Information processing system and information processing method

Abstract

To arrange areas to be used by respective groups so as to be gathered for each group in a free address type office.SOLUTION: In an information processing system, a table in an area whose use is permitted to a group is allocated to each of a plurality of groups using an object area in the object area used as a free address type office. The acquisition unit acquires a table selection criterion in which a selection order of tables is predetermined. The assignment processing unit determines a specific table from a plurality of tables located in the target area according to the table selection criterion, compares the number of seats of the group to be assigned next with the number of seats of the specific table before assigning the group to be assigned next to the specific table, determines whether or not to assign the group to be assigned next to all the seats of the specific table based on the comparison result, assigns the group to be assigned next to all the seats of the specific table, and leaves a table having an unassigned seat after the assignment as a candidate for next assignment.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 3

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to an information processing system and an information processing method. [Background technology]

[0002] In recent years, a work style called ABW (Activity Based Working), which allows workers (employees) to choose where they can work most efficiently, has been attracting attention. A method is known for dividing office worker behavior into multiple "scenes (work scenes)," such as "Think," "Station," "Community," "Review," "Reception," "Academy," and "Break" (see, for example, Patent Document 1). The layout of each scene within a building and the locations where groups using the building will work can be optimized during the floor plan design stage to increase the convenience of the building. According to Patent Document 1, general office work is classified as a "station," and interactions between workers, such as meetings, are classified as a "community." Buildings designed to enable efficient work by dividing employees into scenes in this way are already available. Furthermore, if the areas for office work ("stations") are configured as a free address system, workers can choose the table and seat they want to use from those provided within that area. In such free address offices, there are cases where it is desirable to stimulate communication within groups and to be able to work in a suitable environment. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0003] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2016-115006 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0004] In some cases, a group address is applied to group areas used by each group within a target area used as a free address office. In this case, the table may run out of space because addresses are assigned on a group basis. An object of the present invention is to provide an information processing system and an information processing method that can arrange areas used by each group in a free address office so that each group's area is grouped together. [Means for solving the problem]

[0005] (D1) The present invention has been made to solve the above-mentioned problems, and an information processing system that is a first aspect of the present invention is an information processing system that allocates tables within an area that is permitted for use by a plurality of groups that use a target area used as a free address office to each group, and is equipped with an acquisition unit that acquires table selection criteria in which the order in which the tables are selected is predetermined, and an allocation processing unit that determines a specific table from among a plurality of tables located within the target area in accordance with the table selection criteria acquired by the acquisition unit, and prior to allocating the next group to the specific table, compares the number of seats at the specific table with the next group to be allocated, and determines whether or not to allocate all seats at the specific table to the next group to be allocated based on the comparison result, and allocates them respectively, and leaves tables that have unallocated seats after the allocation as candidates for the next allocation. (D2) Furthermore, in the information processing system, when the number of remaining seats at the specific table is less than or equal to the number of people in the group to be next allocated, the allocation processing unit allocates the number of people from the group to be next allocated up to the number of remaining seats at the specific table to the specific table, and allocates the remaining number of people after the allocation to other tables.When the number of remaining seats at the specific table exceeds the number of people in the group to be next allocated, the allocation processing unit allocates all or part of the group to be next allocated to the specific table. (D3) The information processing system further includes a calculation unit that calculates a proximity between a group assigned to a specific table among a plurality of tables provided in the target area and another group to which assignment has not been completed, and the assignment processing unit determines the group to be next assigned to the specific table or another table adjacent to the specific table based on the proximity calculated by the calculation unit. (D4) Furthermore, in the information processing system, when switching the area permitted for use by the group between a first time slot and a second time slot within a specific workday, if the number of users in the second time slot on the specific workday is less than the number of users in the first time slot, and the area permitted for use by the group in the second time slot is limited to a portion of the area that is smaller than the area permitted for use by the group in the first time slot, the allocation processing unit allocates the area permitted for use by the group in the second time slot so that the entire group, including the users in the second time slot, can fit into it. (D5) A second aspect of the information processing method of the present invention is a computer-based information processing method for allocating tables within an area that is permitted for use by a plurality of groups that use a target area used as a free address office to each of the groups, the information processing method including: acquiring table selection criteria in which the order in which tables are selected is predetermined; determining a specific table from among a plurality of tables located within the target area in accordance with the acquired table selection criteria; comparing the number of seats at the specific table with the number of seats at the group to be next allocated prior to allocating the specific table to the group to be next allocated; determining whether or not to allocate seats to be used by the group to be next allocated based on the comparison result, and allocating the seats to each of the specific table; and leaving tables with unallocated seats after the allocation as candidates for the next allocation. (1) The utilization area determination support system related to the present invention is a utilization area determination support system that allocates tables within an area that is permitted for use by a plurality of groups that use the target area within a target area used as a free address office, to each group, and includes an acquisition unit that acquires table selection criteria in which the order in which the tables are selected is predetermined, and a recommendation processing unit that determines a specific table from among a plurality of tables located within the target area in accordance with the table selection criteria in which the order in which the tables are selected is predetermined, and then estimates an evaluation value related to seat occupancy when a group including a table whose allocation has not yet been completed is assigned as the group that will use the specific table, and assigns a specific group from among the plurality of groups whose allocation has not yet been completed to the specific table based on the estimated evaluation value, and the recommendation processing unit is a utilization area determination support system that allocates different groups to the specific table when predetermined conditions are met. (2) Furthermore, in the utilization area determination support system, the predetermined condition includes that the expected utilization rate within the target area exceeds a predetermined value. (3) Furthermore, in the utilization area determination support system, the predetermined conditions include that the planned utilization rate within the target area exceeds a predetermined value and that there are insufficient tables to allocate when a single group is allocated to the specific table. (4) Furthermore, in the utilization area decision support system, the recommendation processing unit allocates the number of people in each group allocated to the specific table to two or more. (5) Furthermore, in the utilization area decision support system, the evaluation value relating to the seat sufficiency is the number of seats in short supply for the allocated group. (6) Furthermore, in the utilization area determination support system, the recommendation processing unit determines the evaluation value related to the seat occupancy as the number of seats that are insufficient in the allocated group based on the difference between the number of seats expected to be occupied in the allocated group and the number of seats already allocated. (7) Another aspect of the present invention is a utilization area determination support method for a utilization area determination support system that allocates tables within an area that is permitted for use by a group to each of a plurality of groups that use the target area, the target area being used as a free address office, the utilization area determination support method comprising the steps of: acquiring table selection criteria that predetermine the order in which the tables are selected; determining a specific table from among a plurality of tables located within the target area in accordance with the table selection criteria that predetermine the order in which the tables are selected; then, estimating an evaluation value related to seat occupancy when a group that includes an unassigned table is assigned as the group that will use the specific table; and allocating a specific group from among the plurality of unassigned groups to the specific table based on the estimated evaluation value; and assigning different groups to the specific table when a predetermined condition is met. (8) Another aspect of the present invention is a program for causing a computer of a usage area determination support system, which allocates tables within an area that is permitted for use by a group to each of a plurality of groups that use the target area used as a free address office, to acquire table selection criteria that determine the order in which the tables are selected in advance; determining a specific table from among a plurality of tables located within the target area in accordance with the table selection criteria that determine the order in which the tables are selected in advance, and then calculating an evaluation value related to seat occupancy when a group that includes a table whose allocation has not yet been completed is assigned as the group that will use the specific table, and allocating a specific group from among the plurality of groups whose allocation has not yet been completed to the specific table based on the estimated evaluation value; and allocating different groups to the specific table when predetermined conditions are met. [Effects of the Invention]

