embodiment depicted in FIG. 3 A.
- FIG. 4 is a flowchart illustrating a method for assessing the preferences of a group for one or more decision objects.
- the claimed invention provides methods and systems for regulating the number and characteristics of candidates who are allowed to participate in an online survey.
- survey options could be created on-the-fly, based on the answers provided by participants. And indeed, this is currently done in some cases, but it typically involves creating or modifying the questions or options presented to a respondent based on his or her responses to earlier questions. This is the case in survey designs that implement skip rules or answer piping; it is also the case in certain adaptive conjoint schemes.
- a new type of survey makes it possible to modify the choices presented to a participant, not only as a result of earlier answers from the participant, but also based on preference information provided by other participants to similar or related questions within the same survey. These other participants may have provided the preference information much earlier during the survey fielding period, or they could be providing it almost contemporaneously with the first participant.
- One exemplary online survey methodology modifies decision objects during the course of the survey using genetic or evolutionary algorithms to develop new, more preferable decision objects. This approach is described in co-pending U.S. Application Serial Number 10/053,353 filed November 9, 2001 and entitled “Method and Apparatus for Dynamic, Real-Time Market Segmentation,” which is incorporated herein by reference.
- an evolutionary approach begins by asking participants to rate or compare decision objects presented on a screen. Through mutation and breeding, "progeny" of some of the decision objects are then created and shown to one or more of the participants. Preferably, these new decision objects inherit desirable characteristics from their parent decision objects.
- the genetic algorithm-driven survey is similar to a standard market research study wherein participants are asked to evaluate a plurality of choices and provide information indicating their preferences. Unlike a typical market research study, however, participants see a panel of decision objects that are sampled from a population of such objects, a population that is evolving in real-time based upon the preferences expressed by a plurality of the participants. Because the total population of the decision objects is evolving constantly, and participants may join and exit the survey at any time, it is important that the participants allowed to participate in the survey at any given time have demographic and other characteristics desired by the surveyor. Towards that end, embodiments of the present invention constantly evaluate and select candidates for participation in the survey in order to ensure that the decision object population is only evolved by participants satisfying certain conditions.
- FIG. 1 depicts an electronic network in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.
- a terminal 102a which could be a desktop PC, a laptop computer, a kiosk, or other means for interfacing with a survey candidate or participant, is preferably connected to a Local Area Network 104 (LAN).
- LANs 104 comprise any number of terminals, servers, network storage devices, databases, printers, hubs, or other network appliances.
- the LAN 104 may in turn be connected to a Wide Area Network 106 (WAN).
- WAN Wide Area Network 106
- WANs 106 generally cover a larger geographic area than a LAN 104 and comprise one or more LANs 104, as well as individual terminals 102b, and may be connected to one or more switches 108, the switches 108 being connected to still more terminals 102c. Additionally, the switch 108 may also be connected to a survey and real-time computation host 110, which is preferably connected to a database 112 for storing preference information.
- the WAN in this embodiment, is connected to the Internet 114 so that participants that are not a part of the WAN 106 or LAN 104 may access the survey and real-time computation host 110.
- FIG. 1 represents only one embodiment of the present invention and other embodiments may comprise the survey host 110 being connected to the LAN 104 or accessed through the Internet 114 or other electronic communication means.
- FIG. 2 depicts a typical electronic network connecting potential candidates to a central server, or host.
- candidates 202 use terminals 204 to access a survey and real-time computation host 206. Once they are approved (as described below), the candidates 202 become participants 210 and continue their interaction with the host 206.
- the survey host 206 accesses a database 208 to store information about the candidates 202.
- the database 208 also stores preference information expressed by survey participants 210, or survey settings such as survey questions 212 or decision object attributes 214.
- the host 206 and database 208 are depicted as separate modules, one skilled in the art will recognize that they may be combined into one physical device or be located on separate LANs or WANs (104 and 106 from FIG. 1, respectively).
- the participants 210 interact with the survey residing on the host 206, decision objects are evolved and presented to other participants 210.
- the claimed invention provides methods of selecting which candidates 202 will be allowed into the survey to as participants 210.
- FIG. 3 A is a flowchart depicting an aspect of the claimed invention wherein input from a candidate 202 is either allowed into, or excluded from, a survey.
- the process begins by obtaining information describing the candidate (step 302).
- Information may include any aspect of the life of the candidate considered relevant by the product developer, and includes, without limitation, the candidate's:
- purchase behavior e.g., quantity purchased per store visit, or type of store where purchases typically made
- the information is obtained over an electronic network (described above). Based on the information obtained, the candidate 202 is categorized as being a potential member of one or more groups (step 304). However, because surveyors generally desire only a certain amount of representation of a given participant-type (e.g., demographic) during a survey, care must be taken that before adding the candidate 202 to the pool of participants 210, the survey participant population size and proportions are controlled. Therefore, an excluding step (step 306) is performed to determine whether or not the candidate should be allowed to participate in the survey.
