Evaluation system

Abstract

This system provides an evaluation system that allows users to be evaluated on a network and encourages their active participation. [Solution] In the evaluation system A, a server 1 manages user information and point information, issues a predetermined amount of points to multiple users U, the user information includes the point transfer history of a specific user U, and the point information includes the point transfer history and the current location of the points, and when user U transfers points that have been granted to another user U using terminal 2, based on the point transfer, server 1 updates the user information of the transferring user U (user U who transferred the points) and the receiving user U (user U who received the points), and updates the point information, and evaluates user U based on the updated user information and point information.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to an evaluation system for evaluating users using points issued on a server, and more particularly to an evaluation system that encourages active participation of users in the network and the community using the same.

Background Art

[0002] In modern times when electronic terminals carried by individuals such as smartphones are widely popularized, settlement means for exchanging information on the network using electronic money, points issued by each company, etc. are widely popularized. Since the settlement means on the network has a high degree of anonymity, it is preferable that in the network, it is possible to evaluate whether a certain user is trustworthy.

[0003] For example, the invention described in Patent Document 1 is characterized in that in an information communication system for managing virtual currency transactions, a score value is calculated based on transactions of a specific account, etc., and an evaluation calculation is executed based on the score value.

[0004] Similarly, communication on the network is common, and mechanisms for promoting it have been developed. For example, the invention described in Patent Document 2 is a program for a game in which a plurality of players participate in a battle, and a first stage control unit that controls the progress of a first stage in which the battle results of each player are evaluated based on an evaluation value updated by repeating the battle, and a second stage control unit that controls the progress of a second stage in which players with top battle results in the first stage are allowed to participate and the players whose participation is allowed conduct a battle. As the second stage control unit, a computer is made to function, and the second stage control unit makes it possible to watch the battle in the second stage regardless of whether or not to participate in the second stage, and a program that enables a reward to be obtained based on watching the battle. This is a mechanism for promoting the participation of users participating on a network that provides the same game by using a reward as a motivation.

[0005] Furthermore, systems have been developed that aim to evaluate users themselves, and that incorporate the participation of other users in evaluations as a predetermined process. The invention described in Patent Document 3 is a personnel evaluation system characterized by comprising: a work report storage unit that stores work reports created by the person being evaluated; an evaluation mark presentation unit that presents an evaluator with a selection of evaluation marks related to the evaluation of the work report after the evaluator has viewed the work report; an evaluation reason presentation unit that, when the evaluator selects one or more evaluation marks from the selection of evaluation marks, presents the evaluator with a list of evaluation reasons that describe the reasons for selecting the evaluation marks; a point aggregation unit that has points pre-assigned to each evaluation mark, and when the evaluator selects an evaluation mark, aggregates the points assigned to the selected evaluation mark as the points of the person being evaluated; and an evaluation presentation unit that presents the evaluation reasons and points to the person being evaluated. [Prior art documents] [Patent Documents]

[0006] [Patent Document 1] Patent No. 7636046 [Patent Document 2] Japanese Patent Publication No. 2024-157262 [Patent Document 3] Japanese Patent Publication No. 2022-147539 [Overview of the Initiative] [Problems that the invention aims to solve]

[0007] As seen in Patent Documents 1-3, online communication is expanding in ways similar to face-to-face communication, including currency exchange, community formation, and mutual evaluation among network participants.

[0008] Therefore, just as with face-to-face communities, there is a need for systems in online communities that encourage and reward users' active participation.

[0009] The information and communication system described in Patent Document 1 is intended for the exchange and settlement of virtual currency, and the user evaluation in this system is limited to aspects such as financial creditworthiness. Furthermore, it does not incorporate any mechanism to encourage user participation.

[0010] The program described in Patent Document 2 motivates users to participate in a specific game by offering rewards within that game. However, it is not attractive to users who do not participate in that game, and therefore is not an effective motivator for joining the network. Similarly, the personnel evaluation system described in Patent Document 3 is a system for personnel evaluation within a company and is not suitable for evaluating users who do not belong to the same organization.