[0006] According to the present invention, in a free address office, the areas used by each group can be arranged together. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0007] [Figure 1] FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating an example of a building to which an embodiment is applied. [Figure 2A] 1 is a schematic configuration diagram of a utilization area determination support system 1 according to a first embodiment. [Figure 2B] FIG. 2B is a diagram for explaining an application example of the utilization area determination support system 1 of FIG. 2A. [Figure 2C] FIG. 2B is a diagram for explaining an application example of the utilization area determination support system 1 of FIG. 2A. [Figure 3] 1 is a configuration diagram of an analysis processing device 100 according to a first embodiment. [Figure 4A] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of information related to a table according to an embodiment. [Figure 4B]FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of information related to a group according to the embodiment. [Figure 4C] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of information related to an upper limit value according to an embodiment. [Figure 4D] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of each variable used in processing each group according to the embodiment. [Figure 4E] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of data of a processing result according to the embodiment. [Figure 5A] 10 is a flowchart of a recommendation process according to an embodiment. [Figure 5B] 10 is a flowchart of a recommendation process related to seat sharing arrangements according to an embodiment. [Figure 6] 10 is a flowchart of a preparation process according to an embodiment. [Figure 7] FIG. 10 is a diagram for explaining placement in a table with the highest table priority. [Figure 8] FIG. 10 is a diagram for explaining placement in a table with the highest table priority. [Figure 9A] 10 is a flowchart of a process related to arranging a plurality of tables of the same group (Gr) according to an embodiment. [Figure 9B] 10A and 10B are diagrams for explaining processing related to arranging a plurality of tables of the same group (Gr) in the embodiment. [Figure 9C] 10A and 10B are diagrams for explaining processing related to arranging a plurality of tables of the same group (Gr) in the embodiment. [Figure 10] 10 is a flowchart of a process relating to adjacent arrangement of the same group according to an embodiment. [Figure 11] FIG. 10 is a diagram for explaining the process when the tables of a group are not adjacent to each other if seats other than the center table are assigned. [Figure 12] FIG. 10 is a diagram for explaining each piece of information shown in a symbol in a table. [Figure 13] 10 is a flowchart of a process for acquiring a group with high proximity according to the second embodiment. [Figure 14A]FIG. 11 is a diagram for explaining the process of acquiring a group with high proximity related to FIG. 10. [Figure 14B] FIG. 11 is a diagram for explaining the process of acquiring a group with high proximity related to FIG. 10. [Figure 15] FIG. 11 is a diagram for explaining the process of acquiring a group with high proximity related to FIG. 10. [Figure 16] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating table priority order according to an embodiment. [Figure 17] 10 is a flowchart of a process for arranging a group (Gr) with high proximity according to an embodiment. [Figure 18A] 10 is a flowchart of a process for arranging shared tables among tables in the same group (Gr) in an embodiment. [Figure 18B] 10A and 10B are diagrams for explaining the process of arranging shared tables among tables in the same group (Gr) in an embodiment. [Figure 18C] 10A and 10B are diagrams for explaining the process of arranging shared tables among tables in the same group (Gr) in an embodiment. [Figure 19A] 10 is a flowchart of a process for acquiring a table ID (T) for a group having two or more unassigned people according to an embodiment. [Figure 19B] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating a process for acquiring a table ID (T) for a group in which two or more people remain to be assigned. [Figure 20A] 10 is a flowchart of a process for determining whether processing for all groups has been completed according to an embodiment. [Figure 20B] 10 is a flowchart of a process for determining whether processing for all groups has been completed according to an embodiment. [Figure 21A] 10 is a flowchart of a process for arranging adjacent seats of the same group using a shared table according to a modified example of the first embodiment. [Figure 21B] FIG. 21A is a diagram for explaining the process of recommending a shared table. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0008] DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Hereinafter, embodiments of a utilization area determination support system, a utilization area determination support method, and a program according to the present invention will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0009] (Common to all embodiments) The utilization area decision support system described below is applied to, for example, the seating area selection process for a free address office.

[0010] For example, within the building where the office is located, the seven scenes mentioned above are appropriately arranged to suit different work styles. Work styles include various requirements such as the type of work, place of work, employment status, and working hours, and are determined in advance for each group or worker. The layout of each scene is determined in advance at the design stage using floor plans and zoning, and changes are relatively infrequent. While the utilization rate of each of the above scenes may vary depending on the content of daily work, in this embodiment, a common floor plan is applied and the location of each scene remains unchanged.

[0011] The following embodiment relates to the use of areas allocated to "stations." The utilization area decision support system of the embodiment applies a "group address system" by establishing a "home area" in a free-address "station" where tables and seats used by workers are grouped together. Within this "home area," seats (homes) to be used for daily work are determined. The utilization area decision support system recommends the location of tables allocated to the "home area" in response to requests from workers. This is expected to stimulate communication both within and outside the group and enhance the worker's sense of belonging. Furthermore, free space is created by optimizing the layout of each group's work area (home area). The utilization area decision support system allocates this free space in a desired location, providing opportunities for its utilization. Details regarding this are provided below.

[0012] (Application example of embodiment) The following application example will be given to explain the embodiment. FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating an example of a building to which the embodiment is applied. "Stations" are assigned to the target area TZ shown in (a) of Figure 1. The number of workers using this target area TZ is determined based on the total number of seats at each table. Although it is possible to accommodate up to the total number of seats, for convenience, it is recommended to use up to about 80% of the total number of seats. For example, tables placed in a "station" should have four to six seats per table. Each table is located, for example, at the intersection of a two-dimensional grid. The size, shape, number of seats, etc. of each table may be uniform, or some may differ from each other. The number of tables and their locations may be changed as appropriate without being limited to those shown in (a) of Figure 1.

[0013] The diagram of the application example shown in (a) of Figure 1 includes the target area TZ described above, as well as adjacent areas NZ1 and NZ2. The adjacent area NZ1 is adjacent to the target area TZ. The adjacent area NZ1 is assigned one of the scenes described above, "Community." The "Community," for example, provides a place where workers can communicate with each other. The target area TZ and adjacent area NZ1 are adjacent to each other, and the adjacent area NZ2 has an "aisle" that runs along the direction in which the target area TZ and adjacent area NZ1 are arranged side by side. The position of the table within the target area TZ is shown using XY coordinates. The origin of the XY coordinates is set at the point where the "Community" and the "aisle" meet. The X-axis direction is along the extension direction of the "aisle," and the Y-axis direction is intersecting the extension direction of the "aisle."

[0014] The information assigned to each table is shown in the symbol of each table shown in (a) of Figure 1. An example of a symbol for a table with four seats is shown in (b) of Figure 1, and each piece of information is explained below. The information "table ID," "priority," "X coordinate," and "Y coordinate" is assigned to each of the four squares.

[0015] The rectangles marked "a1" to "a5," "b1" to "b5," "c1" to "c5," and "d1" to "d5" shown in (a) of FIG. 1 respectively indicate tables with, for example, four or six seats. For example, the symbol S4P indicates the symbol for table a1 with four seats, and its position is column 1 on the X axis and row a on the Y axis. The symbol S6P indicates the symbol for table b1 with six seats, and its position is column 1 on the X axis and row b on the Y axis.

[0016] Although not shown, the working hours of each group using the target area TZ are set to a common time period, and are not based on a shift system with different working hours. Furthermore, a flextime system or overtime may be applied. For example, the time periods proposed by the utilization area determination support system may be either regular working hours or overtime, or both. In both cases, the utilization area determination support system may change the proposals for regular working hours and overtime.

[0017] For example, if the work style of the members of each group tends to involve relatively many tasks such as moving outside of their "stations," the highest priority may be assigned to the table closest to the aisle.

[0018] The area where free tables FT (not shown) that are not assigned to any group are located is called free space FS (not shown). The area where free tables FT are located together is called central table BB. Free tables FT are tables that have become available due to seats being left vacant, but by adjusting the location of the vacant seats, each group can use them as a place for communication for their own purposes, or as a place for individual workers to concentrate.