- a participant-type e.g., demographic
- step 308 it is then determined if the candidate 202 has been excluded (step 308) by the excluding step (step 306). If he has, his session ends (step 310) ' and he may be allowed to exit the survey or to go on to another survey. Alternatively, to the same effect, he may be permitted to participate, but his input is excluded. If he has not been excluded, he is allowed to participate in the survey (step 312), becomes a participant 210, and is added as a member of each of the predetermined groups.
- the system then obtains preferential information describing the participant's 210 preferences (step 314) for one or more decision objects.
- the preferences of the participant 210 are then used to evolve decision objects (step 316) within the decision object population. Additionally, decision objects may be evolved based on preferential information obtained from all other participants.
- the exclusion process does not end the candidate's 202 participation. Instead, since the candidate 202 is already engaged in the survey process, preferential information may still be obtained from him (path 320).
- the candidate's 202 preferences about decision objects may be obtained, but are not used to evolve the decision object population. Instead, these preferences may be used to perform non-real-time (i.e., post-fielding) preference analysis such a conjoint analysis, or simply discarded. Additional information from a questionnaire or other non-convergent exercise may also be obtained despite exclusion.
- FIG. 3 B depicts an excluding step in accordance with one embodiment of the invention illustrated in FIG. 3A.
- the excluding step begins by choosing a group n (step 322) that the candidate 202 will be a member of if the candidate were to become a participant 210.
- the excluding step determines if adding the candidate would cause that group to exceed a specified representation threshold (step 324).
- Differing versions of this embodiment provide alternate means for calculating this threshold.
- the specified threshold is based on the desired percentage representation for the group in question (RTn), multiplied by the total number of survey completions up to that point, (total completes or TC).
- the excluding step could be expressed as follows:
- Pn is the desired number of completes for group n (including candidate 202.) If the expression above tests true, then candidate 202 would be excluded from participating.
- tolerance bands are defined around the threshold. These can take two forms: a percentage-based tolerance band or an absolute upper/lower bound deviation from the target group size. In the former case, a percentage tolerance is allowed around the target representation percentage for the group under consideration, e.g., a target percentage of 25% of all candidates ⁇ 5%, or, stated another way, 20 - 30%. of all candidates.
- the combined test may be expressed as:
- tolerance deviation is the greater of the total completes multiplied by the desired representation percentage multiplied by the percentage tolerance upper bound for group n (PTUBn) and the absolute tolerance upper bound for group n (ATUBn).
- This deviation may be an absolute allowable deviation irrespective of candidate population size, or it may be a relative deviation based on a percentage of all candidates 202.
- deviation functions will need to be applied to meet sampling criteria of each specific survey and thus such functions are covered within the spirit of the invention.
- step 326 Based on the determination made in step 324, if the candidate's 202 admission to the survey would exceed the specified threshold, then the candidate (or his input) is excluded from the survey (step 326). If allowing the candidate 202 into the survey would not exceed the specified threshold, he is not excluded at this point (step 328) and the excluding step 306 proceeds to check the respective thresholds for each remaining group (step 330) the candidate 202 is a potential member of. If allowing the candidate 202 does not exceed any of those thresholds, the candidate is allowed to take part in the survey.
- FIG. 3C depicts another excluding step (step 306 in FIG. 3A), found in another embodiment of the invention illustrated in FIG. 3 A.
- the steps preceding the excluding step are the same as those described above in reference to steps 302 and 304 in FIG. 3 A.
- the invention begins by choosing a group that the candidate (step 332) will be a member of if allowed into the survey as a participant 210. However, instead of checking to see if adding the candidate 202 to this group exceeds this group's specified threshold as is described in FIG. 3B, the system determines whether adding the candidate to this group would cause the population of any other group to fall below a specified representation threshold (step 334).
- the specified threshold is a percentage of all candidates who have been allowed to participate in the survey. In other versions, the specified threshold is a percentage range between a minimum and a maximum allowable percentage of all candidates, e.g., 25% of all candidates ⁇ 5%, or, stated another way, 20 - 30%, as well as an absolute group threshold. This may be expressed as:
- the tolerance deviation is greater of the total completes multiplied by the desired representation percentage multiplied by the percentage tolerance lower bound for group n (PTLBn) and the absolute tolerance lower bound for group n (ATLBn).
- the absolute tolerance bound for the group is an integer number that does not depend on the respondent population size. This deviation may be an absolute deviation irrespective of candidate population size, or it could be a relative deviation based on a percentage of all candidates.
- One skilled in the art will recognize that other deviation functions will be necessary to apply to meet sampling criteria of each specific survey and thus such functions are covered within the spirit of the invention.
- step 334 Based on the determination made in step 334, if the candidate's admission to the survey would cause any group to fall below its threshold, then the candidate is excluded from the survey (step 336). If allowing the candidate 202 into the survey would not cause any group to fall below its threshold, he is not excluded at this point (step 338) and the excluding step 306 proceeds to check the respective thresholds for each remaining group (step 340) the candidate is a potential member of. If allowing the candidate 220 does not exceed any of those thresholds, the candidate is allowed to take part in the survey becoming a participant 210.