[0011] This invention was developed in response to the aforementioned problems. Specifically, the purpose of this invention is to provide an evaluation system that can evaluate users on a network and further encourage their active participation. [Means for solving the problem]

[0012] As a result of diligent research, the inventors have found that the above problem can be solved by using points on a network and evaluating users based on the transfer of points between users. This invention is based on this finding.

[0013] The present invention relates to an evaluation system A comprising a server 1 that manages user information UI and point information PI, and terminals 2 used by multiple users U, each connected to the server 1 via a network N, wherein the server 1 issues a predetermined amount of points P to each of the multiple users U, the user information UI includes the transfer history of points P for a specific user U, the point information PI includes the transfer history of points P and the current location of points P, and users U use terminals 2 、 The points P that have been awarded , to other users U If a point is transferred, based on the transfer of the point P, Server 1 updates the user information UI of the transferring user U1 (User U who transferred the point P) and the receiving user U2 (User U who received the point P), and updates the point information PI, and evaluates User U based on the updated user information UI and point information PI. Server 1 then classifies the points P transferred to user U2 based on evaluation items pre-set by user U2, quantifies the difference between the bias of the classified points P and the standard state, and calculates a score. It resides in evaluation system A.

[0014] The present invention relates to an evaluation system A described above, in which user information UI further includes the amount and / or number of points P transferred by user U.

[0015] The present invention relates to the evaluation system A described above, in which the update of user information UI is performed based on the transfer of points P made by user U during any given period.

[0016] The present invention lies in the evaluation system A described above, in which the evaluation of user U to whom points P were first issued is based on the total number of users U to whom points P were transferred.

[0017] The present invention resides in the evaluation system A described above, in which user U is granted the authority to issue points P by server 1.

[0019] The present invention pertains to the evaluation system described above, where user information further includes the transfer amount and / or the number of transfers of points made by the user, the user information includes evaluation information given by the transferor user and / or the transferee user accompanying the transfer of points, and the update of the user information is carried out based on the transfer of points made by the user within an arbitrary period.

[0020] Also, the present invention may be a suitable combination of the above configurations.

Advantages of the Invention

[0021] When user U transfers points P given to another user U using terminal 2 in evaluation system A of the present invention, based on the transfer of points P, server 1 updates the user information UI of transferor user U1, who is user U that transferred points P, and transferee user U2, who is user U that received the transfer of points P, and updates the point information PI, and evaluates user U based on the updated user information UI and point information PI, thereby evaluating user U on network N and further promoting the active participation of user U.

[0022] In evaluation system A of the present invention, since user information UI further includes the transfer amount and / or the number of transfers of points P made by user U, it becomes possible to evaluate the active participation of user U in network N regardless of the amount of points P owned by a specific user U.

[0023] In evaluation system A of the present invention, since the update of user information UI is carried out based on the transfer of points P made by user U within an arbitrary period, it becomes possible to evaluate the active participation of user U in network N regardless of the amount of points P owned by a specific user U.

[0024] In the evaluation system A of the present invention, the evaluation of the user U to whom the point P was first issued is based on the total number of users U to whom the point P was transferred, so that the point P was transferred within the community based on the behavior of the user U, that is, the event that communication was generated within the community was supplemented and evaluated on the evaluation system A.

[0025] In the present invention, since the user U is given the right to issue the point P by the server 1, the total number of points P on the network N is not constant. For example, even if a specific user U wants to transfer the point P, there is no point P to transfer because the user does not own it, and such a situation is prevented. As a result, it becomes possible to more appropriately evaluate each user U.

[0026] The present invention can be used as a system for evaluating the degree of achievement of a target set in advance by a transferor / transferee user, by classifying the points transferred to the transferor / transferee user based on the evaluation items set in advance by the server, and calculating a score based on the deviation of the classified points. Therefore, it becomes possible for the transferor / transferee user to use the calculated score as an index for self-improvement or self-realization.

[0027] The evaluation system of the present invention further includes the transfer amount and / or the number of transfers of the points transferred by the user in the user information, the user information includes the evaluation information given by the transferor user and / or the transferee user accompanying the transfer of the points, and the update of the user information is based on the transfer of the points made by the user in an arbitrary period. Therefore, it is also possible to obtain a more precise evaluation from others, review self-evaluation, or grasp the gap between self-evaluation and evaluation by others using the evaluation system.