[0019] (First embodiment) FIG. 2A is a schematic configuration diagram of the utilization area determination support system 1 according to the first embodiment. The utilization area determination support system 1 in this embodiment includes an analysis processing device 100, a terminal device 200, and a terminal device 200M. A worker is indicated by the symbol W. A manager is indicated by the symbol M. In the following description, the symbols W and M will be omitted.

[0020] The terminal device 200 is a device used by a worker when posting or viewing information. For example, each worker carries the same type of terminal device 200. The symbols GA, GB, GC, and GD shown in FIG. 3 indicate the group to which the worker belongs. Each worker operates the terminal device 200 they carry to send information (e.g., responses to a questionnaire) to the analysis processing device 100, obtain information from the analysis processing device 100, and display the information on its display unit, thereby obtaining the location of a table available to the worker in the office.

[0021] The terminal device 200M is a device operated by the administrator M of the utilization area determination support system 1 to change the settings of the analysis processing device 100.

[0022] 2B and 2C are diagrams for explaining an application example of the utilization area determination support system 1. FIG. Figure 2B shows a typical work day. For example, when a worker arrives at work at 9:00, or when the worker is scheduled to arrive at work at 9:00, the utilization area determination support system 1 displays information on the terminal device 200 (e.g., a smartphone) carried by the worker, informing the worker of the seat that the worker will use that day. The terminal device 200 may display this information in a pop-up format (FIG. 2C). The worker may operate a pop-up icon on the terminal device 200 to display (on signage) related information regarding the seating information.

[0023] Furthermore, for example, when it is time to leave work (e.g., 5:30 p.m.), the utilization area determination support system 1 displays information on the terminal device 200 (e.g., a smartphone) carried by the worker that guides the worker to the work area (seat) that the worker will use during overtime that day. The work area to be used during overtime is determined so that all groups fit within a portion of the overall area. Within this work area, the workers may be divided into groups so that they are grouped together, or may be arranged in a general free address format.

[0024] In this way, the utilization area decision support system 1 can recommend work areas in accordance with the utilization system of the office.

[0025] An example of the analysis processing device 100 will be described with reference to Fig. 3. Fig. 3 is a configuration diagram of the analysis processing device 100 according to the first embodiment. The analysis processing device 100 is an example of a computer system.

[0026] The analysis processing device 100 includes, for example, an information acquisition unit 10, a calculation unit 30, a recommendation processing unit 40, an output unit 50, and a storage unit 60 (not shown).

[0027] The storage unit 60 stores various data and programs for various processes executed by each unit (described later) of the utilization area determination support system 1. The utilization area determination support system 1 may be configured to use an external storage unit in addition to the storage unit 60, and a general method using communication may be applied to this.

[0028] The information acquisition unit 10 acquires various data related to the processing of the utilization area determination support system 1 from an operation unit not shown in Fig. 3A or via the communication line NW (Fig. 2A). The various data include, for example, basic information, information related to a questionnaire from the previous day (schedule information), and data on the amount of inter-organizational communication up to the previous day.

[0029] For example, the basic information includes various information such as the building floor plan, the work style of each target group, the personnel composition of each group's workers, the priorities and upper limits assigned to multiple tables, etc. For example, the floor plan information includes information about the location and distance between the target area TZ used as a free-address office and an area for specific uses located outside the target area TZ. The priorities assigned to multiple tables (referred to as table priorities) and upper limits will be described later. The information about the previous day's survey includes the workers of each group's plans to be in the room on that day, whether they have any meetings scheduled for that day, etc. The information about the previous day's survey is an example of schedule information related to work on the day of use that was declared before (the day before) the multiple tables were used. The schedule information is an example of schedule information related to meetings scheduled for the day of use. The amount of communication between groups includes behavioral history information (including location information) for the several days leading up to the previous day.

[0030] When the information acquisition unit 10 acquires the various data described above, it writes and adds the acquired information to the storage unit 60. Each of the functional units described below uses the various data acquired by the information acquisition unit 10 or the various data stored in the storage unit 60 to add the processing results to the storage unit 60.

[0031] Based on the schedule information, the calculation unit 30 calculates the number of tables required on the day of use (required number of tables) from among the multiple tables in the target area TZ to be used as tables that restrict the usage pattern on that day. The required number of tables includes the number of tables for each group and the number of free tables. More specifically, the required number of tables on the day of use includes the number of tables assigned for exclusive use by each group and the number of free tables FT assigned for shared use by each group. In this embodiment, processing based on the number of tables will be described, but processing based on the number of seats may also be used instead.

[0032] The calculation unit 30 calculates the number of people who answered that they plan to be present for each group based on the schedule information. The calculation unit 30 calculates the amount of communication between groups based on the behavior history information.

[0033] Based on the above schedule information, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines the priority of group placement to determine the tables to be used by each of multiple groups, including the first group and the second group, within the target region TZ. For example, a group with a higher priority of group placement is called the first group. In this case, the second group has a lower priority than the first group. The same applies below.

[0034] Furthermore, the recommendation processing unit 40 arranges the areas of the second group, which has a lower priority than the group arrangement priority of the first group, in an area other than the area where the areas of the first group are arranged so as to satisfy the required number of tables. In this way, the second group is determined. Note that the arrangement of the areas of this second group shall follow the rules for arranging the areas of the second group, which will be described later.

[0035] The recommendation processing unit 40 may select in advance the free tables FT that are permitted for use by the members of the first group and the members of the second group as appropriate, so as to satisfy the required number of tables.

[0036] The output unit 50 receives a request from an external terminal device, and outputs the result of the processing by the recommendation processing unit 40 to the terminal device in response to the request.

[0037] An example of various types of information relating to the example shown in the embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS. 4A to 4E.

[0038] Fig. 4A is a diagram illustrating an example of information related to tables in an embodiment. The "table master" shown in Fig. 4A stores information related to each table. The "table master" includes items such as table ID, number of seats, coordinates (X coordinate, Y coordinate), table priority, and center table. Each record in the "table master" is provided for each table.

[0039] The table ID is identification information for each table. The number of seats is the number of seats at each table. The X coordinate indicates the coordinate in the X direction of each table, and the Y coordinate indicates the coordinate in the Y direction. The table priority is the priority of the table selected when arranging a group. For example, "1" is defined as the highest priority, and the higher the number in the consecutive numbers, the lower the priority.

[0040] The central table indicates information for identifying the table as being within the central table BB and information specifying the priority of the table within the central table BB. For example, "0" indicates that the table is not set as the central table BB, and any number other than "0" indicates that the table is set as the central table. The priority of the tables within the central table BB should also be specified using consecutive numbers starting from 1, just like the table priority.

[0041] 4B is a diagram illustrating an example of information related to groups according to an embodiment. The "group master" shown in FIG. 4B stores information related to each group. The "group master" includes items such as group ID, number of members, prevention of leading, and group priority.

[0042] For example, group ID is the identification information for each group. Group name indicates the name of each group. Number of members indicates the number of members in each group. Leading prevention indicates information to prevent a group from being placed in the highest priority table when performing group placement processing. For example, a value of 1 is set for a group that should not be placed in the highest priority table. Group priority indicates the order in which groups are selected when performing group placement processing. It is recommended that group priorities for the "group master" be specified as consecutive numbers starting from 1, just like the table priorities mentioned above.

[0043] 4C is a diagram illustrating an example of information related to upper limit values ​​according to an embodiment. The "upper limit value" shown in (a) of FIG. 4C stores information related to the upper limit value of the distance between tables in which each group is arranged.

[0044] "Upper limit" includes items such as upper limit UL1 and upper limit UL2. For example, upper limit UL1 indicates the upper limit of the distance that defines the target range when extracting the adjacency relationship between different groups. For example, it defines the range when extracting which groups have already been assigned to surrounding (adjacent) tables for a table in which a group is to be placed. The upper limit value UL2 indicates the upper limit of the distance that defines the range of targets when placing the same group in adjacent tables. For example, for a table where two groups are to be placed, it defines the range when extracting which groups have already been assigned to surrounding (adjacent) tables.

