Method for delivering a message to an unknown recipient and method for analyzing a history of communication elements

Abstract

A method for delivering a message within a network of members to a recipient member unknown to the sending member, characterized in that it comprises: - a test step (701) performed on the basis of an analysis of the history of past communication elements between the members of the network, the test consisting of determining whether the recipient is a member with whom the sending member has already had a direct relationship, - if and only if the result of the test is negative: - a step (702) of calculating an indirect path between the sending member and the recipient member, this indirect path consisting of a succession of arcs connecting two members who have already had a direct relationship, according to the analysis of the history of the network's communication elements, and passing through an intermediate member who has already had a direct relationship with the sending member.- a step (704) of replacing the message recipient with the intermediary member and - a step of adding, in the message, an invitation for the intermediary member to attempt in turn to send the message to the same recipient by applying the same process. Figure for the abbreviation: figure 7,

Description

Title of the invention: Method for delivering a message to an unknown recipient and method for analyzing a history of communication elements

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of electronic communications, and in particular to the field of electronic message transmission.

[0002] A method for transmitting electronic messages has been disclosed for a long time, for example in IETF RFC 821 [August 1982]. This method provides for a distributed organization of mail servers which offers each user the possibility of having one or more personal addresses, which can be used by any internet user to send them emails.

[0003] One drawback of this method of communication, which is now very widely used in the professional world, is that users' mailboxes are almost always saturated with unsolicited messages, whether they are SPAM or emails sent as a copy for information or as a precaution.

[0004] In response, users apply anti-spam filters which reject certain messages without the senders' knowledge.

[0005] In addition, since anti-spam filters do not eliminate the many messages received as copies or sent for information, users tend to organize automatic classifications to keep emails that they consider a priori to be important above other emails received constantly and perceived a priori as being of secondary importance.

[0006] Consequently, it has become very difficult for a user who is sending a message to a recipient for the first time to be sure that the message will be delivered to him; and if so, that it will be seen; and if so, that it will be read.

[0007] To compensate for this uncertainty about whether the message has actually been received, the sender may resend it several times, possibly seek other means of communication with the recipient, request an alternative address, ask for read receipts, or even try to contact him directly.

[0008] These additional actions by message senders generate increased demand on communication systems by artificially increasing the number of exchanges, which in turn makes anti-spam filtering and automatic classification rules even more necessary.

[0009] This is therefore a race forward which has serious consequences on the consumption of resources.

[0010] Document US2015310374A1 discloses a method for monitoring employees of an organization, in an attempt to correct a lack of rigor in updating contact details for solicited prospects.

[0011] Even if this monitoring method improves the updating of contact details, monitoring contact attempts does not remedy the problem of overconsumption of resources due to senders' uncertainties about whether the messages they send will be taken into account.

[0012] Document US2020 / 344202A1 describes a method for creating alliances between users. This method allows alliances to be used to facilitate communication and data exchange between allied users.

[0013] Unfortunately, even if data exchanges between allied users optimize flows, as in social networks, it is not suitable for users who are not already in a reciprocal relationship.

[0014] In document US2020 / 344202A1, the concept of a graph is mentioned to make more efficient an analysis of all past exchanges between all members of a network.

[0015] No use is made of this network knowledge to optimize message delivery between members. It is only used to verify the accuracy of a contact file or the effective targeting of a prospect list.

[0016] The prior art leaves unsolved the problem of delivering a message within a network of members to a recipient member unknown to the sending member. A sender can therefore never be certain that their message will be considered by the recipient. Technical and organizational barriers can prevent this consideration, and the sender is not informed of this. Technical resources are consumed excessively to overcome this uncertainty, and these resources in turn lead to the overconsumption of other resources. The invention

[0017] In this description, a message means any electronic communication element enabling a member of a network to transmit information to another member in a delayed manner, that is, non-simultaneously. This information may consist of text, an audio or video recording, and generally any digital file that can be read upon receipt by the receiving member.