Brief Description of the Drawings

[0028] [Figure 1] FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram showing an evaluation system. [Figure 2]Figure 2 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of user information. [Figure 3] Figure 3 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of point information. [Figure 4] Figure 4 is an explanatory diagram illustrating the transfer of points between users. [Figure 5] Figure 5 is an explanatory diagram showing the state in which points are transferred from one place to another. [Figure 6] Figure 6 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a score. [Modes for carrying out the invention]

[0029] Hereinafter, preferred embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings as necessary. In the drawings, identical elements will be denoted by the same reference numeral, and redundant explanations will be omitted. Furthermore, unless otherwise specified, positional relationships such as up, down, left, and right shall be based on the positional relationships shown in the drawings. In addition, the dimensional ratios in the drawings are not limited to those shown.

[0030] Figure 1 is an explanatory diagram showing evaluation system A. The evaluation system A of the present invention is for issuing points P to users U participating in a network N and evaluating each user U through the transfer of said points P. Evaluation system A comprises a server 1 that manages user information UI and point information PI, and terminals 2 used by multiple users U, which are connected to server 1 via a network N.

[0031] Terminal 2 can preferably be a personal computer, smartphone, tablet, or the like. Furthermore, network N may be either the internet or a local network.

[0032] Figure 2 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a user information UI. User U accesses Server 1 via Network N using Terminal 2, registers and records user information UI. Server 1 issues a predetermined number of points P to user U whose user information UI has been registered. The user information UI is an account for each individual user (U), and includes the points P issued and the transfer history of those points P. The user information UI may also include other information such as email addresses and user names, as well as personal information such as address, name, and affiliation.

[0033] Figure 3 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of point information PI. When Server 1 issues points P to user U, point information PI is recorded in Server 1. Furthermore, a user U who has been issued points P can freely transfer those points P to other users U via the network N using terminal 2. When points P are transferred, the user information UI and point information PI of the user U who transferred the points P (transferring user U1) and the user U who received the points P (transferee user U2) are updated on server 1.

[0034] The point information PI includes the user U to whom the points P were initially issued, the number of points P issued, the transfer history of points P, and the current location of points P. In other words, it holds the complete transfer history since issuance on network N. This makes it possible to retrospectively confirm whether or not point P was actively transferred.

[0035] Similarly, by updating the user information UI and point information PI as described above, the user information UI will record all the points P issued to a specific user U, the points P transferred to that user U, and the points P transferred by that user U, including the number of times, the amount of points P transferred each time, and the history of the recipients, making it possible to check these details retrospectively.

[0036] Publicly known programs can be used for recording and managing user information UI and point information PI on server 1, and for transferring and receiving points P on terminal 2.

[0037] The following describes an example of evaluation using the evaluation system A of the present invention. The evaluation system A of the present invention can be suitably used to evaluate active participation in and interaction within a network N that can be defined within a certain range, such as a company or a local community.

[0038] Taking the example of performance evaluation within a company, User U is an employee, and the administrator managing Server 1 and the entire evaluation system A is the company. First, the company uses server 1 to issue points P to each employee, who is user U.

[0039] Initially, the points P issued to each user U may be uniform for everyone, or they may vary depending on factors such as job title, years of service, and previous year's performance. This allows for a more appropriate evaluation in the evaluation system A, based on the evaluation capabilities of each user U, which have been assessed in advance.

[0040] Figure 4 is an explanatory diagram illustrating the transfer of points P between users U. An employee who is User U and has been issued points P can transfer points P to other employees at any time.

[0041] The timing of transferring points P is optional, but it is preferable that the transferring user U1 expresses gratitude, goodwill, or high evaluation to the transferring user U2 for their work. This makes it possible to use the amount of points P earned by a particular user U as an evaluation of that user U's contribution to the work by other users U (employees).