[0045] Figure 4C (b) shows an example of calculating the distance between tables. The tables are arranged in a grid pattern along the X and Y axes. The grid spacing is 1.0. The reference position of each table is aligned with this grid. The reference position of each table is set, for example, to the center of the table top. For example, tables a1 and a2 are adjacent to each other along the X axis. The distance between them is 1.0. Tables a1 and b1 are adjacent to each other along the Y axis. The distance between them is 1.0. In contrast, tables a1 and b2 are arranged relatively close to each other but are not adjacent to each other. The distance between them is 1.4.

[0046] 4D is a diagram illustrating an example of each variable used in processing each group in the embodiment. The "group data" shown in FIG. 4D stores data of each variable used in processing. For example, the "group data" includes items such as group ID, number of people scheduled to be present, number of meetings scheduled, ratio of people scheduled to have meetings, and processing order.

[0047] The group ID is identification information for each group. The number of people scheduled to be present indicates the number of people scheduled to be enrolled on that day. For example, this may be a value obtained by aggregating the number of people scheduled to be enrolled on that day based on survey results. The number of people scheduled for meetings indicates the number of people scheduled to be enrolled who have meetings scheduled among the people scheduled to be enrolled. For example, this may be a value obtained by aggregating the number of people scheduled to be enrolled who answered that they have meetings scheduled based on survey results. The ratio of people scheduled for meetings indicates the proportion of people scheduled to be enrolled who answered that they have meetings scheduled. For example, this may be the ratio of the "number of people scheduled to be present" to the "number of people scheduled for meetings" described above. The processing order indicates the processing order of the next group to be processed. This processing order is recalculated and updated each time processing is performed, referring to the meeting ratio, group master, inter-group proximity, and output history. Note that known methods such as those described in JP 2016-115006 A may be used to calculate inter-group proximity.

[0048] 4E is a diagram illustrating an example of data resulting from processing in the embodiment. The "output data" shown in FIG. 4E stores data resulting from processing. The "output data" includes items such as a table ID, a group ID, and the number of seats in use. For example, for each table associated with a table ID, a group associated with a group ID is assigned, and the number of groups is stored as the number of seats in use.

[0049] 5A is a flowchart of a recommendation process according to an embodiment. FIG. 5B is a flowchart of a recommendation process for suggesting seat sharing according to an embodiment. First, a process assuming that seat sharing is not suggested will be described.

[0050] First, a preparation process is carried out (step S12). For example, the information acquisition unit 10 acquires basic information, schedule information, and behavior history information specified by the facility manager. For example, the schedule information may be based on responses to a questionnaire presented by the information acquisition unit 10 to the group members, or may be based on schedule information collected by a schedule management device (not shown). The calculation unit 30 calculates the number of tables required based on the schedule information. Based on this, the manager selects, for example, a central arrangement, which is one of the types of arrangement positions for free space.

[0051] In this embodiment, for example, the occupancy rate may be used as the schedule information to identify whether or not the following processing should be applied: Fig. 6 is a flowchart of the advance preparation processing according to this embodiment.

[0052] The calculation unit 30 calculates the total number of people expected to be present in each group and the overall presence rate, for example, based on the responses to a questionnaire. The presence rate is the ratio of the total number of people expected to be present in each group to the total number of people belonging to each group. The calculation unit 30 determines whether the overall presence rate is lower than a predetermined value (step S122), and if the overall presence rate is lower than the predetermined value, proceeds to step S126. The predetermined value related to the presence rate may be, for example, 40%. If the overall presence rate exceeds the predetermined value, the calculation unit 30 determines whether the total number of people expected to be present is greater than the number of seats at tables excluding the center table (step S124).

[0053] If the total number of people expected to be present is greater than the number of seats at tables excluding the center table, the arrangement condition is determined to be such that no center table is provided so that there is no shortage of seats (step S126), and the process ends. If the total number of people expected to be present is not greater than the number of seats at tables excluding the center table, the arrangement condition is determined to be such that a center table (free space area) is provided, and the process ends. The occupancy rate is an example of a planned utilization rate.

[0054] In the following description of this embodiment, the case where a central table (free space area) is provided will be mainly described.

[0055] 5, the recommendation processing unit 40 then extracts a target group (first processing group) to be processed first in accordance with a predetermined group priority order (step S14). This group priority order may be predetermined by an administrator, or may be determined based on historical information of group placement results.

[0056] Next, the recommendation processing unit 40 places the group (Gr) that is first in the processing order in the table that has the first table priority (step S18). Note that "group (Gr)" indicates the identification information of that group.

[0057] Here, allocation to the table with the highest table priority will be described with reference to Figures 7 and 8. Figures 7 and 8 are diagrams for explaining allocation to the table with the highest table priority. The table priority is determined based on the group master, output data, etc. For example, the table selection criteria stipulate a priority for preferentially selecting tables in areas other than the central table BB (free space area) from among the tables in the target area TZ.

[0058] For example, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines table a1 as the table with the highest table priority using the table priority shown in FIG. 7. The table priority shown in FIG. 7 shows the result of rearranging the table priority order on the assumption that a central table will be placed. The priority of a table allocated to the central table is set lower than the priority of a table not allocated to the central table. As a result, as shown in FIG. 8, the group (Gr) with the first processing order is placed in table a1 with the highest table priority. The double line around the outer frame of table (a1) shown in FIG. 7 indicates that it has been assigned. The same applies below.

[0059] When multiple tables of the same group (Gr) need to be arranged, the recommendation processing unit 40 arranges the tables of the same group (Gr) so that they are close to each other (step S20). For example, the recommendation processing unit 40 allocates tables extracted according to table priority as tables of the same group (Gr) so as to secure the number of seats planned to be occupied by the same group (Gr). Details of this process will be described later. Note that, if there are insufficient tables at this stage, it is advisable to secure available seats by methods such as shared seating arrangements.

[0060] Next, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether or not the arrangement of all groups has been completed (step S22). If the arrangement of all groups has been completed, the series of processes ends.

[0061] If there is an unavoidable group, the recommendation processing unit 40 acquires the table ID (T) of the table with the highest table priority among the available tables (step S30).

[0062] Next, the recommendation processing unit 40 acquires the group (Gr) of the group arranged in the adjacent table and the group having high proximity (step S32). The recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether the same group can be arranged adjacently, and if adjacent arrangement is not possible, changes the table ID (T) according to a predetermined rule (step S34). This is repeated the required number of times to determine the table ID (T) of the table that can be arranged adjacently.

[0063] The recommendation processing unit 40 arranges the group (Gr) with high proximity in a table (table ID (T)) that can be arranged adjacently (step S36).

[0064] By performing the above processing procedure, the recommendation processing unit 40 can arrange groups (Gr) with high proximity adjacent to each other without using shared seating arrangement.

[0065] Next, a recommendation process for suggesting seat sharing according to the embodiment will be described with reference to Fig. 5B, which is a flowchart of the recommendation process related to seat sharing according to the embodiment.

[0066] First, the recommendation processing unit 40 performs a preparatory process (step SA12). The recommendation processing unit 40 extracts a group (first processing group) to be processed first according to a predetermined group priority order (step SA14). The processes of steps SA12 and SA14 are the same as those of steps SA12 and SA14 described above, and can be omitted if they overlap.

[0067] Next, the recommendation processing unit 40 places the group (Gr) that is first in the processing order in the table that is first in the table priority order (step SA18).

[0068] Next, when it is necessary to arrange multiple tables of the same group (Gr), the recommendation processing unit 40 arranges the tables of the same group (Gr) so that they are close to each other (step SA20). For example, the recommendation processing unit 40 allocates tables extracted according to table priority as tables of the same group (Gr) so as to secure the number of seats planned for the same group (Gr). The details of this process will be described later. Note that if there are insufficient tables at this stage, seats are secured by methods such as sharing seats.