- step 306 of FIG. 3 C To illustrate the excluding step 306 of FIG. 3 C, assume fifty candidates are have participated in a survey to-date, 26 are male, 24 are female, with the specified threshold being 50% representation for each gender ⁇ 2%. As the 51 st candidate 202, a male, attempts to enter the survey, the groups he would not be a part of are evaluated. If adding the male to the candidate population would cause the female portion to be underrepresented, then he cannot be added. In this scenario, adding the male would cause the female representation to drop from 48%, which is within acceptable tolerances, to 47%, which is not. The male is therefor rejected, as other male candidates 202 will be, until another female candidate 202 is admitted into the survey.
- FIG. 4 illustrates another aspect of the invention, a method for assessing the preferences of an objectively predefined consumer group from among decision objects.
- decision objects comprise various forms of a product, or different product options. The process begins by conducting a survey involving displaying various decision objects to consumers and collecting preference information (step 402).
- the process then permits a candidate 202 to request participation (step 404).
- Data is obtained relevant to determining whether the candidate may be classified as a member of a predefined group (step 406). Groups may be based on information similar to the candidate information described previously.
- a determination is made to assess whether or not adding the candidate 202 would over-represent a group (step 408). If adding the candidate 202 would over-represent a group, then he is excluded from the survey (step 410). Using the example above, if the survey had 26 males and 24 females, the act of adding another male, given the requirement of 50% representation ⁇ 2%, would cause the male subtype to be over-represented by 1% and thus he could not be included.
- step 412 If adding the male candidate 202 is allowed, a determination is made if the candidate is otherwise objectively unincludable (step 412). Continuing the example, if the survey had a requirement that all candidates 202 had to be between the ages of 25 and 34, and a 24-year old female candidate attempted to join the survey, though she fits within the gender subtype requirements, she is objectively not includable due to her age. If the candidate 202 is objectively unincludeable, the candidate is therefore excluded (step 414). Note that in various embodiments, determining objective includability may occur either before or after any other excluding step.
- rejection criteria non-over-representation (determined in step 408) and includability (determined in step 412) are overcome, the candidate 202 is allowed to become a participant 210 and participate in the survey, and her input is used in the survey. Preference information is obtained from the participant (step 416) and other participants 210.
Abstract
Description
Claims
Priority Applications (4)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
EP05760706A EP1769420A2 (en) | 2004-06-30 | 2005-06-20 | Real-time selection of survey candidates |
JP2007519282A JP4956425B2 (en) | 2004-06-30 | 2005-06-20 | Real-time selection of survey candidates |
AU2005267372A AU2005267372A1 (en) | 2004-06-30 | 2005-06-20 | Real-time selection of survey candidates |
CA002567588A CA2567588A1 (en) | 2004-06-30 | 2005-06-20 | Real-time selection of survey candidates |
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US10/881,154 | 2004-06-30 | ||
US10/881,154 US20060004621A1 (en) | 2004-06-30 | 2004-06-30 | Real-time selection of survey candidates |
Publications (2)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
WO2006012122A2 true WO2006012122A2 (en) | 2006-02-02 |
WO2006012122A3 WO2006012122A3 (en) | 2007-04-19 |
Family
ID=35515146
Family Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2005/021948 WO2006012122A2 (en) | 2004-06-30 | 2005-06-20 | Real-time selection of survey candidates |
Country Status (7)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (1) | US20060004621A1 (en) |
EP (1) | EP1769420A2 (en) |
JP (3) | JP4956425B2 (en) |
CN (1) | CN101076799A (en) |
AU (1) | AU2005267372A1 (en) |
CA (1) | CA2567588A1 (en) |
WO (1) | WO2006012122A2 (en) |
Cited By (7)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US8868446B2 (en) | 2011-03-08 | 2014-10-21 | Affinnova, Inc. | System and method for concept development |
US9208132B2 (en) | 2011-03-08 | 2015-12-08 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | System and method for concept development with content aware text editor |
USRE46178E1 (en) | 2000-11-10 | 2016-10-11 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Method and apparatus for evolutionary design |
US9785995B2 (en) | 2013-03-15 | 2017-10-10 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Method and apparatus for interactive evolutionary algorithms with respondent directed breeding |