[0018] An object of the invention is a method for delivering, within a network of members, a message to a recipient member unknown to the sending member, characterized in that it comprises: - a testing step carried out based on the results of an analysis of the history of past communication between network members, the test consisting of determining whether the recipient is a member with whom the sending member has already had a direct relationship, - if and only if the test result is negative: - a step of calculating a so-called indirect path between the sending member and the receiving member, this indirect path being made up of a succession of arcs linking two members that have already had a direct relationship, according to the result of the analysis of the history of the communication elements of the network, and passing through an intermediate member that has already had a direct relationship with the sending member, - a step of replacing the message recipient member with the intermediary member and - a step of adding, in the message, an invitation for the intermediate member to try in turn to send the message to the same recipient by applying the previous steps.

[0019] A member with whom the sending member has already had a direct relationship is understood to be a member with whom the sender has exchanged communication elements in the past, without the intermediary of another member.

[0020] A "member network" is defined as a group of members capable of communicating directly with each other using communication methods specific to that group. If the communication methods are email servers conforming to the IETF family of standards defining electronic messages ("emails"), including the aforementioned RFC 821, the member network is the very large group of all individuals possessing an email address, and the communication elements are emails. In the common case where email services include address book and calendar management services (on servers, as in the Exchange standard, or simply on endpoints, via installed communication software), the communication elements are address book entries and calendar appointments, respectively.If the means of communication are managed by a specialized service limited to registered members, such as a social network, the network of members within the meaning of the invention is this social network and the elements of communication are messages exchanged between members within the social network, as well as, if they exist, logs of audio or video conversations.

[0021] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the communication elements passed between the members are emails.

[0022] According to a particular embodiment of the process, emails are analyzed on the basis of their header only, ignoring their body.

[0023] Limiting oneself to the analysis of the headers, without reading the bodies, guarantees respect for privacy and satisfies the obligation not to retain personal data not necessary for the intended processing.

[0024] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the communication elements passed between the members are agenda events.

[0025] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the communication elements passed between members are address book entries.

[0026] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the communication elements passed between the members are short messages, also referred to as “texts” or “SMS”.

[0027] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the communication elements passed between the members are social network messages, also referred to as “chats”.

[0028] Thanks to the replacement of the receiving member, the message progresses from member to member in the network with, at each stage, the guarantee of passing through the filtering rules, of being accepted by the intermediate member, therefore of being read and relayed by the intermediate member, until it reaches the initial receiving member step by step.

[0029] In an advantageous embodiment, the original message from the sending member to the unknown recipient member is readable only by that recipient member. This restricted readability of the original message can result, for example, from encryption. Thus, the confidentiality of the message between the sending member and the recipient member can be maintained.

[0030] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the so-called indirect path is chosen from a set of possible paths as being a path passing through the minimum number of members.

[0031] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the so-called indirect path is chosen from a set of possible paths as being a path passing through the members having the best affinities between them.

[0032] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the invitation includes a signature allowing it to be isolated in the body of a message and the step of adding the invitation is preceded by a step of deleting an invitation including this signature in the body of the message.

[0033] The invention also relates to a method for analyzing a history of past communication elements between members of a member network, from the accounts of certain members who have authorized access to their account, characterized in that it comprises the following steps: - For each member who has authorized access to their account, reading of logs of past communication exchanged between the first member and other members, - for each pair of members present in the same communication element, memorization of the existence of a relationship between these two members.

[0034] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the analysis result is materialized by a graph-oriented database comprising typed relations linking each two members.

[0035] Such databases are well known to those skilled in the art. They are described, for example, in the technical documentation of the commercial references Neo4j, NoSQL Database, OrientDB, HypherGraphDB, GraphBase, InfiniteGraph, AllegroGraph.

[0036] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the graph-oriented database is constructed by applying a weighting that credits each typed relation with a weight based on the communication elements passed between the two members linked by this relation.

[0037] This weighting makes it possible to qualify the level of affinity between the two members of a relationship.

[0038] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the weighting assigns a higher weight the more numerous the communication elements passed between the two members linked by the relationship.

[0039] Thus, two members who communicate frequently together are considered to have a high level of affinity.

[0040] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the weight, which is higher, follows a logarithmic function of the number of communication elements passed between the two members.

[0041] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the higher weight undergoes attenuation for a communication element which involves third members, i.e. other than the two members concerned by the weighted relationship, this attenuation being preferentially increasing with the number of third members.

[0042] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the weighting assigns a reduced weight, for example zero, to communication elements that are prior to a predetermined deadline.