[0069] Next, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether or not the arrangement of all groups has been completed (step SA22). If the arrangement of all groups has been completed, the series of processes ends.

[0070] If there are any groups that have not yet been placed, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether the number of unplaced people in the groups for which placement has not been completed is one or less (step SA24). If the number of unplaced people in all of the groups for which placement has not been completed is one or less, the unplaced people in the groups for which placement has not been completed are placed together (step SA26), and the series of processes ends. Note that when placing the groups together, if the total number of unplaced people in the groups for which placement has not been completed is equal to or less than the number of seats at one table, the recommendation processing unit 40 may place them at one table, and if the total number of unplaced people in the groups for which placement has not been completed exceeds the number of seats at one table, the recommendation processing unit 40 may place them across multiple tables.

[0071] If there is a group with two or more unassigned members in the group for which the arrangement has not been completed, the recommendation processing unit 40 acquires the table ID (T) of the table with the highest table priority among tables with two or more vacant seats (step SA30).

[0072] Next, the recommendation processing unit 40 acquires the group (Gr) of the group that is highly proximate to the group arranged in the adjacent table (step SA32). The recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether the same group can be arranged adjacently, and if adjacent arrangement is not possible, changes the table ID (T) (step SA34). This is repeated the required number of times to determine the table ID (T) of the table that can be arranged adjacently.

[0073] The recommendation processing unit 40 arranges the group (Gr) with high proximity in a table (table ID (T)) that can be arranged adjacently (step SA36).

[0074] By performing the above processing procedure, the recommendation processing unit 40 can arrange groups (Gr) with high proximity adjacent to each other.

[0075] Below, several specific cases (scenarios) will be given as examples, and the processing related to each case will be explained.

[0076] Scenario 1A: When placing multiple tables in the same group (Gr)

[0077] The process of arranging multiple tables of the same group (Gr) (step S20 in FIG. 5) will be described with reference to FIGS. 9A to 9C. FIG. 9A is a flowchart of the process of arranging multiple tables of the same group (Gr) in an embodiment. FIGS. 9B and 9C are diagrams for explaining the process of arranging multiple tables of the same group (Gr) in an embodiment.

[0078] The information shown in Figure 9C is an example of the results of calculating the distance from a table assigned to a specific group to a new target table. The information shown in Figure 9C is an example of the results of calculating the distance from the assigned table to the new target table, compared to the "table master" shown in Figure 4A above.

[0079] The prerequisites in this example are that the same group has already been assigned (placed) to tables c1 and d1, and the third table in the same group is about to be placed.

[0080] 9C, "distance from c1" and "distance from c2" are the distances from table c1 and table c2 to the respective tables to be placed. The sum of the above distances is shown as distance (M).

[0081] As shown in Fig. 9A, first, the recommendation processing unit 40 compares the number of people expected to be present in a specific group with the number of allocated seats for the same group to calculate the number of seats that are insufficient for the allocated group. For example, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether the number of people expected to be present is equal to or less than the number of allocated seats (step S202). This conditional expression is shown in Equation (1).

[0082] Number of expected attendees ≦ Number of allocated seats (1)

[0083] Since seating is assigned on a table-by-table basis, the number of allocated seats may be greater than the number of people expected to be seated. This difference represents the number of available seats at that table.

[0084] If the number of people expected to be present is equal to or less than the number of allocated seats, the recommendation processing unit 40 ends the series of processes. If the number of people expected to be present exceeds the number of allocated seats, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether or not there are any unassigned tables (vacant tables) (step S204), and if there are no vacant tables, it may attempt, for example, seat sharing processing. Seat sharing processing will be described later.

[0085] If there are free tables, the recommendation processing unit 40 calculates the distance (M) from the allocated tables in the group (Gr) for each free table (step S206). In this case, if there are multiple allocated tables in the same group, it is advisable to sum the distances from each table.

[0086] Next, the recommendation processing unit 40 rearranges the order of placement using numerical values ​​related to the table master, such as the center table, distance (M), and table priority, and selects a table in which to place the group (Gr). The recommendation processing unit 40 assigns the group (Gr) to the selected table and places the group (Gr) there (step S208). After completing the processing of step S208, the recommendation processing unit 40 proceeds to the processing of step S202.

[0087] For example, the list in FIG. 9C shows the results of sorting based on the values ​​of each item, in the order of center table, distance (M), and table priority, when there are free tables in each table registered in the table master. The top record is the result of a trial calculation for table d2 with table ID "d2." The "distance from table c1 to table d2," the "distance from table c2 to table d2," and their total "distance (M)" are 1.41, 1.00, and 2.41, respectively. The "distance (M)" value is an example of an evaluation value, and more specifically, an example of an evaluation value related to distance. It is advisable to select the table with the smallest "distance (M)" value among the records. As a result, the recommendation processing unit 40 extracts table d2 as a suitable table.

[0088] By the above process, when multiple tables of the same group (Gr) are arranged, the tables in the same group can be arranged adjacent to each other.

[0089] Scenario 1B: If seating other than the center table results in the group not being seated next to each other

[0090] Next, with reference to Figures 10 to 12, a process to be applied when the tables of a group will not be adjacent if seats other than the center table are assigned will be described. Figure 10 is a flowchart of a process relating to adjacent placement of the same group in an embodiment. Figure 11 is a diagram for explaining a process when the tables of a group will not be adjacent if seats other than the center table are assigned. Figure 12 is a diagram for explaining each piece of information shown in the table symbol.

[0091] For example, during processing that assumes the use of the central table, a specific group may be placed in an empty table. This example is explained below.

[0092] Figure 11 shows the table allocation status. Figure 12 shows a second example of a symbol for a table with four seats, and explains the information shown in each cell within the table. The information for "table ID" and "group priority" is allocated to the two upper cells, and the information for "assigned group" is allocated to the lower cell.

[0093] As shown in Figure 11, all tables other than the central table except for table d5 have already been assigned. As mentioned above, there are no free tables other than table d5 among the tables other than the central table. Table d5 is a table at the corner of the target area. Therefore, the tables adjacent to table d5 in the -X and -Y directions (tables c5 and d4) are already assigned, even though they are tables within the adjacent range CC.

[0094] In this situation, if group F, which has 11 people expected to be present, is to be placed at table d5, which has only four seats, group F cannot be placed there. If the seats for group F that are not enough to be placed at table d5 are allocated to empty tables in the center table, the tables for group F will not be adjacent to each other.

[0095] Therefore, the present embodiment solves the problem of such a situation by the following process.

[0096] 10, first, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether the number of prospective members of the group is greater than the number of vacant seats at the table selected as the candidate for placement (the table to be placed at) (step S342). If the number of prospective members of the group is not greater than the number of vacant seats at the selected table, there is no need to allocate multiple tables to the group, and the series of processes ends.

[0097] On the other hand, if the number of prospective members of the group is greater than the number of vacant seats at the selected table, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether there are any vacant tables adjacent to the table selected as a candidate for placement within the adjacent range CC (step S344). For example, this determination may be made by defining the adjacent range CC using the value of the upper limit value UL2 (e.g., 1.2). By using the value of the upper limit value UL2 as a threshold, table c4, whose distance from table d5 to table c4 is 1.4 or more, is determined not to be an adjacent table to table d5.

[0098] If there is a free table adjacent to the table selected as a candidate for placement, the recommendation processing unit 40 decides to use that table, sets the table ID of that table as a variable (T), and ends the series of processes.

[0099] If there is no adjacent free table to the table selected as a candidate for placement, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether there are any other free tables (step S346), and if there are no other free tables, proceeds to seat sharing processing.

[0100] If there is another free table, the recommendation processing unit 40 changes the variable (T) indicating the table ID of the free table to the value of the table ID of the next free table (step S348), and proceeds to step S342.