US9799041B2 (en) | 2013-03-15 | 2017-10-24 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Method and apparatus for interactive evolutionary optimization of concepts |
US10354263B2 (en) | 2011-04-07 | 2019-07-16 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Methods and apparatus to model consumer choice sourcing |
US11657417B2 (en) | 2015-04-02 | 2023-05-23 | Nielsen Consumer Llc | Methods and apparatus to identify affinity between segment attributes and product characteristics |
Families Citing this family (21)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US7895240B2 (en) * | 2005-02-03 | 2011-02-22 | General Electric Company | Systems and methods for managing information |
US20070192161A1 (en) * | 2005-12-28 | 2007-08-16 | International Business Machines Corporation | On-demand customer satisfaction measurement |
US20080010351A1 (en) * | 2006-01-31 | 2008-01-10 | Digital River, Inc. | Survey polling system and method |
US20080091510A1 (en) * | 2006-10-12 | 2008-04-17 | Joshua Scott Crandall | Computer systems and methods for surveying a population |
US8494436B2 (en) * | 2006-11-16 | 2013-07-23 | Watertown Software, Inc. | System and method for algorithmic selection of a consensus from a plurality of ideas |
US8893241B2 (en) | 2007-06-01 | 2014-11-18 | Albright Associates | Systems and methods for universal enhanced log-in, identity document verification and dedicated survey participation |
US8056118B2 (en) | 2007-06-01 | 2011-11-08 | Piliouras Teresa C | Systems and methods for universal enhanced log-in, identity document verification, and dedicated survey participation |
US9398022B2 (en) | 2007-06-01 | 2016-07-19 | Teresa C. Piliouras | Systems and methods for universal enhanced log-in, identity document verification, and dedicated survey participation |
US20110066464A1 (en) * | 2009-09-15 | 2011-03-17 | Varughese George | Method and system of automated correlation of data across distinct surveys |
US20120116845A1 (en) * | 2010-11-05 | 2012-05-10 | Matt Warta | System for real-time respondent selection and interview and associated methods |
US20120246580A1 (en) * | 2011-03-22 | 2012-09-27 | Gether, LLC | Social polling |
US9311383B1 (en) | 2012-01-13 | 2016-04-12 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Optimal solution identification system and method |
US10373180B2 (en) * | 2013-06-11 | 2019-08-06 | Ace Metrix, Inc. | Creating a survey sample group according to a desired participant distribution in real time |
TWI709569B (en) | 2014-01-17 | 2020-11-11 | 美商健臻公司 | Sterile chromatography resin and use thereof in manufacturing processes |
TWI709570B (en) | 2014-01-17 | 2020-11-11 | 美商健臻公司 | Sterile chromatography and manufacturing processes |
JP6264946B2 (en) * | 2014-03-03 | 2018-01-24 | 富士通株式会社 | Data collection method and data collection apparatus |
US9992292B2 (en) * | 2014-04-01 | 2018-06-05 | Noom, Inc. | Wellness support groups for mobile devices |
JP6544084B2 (en) * | 2015-07-01 | 2019-07-17 | 富士通株式会社 | Group formation method, group formation apparatus, and group formation program |
SG11202101860UA (en) | 2018-08-31 | 2021-03-30 | Genzyme Corp | Sterile chromatography resin and use thereof in manufacturing processes |
US20220180384A1 (en) * | 2020-03-05 | 2022-06-09 | Guangzhou Quick Decision Information Technology Co., Ltd. | Data collection method and system |
US20220245653A1 (en) * | 2021-01-31 | 2022-08-04 | Walmart Apollo, Llc | Systems and methods for cross-channel marketing experimentation management |
Citations (2)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20020016731A1 (en) * | 2000-05-26 | 2002-02-07 | Benjamin Kupersmit | Method and system for internet sampling |
US20020077881A1 (en) * | 2000-12-18 | 2002-06-20 | Krotki Karol P. | Survey assignment method |
Family Cites Families (91)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US233337A (en) * | 1880-10-19 | Fbederic n | ||
US52774A (en) * | 1866-02-20 | Improvement in grain-hullers | ||
US4115761A (en) * | 1976-02-13 | 1978-09-19 | Hitachi, Ltd. | Method and device for recognizing a specific pattern |
GB8320357D0 (en) * | 1983-07-28 | 1983-09-01 | Quantel Ltd | Video graphic simulator systems |
US4603232A (en) * | 1984-09-24 | 1986-07-29 | Npd Research, Inc. | Rapid market survey collection and dissemination method |
US5222192A (en) * | 1988-02-17 | 1993-06-22 | The Rowland Institute For Science, Inc. | Optimization techniques using genetic algorithms |
US5255345A (en) * | 1988-02-17 | 1993-10-19 | The Rowland Institute For Science, Inc. | Genetic algorithm |
US5124911A (en) * | 1988-04-15 | 1992-06-23 | Image Engineering, Inc. | Method of evaluating consumer choice through concept testing for the marketing and development of consumer products |
US5041972A (en) * | 1988-04-15 | 1991-08-20 | Frost W Alan | Method of measuring and evaluating consumer response for the development of consumer products |
US4935877A (en) * | 1988-05-20 | 1990-06-19 | Koza John R | Non-linear genetic algorithms for solving problems |