[0043] In this way, elements of communication that are too old are not taken into account, or are taken into account very little, because they do not reflect the relationship that currently links the two members.

[0044] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the reduced weight is all the lower the older the communication element is.

[0045] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the reduced weight follows a sigmoid function of seniority, that is to say takes a value close to a lower limit of zero for very old communication elements and takes a value close to a maximum upper limit for very recent communication elements.

[0046] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the reduced weight of an old communication is exceptionally non-zero if there are regular communication elements between the two members, that is to say spaced in time by at most a predetermined duration.

[0047] Indeed, if two members have maintained regular, even infrequent, contact over time, the length of their relationship deserves to be taken into account when characterizing it, as an exception to the rule that excludes excessively old communications. Older communications must therefore be given non-zero weight so as to influence the level of affinity between the two members.

[0048] According to a particular embodiment of the method, the weighting assigns zero weight to communication elements which are subsequent to an earlier communication element between the same members and separated from this earlier communication element by a duration less than a predetermined time interval.

[0049] This method avoids over-weighting a one-off conversation between two members, which, although made up of several successive communication elements over time, actually corresponds to a single exchange.

[0050] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the weighting assigns an insignificant weight, for example zero, when the communication elements are one-way emails, that is to say, emails which have not been answered by their recipient member.

[0051] Thus, unsolicited communications received by the recipient member can be eliminated by considering that if he has not responded, even with a brief thank you message or an acknowledgement of receipt, it is because he does not consider himself to be in contact with the sending member.

[0052] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the insignificant weight of unsolicited communication is exceptionally enhanced if there are regular elements of communication between the two members, that is to say spaced in time at most a predetermined duration.

[0053] Indeed, if two members entered into a relationship after an initial one-way communication, the length of their relationship should be taken into account when characterizing it. Prior one-way communication should therefore be given greater weight to influence the level of affinity between the two members.

[0054] According to a particular embodiment of the process, agenda events benefit from a weighting greater than that of a communication element of any other type.

[0055] According to a particular embodiment of the process, the analysis result is obtained after applying a deduplication step which aims to: - Identify the identifiers of different members but referring to members with sufficiently reliable common properties that allow these members to be considered representatives of the same real person. - consider these identifiers as identical when obtaining the analysis result.

[0056] Thanks to the member deduplication step, real people who have changed their contact details are correctly considered as one and the same member in the count of past communication elements between network members.

[0057] The term "real person" means a person, whether natural or legal, belonging to the real world. A real person has at least one account in a communication system to communicate with other real people, via their own accounts. Brief description of the figures

[0058] The invention will be better understood upon reading the following description, given solely by way of example and made with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which:

[0059] [Fig. 1] schematically represents an email and its representation in a graph-oriented database,

[0060] [Fig.2] schematically represents several emails and their representation in a graph-oriented database,

[0061] [Fig.3] is a graph illustrating the content of a graph-oriented database four nodes and eight typed and weighted relationships, built from an analysis of a set of emails from a network of members,

[0062] [Fig.4] is a block diagram showing the steps of a weighting algorithm,

[0063] [Fig.5] is another graph illustrating the content of an oriented database graph representing unweighted "knowledge" type relationships between members of a network,

[0064] [Fig.6] schematically shows the successive transformations of a sent email by one member of the network to another member of the same network

[0065] [Fig.7] is a block diagram illustrating the steps implemented by a process of message transmission according to the invention. Detailed description

[0066] The first email 101, schematically represented in [Fig. 1], comprises a header 102 and a body (not shown). In the header 102, there are various fields, in accordance with the standards in force, including a “From:” field and a “To:” field.

[0067] The “From:” field contains the address of a sending member A. The “To:” field contains the address of a receiving member B. Both members A and B belong to the same network, in that they can communicate with each other using the communication tools offered by this network. Since these are emails conforming to the aforementioned IETF RFC 821 standard, the member network is the very large group of all individuals possessing an email address. For messages of a specific type, managed by a specialized service and distributed among registered members, such as a social network, the member network within the meaning of the invention would be that social network.

[0068] Other fields in the email header 102 can also be taken into account by the method according to the invention, in particular a “CC:” field and, if it is available because the first email 101 is read among the sent items from sender A, the “BCC:” field. If the first email 101 is read among the received items from recipient B, this “BCC:” field is nonexistent, by definition.