[0042] The user information UI includes the complete history of point transfers made by a specific user U. In other words, it is possible to retrospectively evaluate whether or not user U actively transferred point P to other users U. A user U who actively transfers points P to other users U can be evaluated as someone who can favorably evaluate others. In such cases, the number of points P owned by that user U should decrease, but this can be evaluated because the user information UI includes the entire history of point P transfers made by that user U.

[0043] Furthermore, as mentioned above, the point information PI includes the entire transfer history from the time of issuance. This makes it possible to perform evaluations not only of whether a particular user U has been transferred a lot of points P, i.e., is highly rated, but also of which attributes of other users U are more highly rated, for example, whether that particular user U receives more points P from other users U of the attributes of their superiors, colleagues, or subordinates.

[0044] The points P earned by user U can be used simply as abstract points for personnel evaluation. Furthermore, by making them redeemable for goods, services, etc., they can also be used as part of employee benefits.

[0045] There are no particular restrictions on the timing of the evaluation, but it is preferable to use an arbitrary period as a dividing line. By using the fiscal year as a dividing line and conducting a post-evaluation from the issuance of points P, it becomes possible to use the evaluation in the evaluation system A of the present invention as a measure of the user U's contribution to the company or to other users U (employees).

[0046] As another example, we will describe the use of evaluation system A in a local community. In this case, User U is assumed to be an individual or company belonging to the region, or a local government or NPO that manages the community as the administrator of Server 1.

[0047] Figure 5 is an explanatory diagram showing the state in which point P is transferred from one person to another. The issuance of points P and the transfer of points P between users U are as described above. User U, who actively transfers points P, can be considered to be contributing to the community's growth and actively engaging in interaction. In this regard, based on user information UI and point information PI, a specific user U can be evaluated based on the total number of users U to whom the points P initially issued to that user U were transferred. This makes it possible to capture and evaluate on the evaluation system A the fact that the points P issued to that user U were transferred around within the community based on that user U's actions, that is, that they generated interaction within the community.

[0048] Furthermore, it becomes convenient as it allows users (U) to exchange products and services provided by companies for points (P), and as enables the transfer and receipt of points (P) to be used as a simple payment method.

[0049] In this embodiment, it is assumed that each user U can become either a transferring user U1 or a receiving user U2. In this case, for example, it is conceivable that two specific users U could collude to repeatedly transfer points P to each other, thereby acquiring a large number of transfer histories and improving their evaluation. In such cases, it is possible to prevent this situation by referring to point information PI and evaluating only points P that have been transferred to a certain number of users U, for example, at least three or more users U.

[0050] Figure 6 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a score. In the evaluation system, the server may classify the points transferred by the transferee user based on evaluation items set in advance by the transferee user, and calculate a score based on the bias of the classified points. This allows the recipient user to get an overview of the points they have earned and can be used as a system to evaluate their achievement of pre-set goals. Therefore, the calculated score can be used by the recipient user as an indicator of their self-improvement or self-realization.

[0051] When calculating scores in the evaluation system, the recipient user pre-sets classification items according to the attributes of the points earned. In this case, to assist the recipient user, major classification categories may also be pre-set. In the example in Figure 6, the major categories used are "things you are good at," "things you enjoy," "things that can earn you money," and "things that make others happy." The receiving user sets up classification items for categorizing points based on this main category. Here, the classification items must be such that the receiving user can determine whether or not the transferred points fall under that classification item. In the example in Figure 6, it is assumed that the acquiring user is the business owner who operates the business. Under the major category "What I'm good at," "Business operations" is set as a classification item, and under the major category "Making someone happy," "Advising employees" is set as a classification item.

[0052] These classification items may fall under multiple major categories. If one classification item falls under two or more major categories, that classification item is placed in the overlapping position of the major categories, as shown in Figure 6.

[0053] After the classification criteria are set, the server classifies and stores the points each time a transferee user receives points, according to the classification criteria set by that user. This allows us to calculate the number of points earned by the acquiring user for each classification item after a certain evaluation period has elapsed.

[0054] The classification of points can be automated on the server by performing language analysis using AI learning. If points are earned that the server finds difficult to classify into pre-configured categories, those points may not be used in calculating the score, or they may be manually classified by the receiving user.