CA2051655C (en) * | 1990-02-05 | 1997-04-22 | Toyofumi Takahashi | Animation display unit and external memory used therefor |
US5375195A (en) * | 1992-06-29 | 1994-12-20 | Johnston; Victor S. | Method and apparatus for generating composites of human faces |
JP2727874B2 (en) * | 1992-06-30 | 1998-03-18 | 株式会社日立製作所 | Superconducting wire and composite superconducting conductor |
US6088510A (en) * | 1992-07-02 | 2000-07-11 | Thinking Machines Corporation | Computer system and method for generating and mutating objects by iterative evolution |
US5437554A (en) * | 1993-02-05 | 1995-08-01 | National Computer Systems, Inc. | System for providing performance feedback to test resolvers |
US5687369A (en) * | 1993-09-02 | 1997-11-11 | International Business Machines Corporation | Selecting buckets for redistributing data between nodes in a parallel database in the incremental mode |
US5400248A (en) * | 1993-09-15 | 1995-03-21 | John D. Chisholm | Computer network based conditional voting system |
JP3686107B2 (en) * | 1993-10-06 | 2005-08-24 | 株式会社ブリヂストン | Pneumatic tire design method |
US5651098A (en) * | 1993-10-07 | 1997-07-22 | Hitachi Engineering Co., Ltd. | Planning method and system |
US6202058B1 (en) * | 1994-04-25 | 2001-03-13 | Apple Computer, Inc. | System for ranking the relevance of information objects accessed by computer users |
US5724567A (en) * | 1994-04-25 | 1998-03-03 | Apple Computer, Inc. | System for directing relevance-ranked data objects to computer users |
AUPM813394A0 (en) * | 1994-09-14 | 1994-10-06 | Dolphin Software Pty Ltd | A method and apparatus for preparation of a database document in a local processing apparatus and loading of the database document with data from remote sources |
US6460036B1 (en) * | 1994-11-29 | 2002-10-01 | Pinpoint Incorporated | System and method for providing customized electronic newspapers and target advertisements |
US6041311A (en) * | 1995-06-30 | 2000-03-21 | Microsoft Corporation | Method and apparatus for item recommendation using automated collaborative filtering |
AU1566597A (en) * | 1995-12-27 | 1997-08-11 | Gary B. Robinson | Automated collaborative filtering in world wide web advertising |
US5704017A (en) * | 1996-02-16 | 1997-12-30 | Microsoft Corporation | Collaborative filtering utilizing a belief network |
US5790426A (en) * | 1996-04-30 | 1998-08-04 | Athenium L.L.C. | Automated collaborative filtering system |
US5995951A (en) * | 1996-06-04 | 1999-11-30 | Recipio | Network collaboration method and apparatus |
US20020002482A1 (en) * | 1996-07-03 | 2002-01-03 | C. Douglas Thomas | Method and apparatus for performing surveys electronically over a network |
US6070145A (en) * | 1996-07-12 | 2000-05-30 | The Npd Group, Inc. | Respondent selection method for network-based survey |
US5862223A (en) * | 1996-07-24 | 1999-01-19 | Walker Asset Management Limited Partnership | Method and apparatus for a cryptographically-assisted commercial network system designed to facilitate and support expert-based commerce |
US5913204A (en) * | 1996-08-06 | 1999-06-15 | Kelly; Thomas L. | Method and apparatus for surveying music listener opinion about songs |
GB2316504A (en) * | 1996-08-22 | 1998-02-25 | Ibm | Distributed genetic programming / algorithm performance |
US6078740A (en) * | 1996-11-04 | 2000-06-20 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Item selection by prediction and refinement |
US6233564B1 (en) * | 1997-04-04 | 2001-05-15 | In-Store Media Systems, Inc. | Merchandising using consumer information from surveys |
US6546380B1 (en) * | 1997-09-24 | 2003-04-08 | Unisys Corporation | Method and apparatus for detecting an endless loop in a rules-based expert system |
US6281651B1 (en) * | 1997-11-03 | 2001-08-28 | Immersion Corporation | Haptic pointing devices |
AU2097099A (en) * | 1997-12-31 | 1999-07-19 | Kenneth J. Todd | Dynamically configurable electronic comment card |
US6029139A (en) * | 1998-01-28 | 2000-02-22 | Ncr Corporation | Method and apparatus for optimizing promotional sale of products based upon historical data |
US6993495B2 (en) * | 1998-03-02 | 2006-01-31 | Insightexpress, L.L.C. | Dynamically assigning a survey to a respondent |
US6477504B1 (en) * | 1998-03-02 | 2002-11-05 | Ix, Inc. | Method and apparatus for automating the conduct of surveys over a network system |
US6175833B1 (en) * | 1998-04-22 | 2001-01-16 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for interactive live online voting with tallies for updating voting results |
US6125351A (en) * | 1998-05-15 | 2000-09-26 | Bios Group, Inc. | System and method for the synthesis of an economic web and the identification of new market niches |
CA2337798A1 (en) * | 1998-07-06 | 2000-01-13 | Bios Group Lp | A method for performing market segmentation and for predicting consumer demand |
US6098048A (en) * | 1998-08-12 | 2000-08-01 | Vnu Marketing Information Services, Inc. | Automated data collection for consumer driving-activity survey |