[0101] By the above process, the recommendation processing unit 40 can assign the table to be used by the specific group to a table in the central table BB that is located within a range where the distance from the table assigned as the table to be used by the specific group in an area other than the central table BB (free space area) does not exceed the predetermined upper limit value UL2. This can resolve the situation where the tables of the group are not adjacent due to the positions where other groups are placed.

[0102] The above-mentioned seat sharing process refers to the process of assigning multiple groups to one table. By combining these seat sharing processes, it may be possible to resolve the situation where there are not enough tables when only assigning a single group to have exclusive use of one table.

[0103] According to the above embodiment, the utilization area determination support system 1 allocates tables within a target area TZ, which is used as a free-address office, to each of multiple groups using the target area TZ, each of which is permitted to use the group. The utilization area determination support system 1 includes an information acquisition unit 10 that acquires table selection criteria, which determine the table selection order in advance, and a recommendation processing unit 40 that determines a specific table from among multiple tables located within the target area TZ according to the table selection criteria in advance. The recommendation processing unit 40 then estimates the seating occupancy rate when a group including an unassigned table is assigned to the specific table. Based on the estimated evaluation value, the recommendation processing unit 40 assigns a specific table to a different group from among the multiple unassigned groups. When there are insufficient tables to allocate and certain conditions are met, the recommendation processing unit 40 allocates a specific table to each group. This allows the areas used by each group in a free-address office to be arranged in a group-by-group manner.

[0104] It is preferable that the recommendation processing unit 40 assigns the number of people in each group assigned to a specific table to be two or more.

[0105] (Second embodiment) A second embodiment will be described. In the first embodiment, a case where a central table is arranged has been described. In this embodiment, a case where a central table is not arranged will be described. The differences from the first embodiment will be mainly described.

[0106] Below, we will give some specific examples (scenarios) and explain each example. Scenario 2A: When placing groups with relatively high proximity to each other without including shared tables within the same group (Gr)

[0107] The process of acquiring a group with a relatively high degree of proximity in a case where a central table is not arranged will be described with reference to FIGS.

[0108] Fig. 13 is a flowchart of the process of acquiring a group with high proximity according to the second embodiment. Figs. 14A to 15 are diagrams for explaining the process of acquiring a group with high proximity according to Fig. 13. Fig. 14A shows the position information of each table, and Fig. 14B shows information on groups already assigned to each table. Note that the proximity referred to here may include information such as the proximity itself, the ratio of people scheduled to meet, and group priority. Fig. 16 is a diagram for explaining table priority according to the embodiment.

[0109] The table to be analyzed in this process is defined as an adjacent range DD based on the upper limit value UL1. For example, the adjacent range DD is defined as a region within a circle with the position of the reference table as its center and the upper limit value UL1 as its radius. The recommendation processing unit 40 extracts the group to be processed based on the degree of association between the group placed in the table within the adjacent range DD based on the upper limit value UL1 and the group not placed therein (step S322).

[0110] For example, the recommendation processing unit 40 calculates the degree of association between a group placed in a table within the adjacent range DD from the target table and an unplaced group. The recommendation processing unit 40 aggregates information indicating the degree of association of an unplaced group using the group ID of the unplaced group (referred to as a proximity group ID) as a key. The information indicating the degree of association of an unplaced group may include the average distance, proximity, the ratio of people scheduled to meet, group priority, etc.

[0111] The above average distance refers to the average value calculated for each proximity group for the distance from the table selected as a candidate for placement (the table to be placed) to tables in the adjacent groups that have already been placed. Proximity refers to the proximity of groups (called adjacent groups) that are highly related to the group that has already been placed. The ratio of people scheduled for meetings refers to the ratio of people scheduled for meetings to the number of people enrolled in the adjacent group.

[0112] Next, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines a group to be processed from among the unallocated groups based on the result of the above extraction (step S324), and ends the process.

[0113] For example, the recommendation processing unit 40 may sort information about the groups to be processed based on one or more pieces of information such as the average distance, proximity, ratio of people scheduled to meet, and group priority of each group, and determine the group with the highest ranking as the group to be processed.

[0114] As a result, when the occupancy rate (planned usage rate) within the target area TZ does not exceed a predetermined value, the recommendation processing unit 40 can assign a table to be used by the specific group to an unassigned table located within a range where the distance from the table assigned to be used by the specific group does not exceed a predetermined upper limit value UL1.

[0115] A more specific example will be shown with reference to FIGS. 15 and 16 to explain the calculation of the average distance, etc.

[0116] FIG. 15(a) shows an excerpt of data relating to unallocated tables. For example, at the stage where there are still unallocated tables as shown in (b) of Fig. 15, the recommendation processing unit 40 selects, as a candidate for placement, a table with a high priority based on a predetermined selection criterion from among the tables for which allocation has not been completed as shown in the list shown in (a) of Fig. 15. In the situation shown in Fig. 16, the recommendation processing unit 40 selects table c3, which has the lowest table priority number, based on the table priority order.

[0117] For example, as shown in (a) of Figure 15, tables b2-b4, tables c2 and c4, and tables d2-d4 are tables within the adjacent range DD. As shown in (a) of Figure 14B and Figure 15, groups already assigned to tables b2-b3, table c2, and tables d2-d3 have been set. The groups already assigned to tables within the adjacent range DD are groups A, C, D, and E. In addition to the above, group B is assigned to a table outside the adjacent range DD.

[0118] The recommendation processing unit 40 extracts, for example, two groups F and G as groups to be evaluated based on the group priority order in the group table, and generates each piece of information shown in FIG. 12(a). For example, as shown in Figure 15(a), the proximity of group G to groups A, C, and E is 0. Although not shown in Figure 15(a), the proximity of group F to groups A, C, and E is also 0. As mentioned above, the proximity of both groups F and G "to groups A, C, and E" is 0. On the other hand, as shown in Figure 15(a), the proximity of group F to group D is 7, which indicates that groups D and F are highly related. As a result, based on the "proximity," group F with a higher "proximity" value is selected (FIG. 15(b)).

[0119] According to the group data (Figure 4D), the number of people expected to be present in group F is four, and the number of people expected to be present in group G is 11. Group F can be allocated to one table, table c3, which has four seats. Group G cannot be allocated to just one table, table c3, which has four seats, and will have to be allocated across multiple tables.

[0120] A more specific example of the process (step S36) of arranging the group (Gr) with high proximity in Fig. 5 will be described with reference to Fig. 17. Fig. 17 is a flowchart of the process of arranging the group (Gr) with high proximity in the embodiment.

[0121] The recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether the number of people scheduled to be present is greater than the number of empty seats at the table selected as a candidate for placement (the table to be placed at) (step S362). If the number of people scheduled to be present is greater than the number of empty seats, the recommendation processing unit 40 places the number of empty seats at that table in that table (step S364), and adds the data of the number of empty seats to the column of the number of seats used in the output data. This completes the series of processes.

[0122] If the number of people expected to be present is equal to or less than the number of vacant seats, the recommendation processing unit 40 arranges the number of people expected to be present in the table (step S366), and adds the data of the value of the number of people expected to be present to the column of the number of seats used in the output data. This completes the series of processes.

[0123] By the above process, a group (Gr) with a high degree of proximity can be placed at a table that can be placed adjacently, depending on the number of people expected to be present in the group to be placed.

[0124] Scenario 2B: When sharing tables within the same group (Gr)

[0125] A case where shared tables are arranged among tables in the same group (Gr) will be described with reference to Figures 18A to 18C. Figure 18A is a flowchart of processing related to arranging shared tables among tables in the same group (Gr) in an embodiment. Figures 18B and 18C are diagrams for explaining processing related to arranging shared tables among tables in the same group (Gr) in an embodiment.

[0126] The information shown in Figure 18C is an example of the results of calculating the distance from a table assigned to a specific group to a new target table. The information shown in Figure 18C is an example of the results of calculating the distance from the assigned table to the new target table, compared to the "table master" shown in Figure 4A above.

