Support device, processing method, program, and storage medium

Abstract

To provide a support device, a processing method, a program and a storage medium which can verify a rule.SOLUTION: In a support system 1, a support device 10, about an item group 21 including a plurality of items having one or more options stored in a storage device 20, acquires a rule which specifies a filtering condition of option of slave items which are other one or more items included in the item group, based on option of master items which are one or more items included in the item group, from a rule group 22 of the storage device 20. A verification unit comprises an acquisition unit 11 which verifies validity of the filtering condition of the acquired rule.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

Technical Field

[0001] Embodiments of the present invention relate to a support device, a processing method, a program, and a storage medium.

Background Art

[0002] There is a need for a technology capable of automatically verifying the correlation (rules) regarding product specifications.

Prior Art Documents

Patent Documents

[0003]

Patent Document 1

Patent Document 2

Patent Document 3

Summary of the Invention

Problems to be Solved by the Invention

[0004] The problem to be solved by the present invention is to provide a support device, a processing method, a program, and a storage medium capable of verifying rules.

Means for Solving the Problems

[0005] The support device according to the embodiment includes an acquisition unit and a verification unit. The acquisition unit acquires a rule. The rule defines a narrowing condition for the options of a subordinate item by the option of a main item for an item group including a plurality of items having one or more options. The main item is one or more of the items included in the item group. The subordinate item is another one or more of the items included in the item group. The verification unit verifies the validity of the narrowing condition of the rule.

Brief Description of the Drawings

[0006] [Figure 1]This is a schematic diagram showing the functional configuration of the support system according to the embodiment. [Figure 2] This is an example table illustrating a list of rules. [Figure 3] This is an example of a rule. [Figure 4] This is another example of a rule. [Figure 5] This is a schematic diagram illustrating the data structure in a storage device. [Figure 6] This is an example of a set of rules to be presented. [Figure 7] This is an example of the output of the verification results. [Figure 8] This is an example of output from another verification result. [Figure 9] This is a schematic diagram showing an example of output from the support device according to the embodiment. [Figure 10] This is a schematic diagram showing an example of output from the support device according to the embodiment. [Figure 11] This is a schematic diagram showing an example of output from the support device according to the embodiment. [Figure 12] This is a schematic diagram showing an example of output from the support device according to the embodiment. [Figure 13] This is a flowchart illustrating the processing performed by the support device according to the embodiment. [Figure 14] This is a schematic diagram showing the functional configuration of a support system according to a modified embodiment. [Figure 15] This is an example of a rule. [Figure 16] This is another example of a rule. [Figure 17] This is a diagram illustrating the function of the extraction unit. [Figure 18] This is a schematic diagram illustrating how related rules are extracted. [Figure 19] This is a schematic diagram illustrating how related rules are extracted. [Figure 20] This flowchart illustrates the processing performed by the support device according to a modified embodiment. [Figure 21] This is a schematic diagram showing the hardware configuration.

Best Mode for Carrying Out the Invention

[0007] Hereinafter, each embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. In this specification and each figure, the same reference numerals are given to the same elements as those already described, and detailed descriptions thereof will be omitted as appropriate.

[0008] Generally, a product is composed of a plurality of modules and has various characteristics. A module is a combination of a plurality of parts and is a constituent unit of a product. The specific specifications of a product are related to each other. The specifications are the functions, performance, shape, component configuration, standards, etc. that the product has. As an example, if a certain module is used in a product, due to the restrictions caused by the size, output, or function of that module, another module cannot be used. As another example, if a certain module is used in a product, the use of another module that is adversely affected by its combination with that module is restricted. When designing a product, it is necessary to consider such a correlation relationship of specifications.

[0009] As the product becomes larger and the number of modules that can be used and the number of methods that can be adopted increase, the number of correlation relationships also increases. In recent years, customer needs have become diversified. In particular, for custom-made products such as machine tools, medical devices, precision machinery, and power transmission and transformation equipment, there are many restrictions on the product specifications, and the correlation relationships are complex.

[0010] Here, this correlation relationship is called a "rule". Usually, the rules are summarized in a database and appropriately referred to during the design of the product. Or, the rules are used in design tools such as a configurator. The configurator calculates and selects appropriate specifications based on the rules registered in advance as a master and the requirements from customers, and outputs a quotation result, product drawings, etc. For example, the configurator can accept the selection of options for each item regarding component parts, functions, options, etc. The configurator selects appropriate specifications based on the accepted options and rules.

[0011] Rules are required to be properly managed. If the rules are inappropriate, the configurator will output inappropriate specifications based on those inappropriate rules. On the other hand, as the number of rules increases, proper management and maintenance of rules by hand becomes difficult. The invention according to the embodiment is used to support the management and maintenance of rules.