[0069] In the implementation described here, the process ignores the content of the email body. The information transmitted in this body is therefore neither analyzed nor stored, thus ensuring confidentiality and facilitating compliance with data protection laws. In an alternative, the information contained in the email body could be analyzed to refine the weighting of the relationship between members A and B.

[0070] As illustrated by [Fig.1], the analysis of the first email 101 results in the creation, in a first graph-oriented database 103, of two nodes A and B and of a typed relationship oriented from A to B, of the type "sent an email" schematized by an envelope.

[0071] As can be seen in [Fig. 2], if we analyze the headers of several emails 201 read from the inboxes and / or sent items of one or more network members, from the accounts of all members, assuming that they have authorized access to their account, we can construct a second graph-oriented database 202 with as many nodes as there are members encountered A, B, C, D. Each relationship between members has the same type “sent an email” as in [Fig. 1]. Thus, we have stored the existence of a relationship between each pair of members.

[0072] In the example in [Fig. 3], several relationships are defined between the four members A, B, C, and D of the network, with a specific weighting 303 marked in each directed relationship. This example illustrates the case where relationships between network members are weighted according to criteria verified by the analyzed emails.

[0073] By way of example, the weighting can result from the application of the algorithm illustrated in [Fig.4], in which the weighting steps 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406 are defined, namely: - Step 401: if the email is older than a predetermined date - for example, ten years -,

[0074] - step 402: if the email has been replied to or constitutes a reply, the weighting takes the value 1: step 403

[0075] - otherwise,

[0076] - step 404: if there are other elements of communication between the same two If members are spaced out over time by at most a predetermined duration - for example, one week - the weighting takes the value 1: step 403

[0077] - otherwise, the weighting takes the value 0: step 405

[0078] - otherwise,

[0079] - step 406: if the email is spaced out in time from another email that has received the If the weighting is less than 1 within a predetermined interval – for example, three months – the weighting takes the value 1: step 403

[0080] - otherwise, the weighting takes the value 0: step 405

[0081] For the implementation of this very simple algorithm, a person skilled in the art has the choice between: - create zero-weight relationships in order to optimize analysis performance (in particular by keeping the history of an analyzed email so that it can be used to reclassify an email that is too old or unanswered) and - do not create any zero-weight relationships.

[0082] When several 201 emails between the same sending member and the same receiving member are encountered, their weights are added together. The result can take the form of the third graph-oriented 501 database illustrated in [Fig. 5], where only relationships with non-zero weights have been retained.

[0083] The construction of such a graph-oriented database results from an analysis of all the communication elements that have passed between the network members. Once the weights are calculated, each relationship has a non-zero weight that can be considered as a level of oriented affinity between the two members of the relationship. Note that the level of affinity is potentially asymmetric, although this is not mandatory. In a simplifying variant, the relationships between members could be made symmetric.

[0084] The third graph-oriented 501 database was simplified by eliminating relationships whose weighting is below a predetermined threshold. Once this sorting was carried out, the weightings of the relationships were no longer considered. These were deemed to translate equivalent levels of affinity. Of course, in a variant, the weightings could be retained and used.

[0085] The oriented relations between members are of the "knows" type, but this type is not represented because all relations are of the same type.

[0086] Thus, according to this graph in [Fig.5], we can affirm that: - member Z knows members H and I, - member I knows member F, - member H knows member B, - member F knows member A, - member E knows members C and D, - member D knows members A and B, - member C knows members A and Z, - member B knows members A and D, - member A knows member C.

[0087] Having the graph-oriented database of [Fig.5] makes it possible to perform two operations: 1°) A test to determine if a member has already had a direct relationship with another member. 2°) A calculation of the possible paths between two members.

[0088] We will now examine the email transmission chain that enables the delivery of an email to a final recipient member, as illustrated by [Fig.6]. In this figure, the mailboxes of members A, F and I are placed on each line and, in two columns, first the emails in draft state (first column) then the emails in sent state (second column).

[0089] Thus, when a member A attempts to send a message in email format or as a file, possibly encrypted, attached to an email 601 from A to Z, he enters in the “To:” field of the header 102 of the email, the address of member Z.