[0127] The assumptions in this example are that groups have already been assigned (already allocated) to tables a1, b1, b2, c1, d1, and d2. Of the above tables, there are no vacant seats at any table except table b2. Two seats from group A have been assigned to table b2, but there are two vacant seats. Here, we will explain the example of allocating group C, which will have seven prospective students. First, table a2 is assigned to group C, reserving seats for four people. Next, we are at the stage of arranging the second table for group C. Some seats at table b2 have already been assigned, but there are two vacant seats, so it becomes a candidate for table selection.

[0128] 18C, "distance from a2" is the distance from table a2 to each table to be placed. The same value as above is shown in distance (M).

[0129] For example, as shown in Fig. 18A, the recommendation processing unit 40 calculates the number of seats in short supply for the allocated group, and determines whether or not this number of seats in short supply is less than 2 (step S202). This conditional expression is shown in Expression (2).

[0130] (Number of expected attendees - Number of allocated seats)<2 (2)

[0131] If the number of seats missing is one or less, the recommendation processing unit 40 ends the series of processes for allocating seats by table. If the number of seats missing is two or more, the following processes are continued to allocate seats by table.

[0132] In the above case, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether there are any tables with two or more vacant seats (step S204), and if there are no tables with two or more vacant seats, the series of processes ends because there are insufficient tables. The above tables with two or more vacant seats include both tables where some seats are assigned but still vacant, and tables where all seats are still vacant.

[0133] If there are tables with two or more vacant seats, the recommendation processing unit 40 calculates the distance (M) from the allocated tables in the group (Gr) for each table with two or more vacant seats (step S206). In this case, if there are multiple allocated tables in the same group, the distances from each table may be summed up.

[0134] Next, the recommendation processing unit 40 rearranges the order of placement using numerical values ​​such as distance (M) and table priority, and selects a table in which to place the group (Gr). The recommendation processing unit 40 assigns the group (Gr) to the selected table and places the group (Gr) there (step S208). After completing the processing of step S208, the recommendation processing unit 40 proceeds to the processing of step S202.

[0135] For example, the list in FIG. 18C shows the results of sorting based on the values ​​of each item, distance (M) and table priority, in a situation where there are free tables.

[0136] The topmost record is the result of a trial calculation for table b2 with table ID "b2", where the "distance from table a1 to table b2" and the associated "distance (M)" are 1.00 and 1.00, respectively. The second-highest record is the result of a trial calculation for table a3 with table ID "a3", where the "distance from table a1 to table a3" and the associated "distance (M)" are 1.00 and 1.00, respectively.

[0137] The "distance (M)" value is an example of an evaluation value. It is preferable to select the table with the smallest "distance (M)" value among the records. However, the "distance (M)" values ​​of the above two records are both the minimum value of 1.00. In such a case, the recommendation processing unit 40 may extract table b2 as a suitable table, for example, using the priority indicated by the table priority order.

[0138] When a central table is provided, it is advisable to prioritize rearrangement based on the information in the central table in the above-mentioned rearrangement stage (step SA208).

[0139] By the above process, it is possible to arrange shared tables within the same group (Gr).

[0140] Scenario 2C: Obtaining the table ID (T) for a group with two or more unassigned people

[0141] Next, referring to Figures 19A and 19B, we will explain a case where the above case occurs during processing under the condition that the central table will not be used, and the table ID (T) of the table with the highest table priority among tables with two or more vacant seats is obtained.

[0142] 19A is a flowchart of a process for acquiring a table ID (T) for a group having two or more unassigned people according to an embodiment. FIG. 19B is a diagram illustrating a process for acquiring a table ID (T) for a group having two or more unassigned people according to an embodiment.

[0143] Figure 19B (a) shows the table allocation status generated based on the table master and output data. The list shown in Figure 19B (a) includes items such as table ID, table priority, center table, and number of available seats. Note that in this embodiment, information about the center table is not used.

[0144] The prerequisites for this example are that four members of Group B are assigned to Table a1, and three members of Group B are assigned to Table b1 (already assigned). There are no other assigned tables besides the above tables. At this stage, we are in the stage of obtaining Table ID (T).

[0145] Table b1 is a candidate for table selection because some of its seats are already assigned, but there are two vacant seats. However, since there are no vacant seats in table a1, the records in table a1 are excluded from this list.

[0146] 19B(b), first, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether there is a table (table to be allocated) with two or more vacant seats (step S302). If there is no table with two or more vacant seats, the series of processes related to seat sharing arrangement is terminated.

[0147] If there is a table with two or more vacant seats, the recommendation processing unit 40 rearranges the order based on the table priority so as to select a table with a higher table priority from among the tables with two or more vacant seats (step SA304).

[0148] The recommendation processing unit 40 assigns the table ID that is at the top of the selection order to a variable (T) (step SA306), and ends the series of processes.

[0149] By following the above procedure, it is possible to obtain the table ID (T) for a group that has two or more unassigned people.

[0150] Below, several variations of the seat sharing process will be explained.

[0151] (First Modification of the First Embodiment) 20A and 20B, a case where it is determined whether processing for all groups has ended will be described as a first modified example of the first embodiment. The example of the first embodiment described above was not a process for determining whether or not a user can share a seat. In this modified example, a case where it is determined whether or not a user can share a seat when determining whether or not processing for all groups has ended will be described.

[0152] Scenario 1C: Allowing shared seating and determining completion of processing for all groups

[0153] Fig. 20A is a flowchart of the process for determining whether the process for all groups in this modified example has been completed. Fig. 20B is a diagram for explaining the process for recommending a shared table related to Fig. 20A. This process is based on the premise that the use of shared tables will be considered, as described above.

[0154] Figure 20B shows the table allocation status. As shown in Figure 20B, all tables except center table BB have already been allocated, and furthermore, it is assumed that a portion of center table BB has already been allocated. Of center table BB, tables b3-b4 and c3-c4 are all vacant. The tables that have already been allocated include tables with no vacant seats and tables with one vacant seat remaining. The groups assigned to each table are group A to group H. Among these, for example, it is assumed that tables used by one person each have not yet been assigned to groups A, B, and FH.

[0155] First, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether the number of unassigned people in each group is one or less in all groups (SA242). If the number of unassigned people in each group is not one or less in all groups, the recommendation processing unit 40 continues the process (step SA248).

[0156] If the number of unassigned people in each group is one or less in all groups, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether there are any tables with two or more vacant seats (SA250). If there are no tables with two or more vacant seats, there are not enough tables, so the recommendation processing unit 40 ends the series of processes.

[0157] If there is a table with two or more vacant seats, the recommendation processing unit 40 acquires the table ID (T) of the table with the highest table priority among the tables with two or more vacant seats (SA252).

[0158] The recommendation processing unit 40 allocates a group with vacant people to the table with the same number of people as the number of vacant seats in the acquired table ID (T) and allocates the group to this table (SA254). In this case, if multiple groups are targeted, there is no restriction on the order in which the groups are allocated, and the order may be determined appropriately according to a predetermined standard.

[0159] The recommendation processing unit 40 determines the relationship between the total number of people expected to be present based on the group data and the total number of uses of the output data (S356). For example, it determines whether the "total number of people expected to be present" is less than or equal to the "total number of uses." If this determination shows that the "total number of people expected to be present" is greater than the "total number of uses," the process proceeds to step SA250.

[0160] If the "total number of people expected to be present" is equal to or less than the "total number of uses", the recommendation processing unit 40 ends the series of processes (step SA258).

[0161] The above process allows you to use shared seating depending on the situation, perform the process for all groups, and determine whether it is complete. According to this process, tables with at least two seats remaining become candidates for shared seating.