[0012] Figure 1 is a schematic diagram showing the functional configuration of the support system according to the embodiment. As shown in Figure 1, the support system 1 includes a support device 10, a storage device 20, an input device 30, and an output device 40. The support device 10 verifies whether the rules are set appropriately. The storage device 20 stores the rules to be verified, the data used in the verification, etc. The input device 30 is used by the user to input data into the support device 10. The output device 40 outputs the data output from the support device 10 to the user.

[0013] The following describes each component of support system 1 in detail. Here, we will explain an example where the product is power distribution equipment.

[0014] The storage device 20 stores an item group 21 containing multiple items and a rule group 22 containing multiple rules. Each item is related to the product specifications and has one or more choices. Each rule is set for two or more items included in the item group. In a rule, one or more items are defined as "main items" and one or more other items are defined as "sub-items". The rule also defines conditions for narrowing down the choices of the sub-items based on the choices of the main items.

[0015] Figure 2 is an example table illustrating a list of rules. Table 100, shown in Figure 2, includes columns for Rule ID 101, Item ID 102, and Refinement Condition 103. Rule ID 101 is a unique string used to identify each rule. Item ID 102 is the item ID to which the rule applies. Refinement Condition 103 indicates the filtering of sub-item options based on the main item options. In the illustrated example, the refinement condition is represented by a single row of data.

[0016] Figure 3 shows a concrete example of the rule. Figure 3 shows the details of Rule 120, which is identified by Rule ID "124" in Table 100. Rule 120 relates to the items "Installation Location" identified by Item ID "1", "Implementation of Function A" identified by Item ID "2", "Implementation of Function B" identified by Item ID "3", and "Presence or Absence of Measuring Instruments" identified by Item ID "4". "Location", "Implementation of Function A", "Implementation of Function B", and "Presence or Absence of Measuring Instruments" are part of a group of items.

[0017] Rule 120 concerns the specifications of a device. Rule 120 defines the specification of "presence or absence of instruments" corresponding to the specifications of "location," "implementation of function A," and "implementation of function B." In other words, in Rule 120, the combination of "location," "implementation of function A," and "implementation of function B" is the main item, and "presence or absence of instruments" is the secondary item.

[0018] In Rule 120, item 121 for “Location” includes the options “Indoor” 121a and “Outdoor” 121b. Item 122 for “Implementation of Function A” includes the options “Yes” 122a, “No” 122b, and “Future” 122c. Item 123 for “Implementation of Function B” includes the options “Yes” 123a, “No” 123b, and “Future” 123c. “Yes” indicates that the function will be implemented. “No” indicates that the function will not be implemented. “Future” indicates that the function may be implemented in the future. Item 124 for “Presence of Instruments” includes the options “No” 124a, “Upper and Lower” 124b, “Upper” 124c, and “Lower” 124d. “No” indicates that no instruments will be provided. “Upper and Lower” indicates that instruments will be provided on both the upper and lower levels of the device. "Upper" indicates that the instrument is located on the upper part of the device. "Lower" indicates that the instrument is located on the lower part of the device.

[0019] The filtering condition 125 indicates the filtering of the secondary options 124a to 124d based on the combination of the main options 121a, 121b, 122a to 122c, and 123a to 123c. For example, filtering condition 125 indicates that if option 121a, "Indoors," is selected for the "Location" item 121, option 122a, "Yes," is selected for the "Implementation of Function A" item 122, and option 123a, "Yes," is selected for the "Presence or Absence of Measuring Instruments" item 123, then option 124a, "No," is selected for the "Presence or Absence of Measuring Instruments" item 124.

[0020] The support device 10 includes an acquisition unit 11, a verification unit 12, and an output unit 13. The acquisition unit 11 accesses the storage device 20 and acquires rules. The acquisition unit 11 may also accept rules input by the user via the input device 30.

[0021] The verification unit 12 verifies the validity of the filtering conditions of the acquired rules. As a specific example, the verification unit 12 counts the number of options in the sub-items that are filtered by each option in the main item. Here, this number is called the "filtering count". For each rule, an acceptable range for the filtering count is set in advance. For example, the acceptable range includes an upper limit and a lower limit for the filtering count. The same value may be set as the upper limit and the lower limit. That is, only a specific value may be allowed. The acceptable range may be set in common for multiple rules. Alternatively, the acceptable range may be set for each option in the main item.

[0022] The verification unit 12 compares the number of selections for each main item with an acceptable range. If the number of selections is within the acceptable range, the filtering condition set for that item is deemed valid. If the number of selections is outside the acceptable range, the filtering condition set for that item is deemed invalid. The verification unit 12 verifies the validity of the number of selections for each main item's selection.