US6167445A (en) * | 1998-10-26 | 2000-12-26 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and apparatus for defining and implementing high-level quality of service policies in computer networks |
US6741967B1 (en) * | 1998-11-02 | 2004-05-25 | Vividence Corporation | Full service research bureau and test center method and apparatus |
US6249714B1 (en) * | 1998-12-31 | 2001-06-19 | Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute | Virtual design module |
US6236977B1 (en) * | 1999-01-04 | 2001-05-22 | Realty One, Inc. | Computer implemented marketing system |
US6594638B1 (en) * | 1999-04-07 | 2003-07-15 | Netstakes, Inc. | On-line method and apparatus for collecting demographic information about a user of a world-wide-web site and dynamically selecting questions to present to the user |
US6629097B1 (en) * | 1999-04-28 | 2003-09-30 | Douglas K. Keith | Displaying implicit associations among items in loosely-structured data sets |
AU5934900A (en) * | 1999-07-16 | 2001-02-05 | Agentarts, Inc. | Methods and system for generating automated alternative content recommendations |
US6385620B1 (en) * | 1999-08-16 | 2002-05-07 | Psisearch,Llc | System and method for the management of candidate recruiting information |
AUPQ246899A0 (en) * | 1999-08-26 | 1999-09-16 | Memetrics | An automated communications management agent |
US6839680B1 (en) * | 1999-09-30 | 2005-01-04 | Fujitsu Limited | Internet profiling |
US6859782B2 (en) * | 1999-10-06 | 2005-02-22 | Bob F. Harshaw | Method for new product development and market introduction |
US20020052774A1 (en) * | 1999-12-23 | 2002-05-02 | Lance Parker | Collecting and analyzing survey data |
US6915269B1 (en) * | 1999-12-23 | 2005-07-05 | Decisionsorter Llc | System and method for facilitating bilateral and multilateral decision-making |
JP2001331627A (en) * | 2000-05-23 | 2001-11-30 | Management & Research Kenkyusho:Kk | Market research method |
JP2002015097A (en) * | 2000-06-28 | 2002-01-18 | Nippon Telegraph & Telephone West Corp | Questionnaire processing method and processing system |
US6636862B2 (en) * | 2000-07-05 | 2003-10-21 | Camo, Inc. | Method and system for the dynamic analysis of data |
JP2002049736A (en) * | 2000-08-02 | 2002-02-15 | Iric:Kk | Method and system for marketing with portable telephone |
KR100371662B1 (en) * | 2000-08-23 | 2003-03-28 | 김정욱 | Method for real time survey on the internet |
US6778807B1 (en) * | 2000-09-15 | 2004-08-17 | Documus, Llc | Method and apparatus for market research using education courses and related information |
JP2002092291A (en) * | 2000-09-20 | 2002-03-29 | Ricoh Co Ltd | Method for investigating questionnaire, questionnaire system and recording medium |
JP2002117204A (en) * | 2000-10-05 | 2002-04-19 | Mitsubishi Electric Corp | Device and method for surveying questionnaire, and computer readable recording medium reocrded with program |
US6901424B1 (en) * | 2000-10-10 | 2005-05-31 | Markettools, Inc. | System and method for creating a sample pool for a web-based survey |
US6999987B1 (en) * | 2000-10-25 | 2006-02-14 | America Online, Inc. | Screening and survey selection system and method of operating the same |
US7711580B1 (en) * | 2000-10-31 | 2010-05-04 | Emergingmed.Com | System and method for matching patients with clinical trials |
US6826541B1 (en) * | 2000-11-01 | 2004-11-30 | Decision Innovations, Inc. | Methods, systems, and computer program products for facilitating user choices among complex alternatives using conjoint analysis |
US7177851B2 (en) * | 2000-11-10 | 2007-02-13 | Affinnova, Inc. | Method and apparatus for dynamic, real-time market segmentation |
US7054828B2 (en) * | 2000-12-20 | 2006-05-30 | International Business Machines Corporation | Computer method for using sample data to predict future population and domain behaviors |
US20020133502A1 (en) * | 2001-01-05 | 2002-09-19 | Rosenthal Richard Nelson | Method and system for interactive collection of information |
JP2002215870A (en) * | 2001-01-19 | 2002-08-02 | Mitsubishi Electric Corp | Device for collecting result of survey by questionnaire |
US6574585B2 (en) * | 2001-02-26 | 2003-06-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for improving robustness of weighted estimates in a statistical survey analysis |
US7058590B2 (en) * | 2001-05-04 | 2006-06-06 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | System and method for generating conversion-related estimates utilizing adaptive sample size |
JP3673193B2 (en) * | 2001-07-18 | 2005-07-20 | 株式会社電通 | Advertisement response prediction system and method |
EP1340584B1 (en) * | 2002-02-16 | 2006-07-05 | Trumpf Werkzeugmaschinen GmbH + Co. KG | Apparatus for thermal cutting of workpieces in particular using laser |
JP4001781B2 (en) * | 2002-06-13 | 2007-10-31 | 富士通株式会社 | Questionnaire execution program, questionnaire execution device and questionnaire execution method |
US20040123247A1 (en) * | 2002-12-20 | 2004-06-24 | Optimost Llc | Method and apparatus for dynamically altering electronic content |
US7603291B2 (en) * | 2003-03-14 | 2009-10-13 | Sap Aktiengesellschaft | Multi-modal sales applications |