[0090] When the sending member A requests the sending of email 601 from A to Z, the process comprising the steps of [Fig.7] is implemented.

[0091] In one variant, this implementation is triggered not when the email is sent, but as soon as the address of member Z is entered. This choice regarding the user interface falls within the skills of a person skilled in the art and is not taken into consideration for defining the invention.

[0092] A 701 test step is first executed using the graph-oriented database of [Fig.5], consisting of determining whether the receiving member Z knows the sending member A. This is not the case.

[0093] Since the test result is negative, step 702 is executed to calculate an indirect path between the sending member A and the receiving member Z, This indirect path passes through other members of the network. The rule for determining the indirect path meets the criterion that every member must know the member that precedes it, which is equivalent to saying that it consists of a succession of arcs linking two members that have already had a direct relationship, according to the result of the analysis of the history of the communication elements of the network.

[0094] Thus, the paths meeting the aforementioned criterion are, according to [Fig. 5]: A => B => H => Z A => F => I => Z A => B => H => I => Z A => D => B => H => Z

[0095] During the selection step 703, a path is chosen from among these four possible indirect paths, preferably the shortest one, that is to say the one passing through the fewest possible members.

[0096] In a variant with weighting of relations, the weighting of each relation is taken into account to retain the most efficient path.

[0097] If all relationships are identically weighted, the most efficient path is also the shortest path, that is, the one containing the fewest possible members. If the weights differ, the most efficient path may not be the shortest. In other words, passing through a member with a high affinity level with the preceding and following members may prove more efficient than bypassing it.

[0098] In the example of [Fig.4], we retain the path A => F => I => Z.

[0099] In this path, F is an intermediate member which is in direct contact with the sending member A.

[0100] Then, during the replacement step 704, a replacement of member Z, the initial recipient of the email, is performed by the intermediate member F. The email 601 from A to Z is thus transformed into an email 602 from A to F.

[0101] An optional step 707 may be inserted after step 704. It will be described later.

[0102] Then, during the invitation step 705, an invitation 603 is added to the body of the email 602 from A to F, for the intermediate member F to try in turn to send the email to the same initial recipient Z by applying the same process.

[0103] During sending step 706, email 602 from A to F is sent to the intermediate recipient F. Email 601 from A to Z is never sent. A special process can be implemented to retain, in the sent items of the sending member A, a record of the sending of email 601 from A to Z, either replacing or supplementing the record of the sending of email 602 from A to F.

[0104] The intermediate recipient member F receives email 602 from A to F. He accepts it since he knows the sending member A.

[0105] Since member A enjoys the trust of member F, the instruction added to the email to member F in the form of an invitation 603 for the intermediary member F to forward the email to the recipient member Z is taken into consideration by member F. Member F therefore sends an email 604 from F to Z. This email 604 from F to Z has the same content as the email 602 from A to F. The process is then executed again by member F.

[0106] In an advantageous embodiment, email 602 from A to F is processed by an automated system that automatically generates the content of email 604 from F to Z and submits it to F for acceptance. In this case, the intermediary member F does not need to transmit the email. It simply gives its approval for the delivery of this email using the same message delivery procedure.

[0107] The same steps 701 to 706 are executed again, resulting in the sending by member F of a new email 605 from F to I, in which the recipient Z has been replaced by the intermediate recipient I.

[0108] In email 605 from F to I, there is both an invitation 603 for the intermediate member F and an invitation 606 for the intermediate member I to forward the email to the final recipient Z.

[0109] In one implementation variant, the invitations include a signature that allows them to be reliably identified and isolated from the rest of the email body, without having to read that body. Thanks to this identification, an additional step 707, which removes an invitation already present in the email body, is executed before a new invitation is added. In this implementation variant, member I receives an email no longer containing the invitation intended for member F, but only the invitation intended for himself (member I).

[0110] Since member F enjoys the trust of member I, the instruction added to the email in the form of an invitation 606 for the intermediate member I to send the email to the recipient member Z is taken into consideration and carried out by member I.

[0111] Member I therefore sends an email 607 from I to Z and the message delivery process is therefore again executed by member I, by returning to step 701.