[0162] For example, if there are at least two seats remaining for the same group, that table will be assigned to a shared table. In addition, if there is only one unassigned person left in each group, they can be assigned together. More specifically, table b4 is determined to be a shared table. One seat each for groups A, B, F, and G is assigned to it. Furthermore, table c4 is determined to be a non-shared table, and one seat for group H is assigned to it.

[0163] According to the above embodiment, a shared table can be shared by one member of each group assigned to that table.

[0164] (Second Modification of the First Embodiment) 21A and 21B, a case where a shared table is recommended will be described as a second modified example of the first embodiment. The cases in Fig. 14 and Fig. 15 described above were not processes for using shared tables. In this modified example, a case where the tables of a group are not adjacent to each other will be illustrated as an example, as a result of proceeding with arrangement assuming the use of a central table.

[0165] Scenario 1D: Recommending shared tables when non-center seating would result in groups being seated at non-adjacent tables

[0166] Fig. 21A is a flowchart of a process for arranging adjacent members of the same group using a shared table according to this modification, and Fig. 21B is a diagram for explaining a process for recommending a shared table according to Fig. 21A.

[0167] For example, a case will be described in which a specific group is allocated using a free table in the central table during processing under conditions that require the central table to be used.

[0168] (a) in Figure 21B shows the table allocation status. (b) in Figure 21B shows a second example of a symbol for a table with four seats, and the information shown in each cell in the table will be explained. The information for "table ID" and "group priority" is allocated to the two upper cells, and the information for "assigned group" is allocated to the lower cell.

[0169] As shown in (a) of Figure 21B, it is assumed that all tables other than the central table except for table d5 have already been assigned. As mentioned above, there are no free tables other than table d5 among the tables other than the central table. Table d5 is a table located at a corner of the target area. Therefore, the tables adjacent to table d5 in the -X and -Y directions (tables c5 and d4) have already been assigned.

[0170] In this situation, if group F, which has 11 people expected to be present, is to be placed at table d5, which has only four seats, group F cannot be placed there. If the seats for group F, which are insufficient at table d5, are allocated to empty tables in the center table, the tables for group F will not be adjacent to each other.

[0171] Therefore, in this modified example, the problem of such a situation is solved by the following process. The recommendation processing unit 40 corresponds to the processing of step S34 of the processing procedure that is premised on the placement of a central table, using the procedure shown in FIG. 5B above.

[0172] 21A, first, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether the number of prospective members of the group is greater than the number of vacant seats at the table selected as the candidate for placement (the table to be placed at) (step SA342). If the number of prospective members of the group is not greater than the number of vacant seats at the selected table, there is no need to allocate multiple tables to the group, and the series of processes ends.

[0173] If the number of people expected to be in the group is greater than the number of vacant seats at the selected table, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether there is any table selected as a candidate for placement that has two or more vacant seats (step SA344).

[0174] If there is a table with two or more vacant seats among the tables selected as candidates for placement, the recommendation processing unit 40 ends the series of processes.

[0175] If there are no vacant tables with two or more vacant seats among the tables selected as candidates for placement, the recommendation processing unit 40 determines whether there are any other tables with two or more vacant seats (step SA346), and if there are no other tables with two or more vacant seats, the series of processes ends due to a lack of tables.

[0176] If there are other tables with two or more vacant seats, the recommendation processing unit 40 changes the variable (T) indicating the table ID of the table with two or more vacant seats to the value of the table ID of the next vacant table (step SA348), and proceeds to step SA342.

[0177] By the above process, if a group's table is not adjacent due to the location of another group, it is possible to use a table with two or more vacant seats to resolve this.

[0178] According to any of the above embodiments, the utilization area determination support system 1 is a utilization area determination support system that allocates tables within a target area used as a free-address office to each of multiple groups using the target area. The utilization area determination support system includes an information acquisition unit 10 that acquires table selection criteria that determine a predetermined table selection order, and a recommendation processing unit 40 that determines a specific table from among multiple tables located within the target area according to the table selection criteria, and then estimates an evaluation value for seat occupancy when a group including an unassigned table is assigned to the specific table. Based on the estimated evaluation value, the recommendation processing unit 40 assigns a specific group from among the multiple unassigned groups to the specific table. The recommendation processing unit 40 assigns different groups to the specific table if certain conditions are met. This allows the utilization area determination support system 1 to arrange the areas used by each group in a free-address office so that they are group-by-group.

[0179] The above describes an embodiment of the present invention. The utilization area determination support system 1 includes an internal computer system. The series of steps related to the above-described processes are stored in the form of a program on a computer-readable storage medium, and the computer reads and executes this program to perform the above-described processes. Here, the computer-readable storage medium refers to a magnetic disk, a magneto-optical disk, a CD-ROM, a DVD-ROM, a semiconductor memory, etc. Alternatively, the computer program may be distributed to a computer via a communication line, and the computer that receives the program may execute the program. The term "computer system" herein also includes an OS, etc.

[0180] Although one embodiment of the present invention has been described above, the present invention is not limited to the above embodiment. For example, the present invention can be embodied in the following manner.

[0181] For example, in the above embodiment, for convenience, the configuration related to the present invention has been described as each function of the utilization area determination support system 1 being integrated into one device, but each function may also be appropriately distributed across multiple devices. [Explanation of symbols]

[0182] 1 utilization area decision support system, 10 information acquisition unit, 30 calculation unit, 40 recommendation processing unit, 50 output unit, 60 storage unit, 100 analysis processing device, 200, 200M terminal device

Claims

1. 1. An information processing system that allocates, to each of a plurality of groups that use a target area used as a free address office, a table in an area that is permitted for use by the group, an acquisition unit that acquires table selection criteria in which the order of table selection is predetermined; determining a specific table from among a plurality of tables located within the target area in accordance with the table selection criteria acquired by the acquisition unit; comparing the number of seats at the particular table with the number of seats at the next group to be assigned to the particular table prior to assigning the next group to the particular table; an allocation processing unit that determines whether or not to allocate the next group to all seats at the specific table based on the comparison result, and allocates each seat to each of the seats, and leaves tables that have unallocated seats after the allocation as candidates for the next allocation; An information processing system comprising:

2. The allocation processing unit If the number of remaining seats at the specific table is equal to or less than the number of people in the group to be subsequently allocated, allocate the number of people from the group to be subsequently allocated up to the number of remaining seats at the specific table to the specific table, and allocate the remaining number of people after the allocation to another table, The allocation processing unit If the number of remaining seats at the specific table exceeds the number of people in the group to be allocated next, all or part of the group to be allocated next is allocated to the specific table. The information processing system according to claim 1 .

3. a calculation unit that calculates the degree of proximity between a group assigned to a specific table among a plurality of tables provided within the target area and another group to which assignment has not yet been completed; Furthermore, The allocation processing unit determining the group to be next assigned to the specific table or another table adjacent to the specific table based on the proximity calculated by the calculation unit; The information processing system according to claim 1 .

4. The allocation processing unit When switching the areas that the group is permitted to use between the first time slot and the second time slot within a specific working day, When the number of users in the second time slot on a specific working day is smaller than the number of users in the first time slot, and therefore the area permitted for use by the group in the second time slot is limited to a portion of the area that is smaller than the area permitted for use by the group in the first time slot, Allocating the area permitted for use by the group during the second time period so that all groups including users during the second time period can fit within the area. The information processing system according to claim 1 .

5. 1. An information processing method by a computer in which, within a target area used as a free address office, a table within an area that is permitted for use by a group is allocated to each of a plurality of groups that use the target area, the method comprising: Obtain table selection criteria in which the table selection order is predetermined, determining a specific table from among a plurality of tables located within the target area according to the acquired table selection criteria; comparing the number of seats at the particular table with the number of seats at the next group to be assigned to the particular table prior to assigning the next group to the particular table; Based on the comparison result, it is determined whether or not to assign the next group to all the seats at the specific table, and the tables with unassigned seats after the assignment are left as candidates for the next assignment. An information processing method including:

Images