WO2004092881A2 (en) * | 2003-04-07 | 2004-10-28 | Sevenecho, Llc | Method, system and software for digital media narrative personalization |
US7080027B2 (en) * | 2003-04-17 | 2006-07-18 | Targetrx, Inc. | Method and system for analyzing the effectiveness of marketing strategies |
US8103540B2 (en) * | 2003-06-05 | 2012-01-24 | Hayley Logistics Llc | System and method for influencing recommender system |
US20050131716A1 (en) * | 2003-12-15 | 2005-06-16 | Hanan Martin D. | Method for determining compatibility |
US7302475B2 (en) * | 2004-02-20 | 2007-11-27 | Harris Interactive, Inc. | System and method for measuring reactions to product packaging, advertising, or product features over a computer-based network |
US7308418B2 (en) * | 2004-05-24 | 2007-12-11 | Affinova, Inc. | Determining design preferences of a group |
US20070218834A1 (en) * | 2006-02-23 | 2007-09-20 | Ransys Ltd. | Method and apparatus for continuous sampling of respondents |
US20080091510A1 (en) * | 2006-10-12 | 2008-04-17 | Joshua Scott Crandall | Computer systems and methods for surveying a population |
US7877346B2 (en) * | 2007-06-06 | 2011-01-25 | Affinova, Inc. | Method and system for predicting personal preferences |
US8234152B2 (en) * | 2007-06-12 | 2012-07-31 | Insightexpress, Llc | Online survey spawning, administration and management |
-
2004
- 2004-06-30 US US10/881,154 patent/US20060004621A1/en not_active Abandoned
-
2005
- 2005-06-20 CN CNA2005800222773A patent/CN101076799A/en active Pending
- 2005-06-20 CA CA002567588A patent/CA2567588A1/en not_active Abandoned
- 2005-06-20 EP EP05760706A patent/EP1769420A2/en not_active Withdrawn
- 2005-06-20 WO PCT/US2005/021948 patent/WO2006012122A2/en active Application Filing
- 2005-06-20 JP JP2007519282A patent/JP4956425B2/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
- 2005-06-20 AU AU2005267372A patent/AU2005267372A1/en not_active Abandoned
-
2011
- 2011-05-30 JP JP2011121053A patent/JP2011192302A/en active Pending
-
2012
- 2012-01-23 JP JP2012011357A patent/JP2012079349A/en not_active Ceased
Patent Citations (2)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20020016731A1 (en) * | 2000-05-26 | 2002-02-07 | Benjamin Kupersmit | Method and system for internet sampling |
US20020077881A1 (en) * | 2000-12-18 | 2002-06-20 | Krotki Karol P. | Survey assignment method |
Non-Patent Citations (1)
Title |
---|
SRINIVASAN V. ET AL.: 'The Predictive Power of Internet-Based Product Concept Testing Using Visual Depiction and Animation' INNOVATION MANAGEMENT vol. 17, 2000, pages 99 - 109, XP003010634 * |
Cited By (16)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
USRE46178E1 (en) | 2000-11-10 | 2016-10-11 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Method and apparatus for evolutionary design |
US9111298B2 (en) | 2011-03-08 | 2015-08-18 | Affinova, Inc. | System and method for concept development |
US9208132B2 (en) | 2011-03-08 | 2015-12-08 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | System and method for concept development with content aware text editor |
US9208515B2 (en) | 2011-03-08 | 2015-12-08 | Affinnova, Inc. | System and method for concept development |
US9218614B2 (en) | 2011-03-08 | 2015-12-22 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | System and method for concept development |
US9262776B2 (en) | 2011-03-08 | 2016-02-16 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | System and method for concept development |
US8868446B2 (en) | 2011-03-08 | 2014-10-21 | Affinnova, Inc. | System and method for concept development |
US11037179B2 (en) | 2011-04-07 | 2021-06-15 | Nielsen Consumer Llc | Methods and apparatus to model consumer choice sourcing |
US11842358B2 (en) | 2011-04-07 | 2023-12-12 | Nielsen Consumer Llc | Methods and apparatus to model consumer choice sourcing |
US10354263B2 (en) | 2011-04-07 | 2019-07-16 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Methods and apparatus to model consumer choice sourcing |
US9799041B2 (en) | 2013-03-15 | 2017-10-24 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Method and apparatus for interactive evolutionary optimization of concepts |
US10839445B2 (en) | 2013-03-15 | 2020-11-17 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Method and apparatus for interactive evolutionary algorithms with respondent directed breeding |
US11195223B2 (en) | 2013-03-15 | 2021-12-07 | Nielsen Consumer Llc | Methods and apparatus for interactive evolutionary algorithms with respondent directed breeding |
US11574354B2 (en) | 2013-03-15 | 2023-02-07 | Nielsen Consumer Llc | Methods and apparatus for interactive evolutionary algorithms with respondent directed breeding |
US9785995B2 (en) | 2013-03-15 | 2017-10-10 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Method and apparatus for interactive evolutionary algorithms with respondent directed breeding |
US11657417B2 (en) | 2015-04-02 | 2023-05-23 | Nielsen Consumer Llc | Methods and apparatus to identify affinity between segment attributes and product characteristics |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