[0055] The calculated points typically show biases in magnitude across different classification categories or major categories. The server considers a state where all classification categories or major categories receive equal points as the standard state, and then quantifies the biased points actually received by the recipient user based on the variance and standard deviation relative to the standard state, calculating this as the recipient user's score.

[0056] The calculated score may be displayed as a numerical value such as the number of points for each classification item, or it may be displayed as the shade of color for each major category in the explanatory diagram shown in Figure 6.

[0057] By calculating a score, the recipient user can gain an overview of the degree of achievement and any biases in each category against the classification items that they have pre-set as goals. Therefore, the evaluation system can be used as a system for assessing the degree of achievement. As a result, the recipient user can use the calculated score as an indicator for self-improvement or self-realization.

[0058] Specifically, by reviewing the classification items after calculating the score, you can gain insights such as realizing that something you didn't previously consider a "strength" is actually something you are good at. Furthermore, by examining the established classification categories, broad categories, and the areas where they all overlap, it becomes possible to articulate what one's purpose in life is. AI-based language analysis may be used as an aid in these examinations and articulation processes. By repeatedly calculating scores and setting classification items using the evaluation system at regular intervals, the recipient user can refine their self-awareness and use it as support for self-realization.

[0059] Furthermore, using the evaluation system of the present invention, it is possible to obtain more precise evaluations from others, reflect on one's own evaluation, or identify the gap between one's own and others' evaluations. In this embodiment, the user information UI includes evaluation information SI provided by the transferring user U1 and / or the receiving user U2 in connection with the transfer of point P to the receiving user U2. Specifically, evaluation information (SI) consists of predetermined tiered numerical values ​​(for example, numbers from 1 to 5, or scores from A to D, or excellent to fair, etc.) or textual information written by the user themselves. After a certain evaluation period has elapsed, the acquiring user U2 is evaluated based on the point information PI linked to the points P earned as described above. At this time, the evaluation information SI is also referenced, allowing the user to understand the gap between their own evaluation and that of others.

[0060] Specifically, when transferring user U1 transfers points P to receiving user U2, both parties, or one of them, input into the terminal an evaluation information SI, either as a score or as textual information, indicating the evaluation on which the transferred points P are based. The evaluation information SI is transmitted to server 1 via network N and recorded as part of the user information UI of the acquiring user U2 who obtained the evaluation information SI, thereby updating the user information UI.

[0061] As mentioned above, after a certain evaluation period, when evaluating the user U based on the user information UI and point information PI, evaluation information SI is accumulated in the user information UI. In this case, if the evaluation information SI, which designates user U as recipient user U2, is primarily entered by the transferring user U1, it becomes possible to obtain a more precise understanding of evaluations from others. If the evaluation information is primarily entered by recipient user U2 (i.e., user U themselves), it becomes possible to reflect on one's own evaluation. Furthermore, if both types of input are available, it becomes possible to understand the gap between one's own evaluation and evaluations from others.

[0062] As mentioned above, evaluation information (SI) can be a predetermined score, but by adding attributes to it, it becomes possible to understand the gap between one's own evaluation and that of others in more detail. For example, we can establish several stages to represent the achievement of a goal or the degree of adult development. Here, we will name four stages as examples: "Seed," "Ignition," "Rise," and "Star (establishment / sharing)." When entering evaluation information SI, the transferring user U1 and / or the receiving user U2 will input which stage of the receiving user U2's actions the transfer of points P, which formed the basis of the evaluation information SI, is based on. In this case, for example, even if the receiving user U2 evaluated their own actions as merely an initial "Seed" stage, the receiving user U1 who transferred the points P might have evaluated it as "Ignition." This gap can be visualized using evaluation information SI. Furthermore, by accumulating more evaluation information (SI), it becomes possible to use it as a record of user U's growth.