[0112] The test in step 701, which determines whether the receiving member Z knows the sending member I, is positive this time. Email 607 from I to Z is sent as is by the sending member A. It is delivered to the final receiving member Z.

[0113] In one embodiment, each member of the network activates a cascading acknowledgment function that allows the sending member A to know the progress of their email through the network. This cascading acknowledgment function traces the transmission chain back up. It can be anonymized so that Sending member A is not informed of the identity of the members who contributed to the delivery of their email to member Z.

[0114] It should be noted that, thanks to the method according to the invention, the initial sending member is not necessarily informed of the path taken by their email to reach the final recipient member Z. They only see the first intermediate member, whom they already know, by definition. Similarly, no intermediate member learns any information about the existence of relationships between members of the network. Each only sees the email sent to the next member, whom they already know, by definition. Thus, an additional advantage of the invention is that it maintains the discretion of the links between members while allowing any member of the network to benefit from the existing links between members.

[0115] The invention is not limited to the embodiments described. Reference list

[0116] 101... First email 102 ... Header 103 ... First graph-oriented database 201 ... Several emails 202 ... Second graph-oriented database 303 ... Specific weighting 401 ... Weighting step 402 ... Weighting step 403 ... Weighting step 404 ... Weighting step 405 ... Weighting stage 406 ... Weighting stage 501 ... Third graph-oriented database 601 ... Email from A to Z 602 ... Email from A to F 603 ... Invitation for Intermediate Member F 604 ... Email from F to Z 605 ... Email from F to I 606 ... Invitation for Intermediate Member I 607 ... Email from I to Z 701 ... Test step 702 ... Calculation step 703 ... Selection step 704 ... Replacement step 705 ... Invitation stage 706 ... Sending stage 707 ... Additional step to delete an invitation

Claims

Claims

1. Method for delivering, in a network of members, a message to a recipient member unknown to the sender member, characterized in that it comprises: - a test step (701) carried out on the basis of a result of analysis of the history of communication elements passed between the members of the network, namely emails (101) or calendar events or address book entries or short messages or social network messages, the test consisting of determining whether the recipient is a member with whom the sender member has already had a direct relationship, - if and only if the result of the test is negative: - a step (702) of calculating a so-called indirect path between the sender member and the recipient member, this indirect path being made up of a succession of arcs connecting two members having already had a direct relationship, according to the result of analysis of the history of the communication elements of the network,and passing through an intermediate member who has already had a direct relationship with the sending member, - a step (704) of replacing the recipient member of the message with the intermediate member and - a step of adding, in the message, an invitation for the intermediate member to attempt in turn to send the message to the same recipient by applying the same process.,

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the emails (101) are analyzed based on their header (102) only, ignoring their body.

3. Method according to any one of claims 1 and 2, in which the so-called indirect path is chosen from a set of possible paths as being a path passing through the members having the best affinities between them.

4. A method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the analysis of the history of communication elements passed between members of the network is a method of analyzing a history of communication elements passed between members of a network of members, from accounts of certain members having authorized access to their account, comprising the following steps: - for each member having authorized access to his account, reading of the logs of past communication elements exchanged between the first member and other members, - for each pair of members present in the same communication element, memorization of the existence of a relationship between these two members.

5. Method according to claim 4, in which the analysis result is materialized by a graph-oriented database comprising typed relationships each connecting two members.

6. The method of claim 5, wherein the graph-oriented database is constructed by applying a weighting that credits each typed relationship with a weight based on the communication elements passed between the two members connected by that relationship.

7. Method according to claim 6, in which the weighting attributes a weight that is all the higher the more numerous the elements of communication passed between the two members connected by the relationship.

8. A method according to any one of claims 6 and 7, wherein the weighting assigns a zero weight to communication elements which are subsequent to a prior communication element between the same members and separated from that prior communication element by a duration less than a predetermined time interval.

9. Method according to any one of claims 6 to 8, in which the analysis result is obtained after applying a deduplication step which aims to: - identify the identifiers of different members but referring to members having properties in common which are sufficiently reliable so that these members can be considered as representatives of the same real person, - consider these identifiers as identical when obtaining the analysis result.

10. Renewed execution of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 9, leading to the replacement of the recipient member by the intermediate members in the message, which progresses from member to member in the network, until it gradually reaches the initial recipient member.

Images