CA2567588A1 (en) | 2006-02-02 |
WO2006012122A3 (en) | 2007-04-19 |
JP2012079349A (en) | 2012-04-19 |
EP1769420A2 (en) | 2007-04-04 |
JP4956425B2 (en) | 2012-06-20 |
JP2011192302A (en) | 2011-09-29 |
JP2008505393A (en) | 2008-02-21 |
US20060004621A1 (en) | 2006-01-05 |
AU2005267372A1 (en) | 2006-02-02 |
CN101076799A (en) | 2007-11-21 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
EP1769420A2 (en) | Real-time selection of survey candidates | |
Dash et al. | Marketing-to-Millennials: Marketing 4.0, customer satisfaction and purchase intention | |
Hu et al. | Nonadopters of online social network services: Is it easy to have fun yet? | |
Bigné et al. | The role of social motivations, ability, and opportunity in online know-how exchanges: evidence from the airline services industry | |
US20070196798A1 (en) | Self-improvement system and method | |
US20130204667A1 (en) | Social networks games configured to elicit market research data as part of game play | |
US20130035981A1 (en) | Social networks games configured to elicit research data as part of game play | |
US20050177413A1 (en) | Method and system for measuring web site impact | |
US20240005368A1 (en) | Systems and methods for an intelligent sourcing engine for study participants | |
US10817888B2 (en) | System and method for businesses to collect personality information from their customers | |
Veeraraghavan et al. | Measuring seat value in stadiums and theaters | |
US20230368226A1 (en) | Systems and methods for improved user experience participant selection | |
Schöbel et al. | More than the sum of its parts–Towards identifying preferred game design element combinations in learning management systems | |
US20070083415A1 (en) | Computerized internetwork system for automated training, management, and accounting of distributors | |
Munsch | College choice criteria utilizing conjoint analysis enabled on a SaaS platform | |
US20170116628A1 (en) | System and method for collecting personality information | |
US11669848B1 (en) | System and method for accurate predictions using a predictive model | |
Tan et al. | Effective e-commerce strategies for small online retailers | |
Rallabandi | Consumer perceptions of sponsored listing and their impact on online marketplaces | |
Fujiwara et al. | BFI Britain on Film British Film Institute (BFI) A Case Study on the Public Value of Online Public Access to Film Heritage | |
Falana et al. | The impact of Janus fit brand extensions on perceived brand innovativeness | |
Bravo et al. | Attributes, trade-offs and choice: A conjoint analysis of sport management programs | |
WO2021071860A1 (en) | Systems and methods for an intelligent sourcing engine for study participants | |
Hill et al. | Viral marketing: Identifying likely adopters via consumer networks | |
Turebekova et al. | Digitalization and Labor: The Role of Online Education in Global Workforce Development |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
AK | Designated states |
Kind code of ref document: A2 Designated state(s): AE AG AL AM AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BW BY BZ CA CH CN CO CR CU CZ DE DK DM DZ EC EE EG ES FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KM KP KR KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MA MD MG MK MN MW MX MZ NA NG NI NO NZ OM PG PH PL PT RO RU SC SD SE SG SK SL SM SY TJ TM TN TR TT TZ UA UG US UZ VC VN YU ZA ZM ZW |
|
AL | Designated countries for regional patents |
Kind code of ref document: A2 Designated state(s): BW GH GM KE LS MW MZ NA SD SL SZ TZ UG ZM ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR HU IE IS IT LT LU MC NL PL PT RO SE SI SK TR BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GQ GW ML MR NE SN TD TG |
|
121 | Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application | ||
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 2005267372 Country of ref document: AU |
|
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 2567588 Country of ref document: CA |
|
ENP | Entry into the national phase |
Ref document number: 2005267372 Country of ref document: AU Date of ref document: 20050620 Kind code of ref document: A |
|
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 2007519282 Country of ref document: JP |
|
WWP | Wipo information: published in national office |
Ref document number: 2005267372 Country of ref document: AU |
|
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 3768/KOLNP/2006 Country of ref document: IN |
|
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 200580022277.3 Country of ref document: CN |
|
NENP | Non-entry into the national phase |
Ref country code: DE |
|
WWW | Wipo information: withdrawn in national office |
Ref document number: DE |
|
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 2005760706 Country of ref document: EP |
|
WWP | Wipo information: published in national office |
Ref document number: 2005760706 Country of ref document: EP |