[0063] The evaluation information system (SI) also makes it possible to visualize the relationships between each user (U). For example, the degree of connection (relationship strength) between a user U who entered evaluation information (SI) and the user U who entered it can be measured by the number of times that evaluation information (SI) has been entered. Furthermore, if the evaluation information (SI) is in the form of text or other written information, it is possible to visualize qualitative relationships between each user (U), other than the relationship strength mentioned above, by performing language analysis using AI. For example, by setting evaluation items such as pleasant or unpleasant (quality of relationship) and the severity of the atmosphere, and then analyzing the SI, it becomes possible to retrospectively evaluate the relationship between the user U who entered the evaluation information SI and the user U who entered it. By accumulating this data, it is also possible to observe changes over time. By visualizing and outputting this, for example, as overlapping circles, the relationships between each user U can be represented in an intuitively understandable way.

[0064] Furthermore, the point information PI includes the transfer history of the point P, and by linking this with the evaluation information SI, it is possible to record the exchange between each user U when the point P is transferred. In other words, the receiving user U2 can see the non-quantifiable records (non-numerical records) associated with the points P they have earned. This allows them to empathize with the story behind the points P and use it as motivation.

[0065] Furthermore, it is not necessary for the transfer user U1 and / or transferee user U2 to input evaluation information SI every time; it is possible to use the information for evaluation if a certain number of times or a certain amount of input is provided.

[0066] Although preferred embodiments of the present invention have been described above, the present invention is not limited to the above embodiments.

[0067] In the embodiment described above, the evaluation of user U was conducted at fixed intervals, but it is not limited to this. For example, it may be conducted at any time. Furthermore, in the above-described embodiment, all users U were evaluated without distinction. However, the evaluation criteria may be changed for each attribute of user U, such as a specific department or region. This attribute information, which serves as the criteria, can be included in the user information UI and used for evaluation. This makes it possible, for example, for a company to use evaluation system A for personnel evaluations at the departmental level.

[0068] In the above embodiment, points P were issued by server 1 to each user U, but users U may also be able to issue points P. This prevents situations where the total number of points P on the network N is not constant, for example, when a particular user U wants to transfer points P but does not have any points P and therefore cannot transfer them. This enables a more appropriate evaluation of each user U. In this case, the users U who can issue points P may be limited to specific users U, such as managers within a company. This can prevent the total number of points P on the network N from increasing unexpectedly.

[0069] Furthermore, the evaluation method for the information contained in the user information UI and point information PI described above is merely one example; the information contained in the user information UI and point information PI may also be evaluated from other perspectives and used as an evaluation of the user U. [Industrial applicability]

[0070] The evaluation system A of the present invention can be suitably used to evaluate active participation in and interaction within a network N that can be demarcated within a certain range. [Explanation of symbols]

[0071] A... Evaluation System 1. Server 2. Terminal UI...User Information PI...Point Information N... Network U···User U1... Transfer user U2... Transferee User P... points SI Evaluation Information

Claims

1. A server that manages user information and point information, An evaluation system comprising terminals used by multiple users, each connected to the server via a network, The server issues a predetermined amount of points to each of the multiple users, The user information includes the point transfer history of a specific user. The point information includes the transfer history of the point and the current location of the point. If the aforementioned user transfers the awarded points to another aforementioned user using the aforementioned terminal, Based on the transfer of the points, the server updates the user information of the transferring user (the user who transferred the points) and the transferee user (the user who received the points), and updates the point information. Based on the updated user information and point information, the user is evaluated. The aforementioned server, Based on evaluation criteria set in advance by the transferee user, the points transferred to the transferee user are classified. An evaluation system that quantifies the difference between the bias of the classified points and the standard state and calculates a score.

2. The evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the user information further includes the amount and / or number of times the user has transferred the points.

3. The evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the update of the user information is performed based on the transfer of points made by the user during any period.

4. The evaluation system according to claim 3, wherein the evaluation of the user to whom the points were first issued is based on the total number of users to whom the points were transferred.

5. The evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the user is granted the authority to issue the points by the server.

6. The user information further includes the amount and / or number of times the user has transferred the points, The user information includes evaluation information provided by the transferring user and / or the receiving user in connection with the transfer of the points. The evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the update of the user information is performed based on the transfer of points made by the user during any period.

Images