[0023] For example, for rule 120, the upper and lower limits of the acceptable range are set to "1". That is, only a narrowing of the number of options "1" is allowed. The verification unit 12 counts the number of narrowings of the secondary options 124a to 124d based on the main options 121a, 121b, 122a to 122c, and 123a to 123c for rule 120.

[0024] Rule 120 determines one of the secondary options 124a to 124d for each combination of the main item options 121a, 121b, 122a to 122c, and 123a to 123c. In other words, the number of refinements in each case is "1", which is within the acceptable range. Therefore, the verification unit 12 determines that the refinement conditions of Rule 120 are valid.

[0025] Figure 4 shows an example of another rule. Figure 4 shows the details of Rule 140, identified by Rule ID "198" in Table 100. In Rule 140, the "Method" item 141 is set as the main item, and the "Coating" item 142 is set as a subordinate item. "Method" includes, for example, the option 141a for "Method A", the option 141b for "Method B", the option 141c for "Method C", and the option 141d for "Method D". "Coating" includes the option 142a for "No" and the option 142b for "Yes" regarding the presence or absence of coating. In Rule 140, the filtering condition 145 indicates the filtering of the subordinate items 142a and 142b by the main item options 141a to 141d.

[0026] For Rule 140, the upper and lower limits of the acceptable range are set to "1". The verification unit 12 counts the number of selections for the secondary items 142a and 142b based on the main item options 141a to 141d. In the illustrated example, the number of selections for options 141a and 141c is "1" each. Therefore, the selection criteria for these options are judged to be valid. On the other hand, for option 141b, neither option 142a nor 142b is selected. The number of selections is "0", and the selection criteria are judged to be invalid. For option 141d, both options 142a and 142b are selected. The number of selections is "2", and the selection criteria are judged to be invalid.

[0027] The output unit 13 outputs the verification results from the verification unit 12. For example, the output unit 13 outputs a first verification result indicating that the filtering conditions are valid for the selected options. The output unit 13 outputs a second verification result indicating that the filtering conditions are invalid for the selected options. The output unit 13 may output either the first or second verification result for a single rule. For example, if the filtering conditions for all options are valid, the first verification result is output. If the filtering conditions for any of the options are invalid, the second verification result is output.

[0028] Figure 5 is a schematic diagram illustrating the data structure in a storage device. Referring to Figure 5, a specific example of data processing by the support system 1 will be explained. For example, as shown in Figure 5, the storage device 20 includes, in addition to the item group 21 and the rule group 22, a filtering number storage unit 23, an acceptable range storage unit 24, a suggestion rule storage unit 25, a linked data storage unit 26, and a suggestion item storage unit 27.

[0029] The verification unit 12 counts the number of selections for each main item for each rule in the rule group 22 and stores it in the selection count storage unit 23. The acceptable range for each rule is stored in the acceptable range storage unit 24, which is set in advance by the user. The verification unit 12 compares the selection count stored in the selection count storage unit 23 with the acceptable range stored in the acceptable range storage unit 24. The verification unit 12 determines whether each comparison result satisfies any of the conditions stored in the suggested rule storage unit 25.

[0030] Figure 6 shows an example of the presentation rules. The presentation rule 160 shown in Figure 6 includes columns for presentation rule ID 161, condition 162, and identifier 163. The presentation rule ID 161 is a unique string used to identify the presentation rule. Condition 162 defines the number of filters for the acceptable range. Identifier 163 indicates an identifier corresponding to the items presented to the user and is set for each condition.

[0031] The verification unit 12 determines whether the relationship between the number of selections and the acceptable range satisfies any of the conditions. Based on the determination result, the verification unit 12 associates an identifier with each of the main item options and stores it in the associated data storage unit 26. Based on the associated identifier, the verification unit 12 retrieves the presented items stored in the presented item storage unit 27 for each of the main item options. The output unit 13 generates and outputs verification results that associate the options with the presented items.

[0032] Figure 7 shows an example of the output of the verification results. The verification result 180 shown in Figure 7 represents the verification result for rule 120 shown in Figure 3. Verification result 180 includes rule ID 181, main item 182, acceptable range 184, number of refinements 185, and judgment result 186.

[0033] For Rule 120, the number of options narrowed down was "1". Therefore, all of the narrowing down numbers 185 satisfy the acceptable range of 184. Based on the presentation rule 160 shown in Figure 6, each option is associated with the identifier "Number of options is appropriate". Each option with an associated identifier is stored in the associated data storage unit 26. For example, in the presentation item storage unit 27, the "OK" presentation item is associated with the identifier "Number of options is appropriate". Therefore, the "OK" presentation item is associated with each option of the main item 182. Based on the associated presentation items, the output result from the output unit 13 shows an "OK" judgment result (presentation item) for all of the options of the main item.

[0034] Figure 8 shows an example of output from another verification result. As shown in Figure 8, a simpler verification result may be output. Verification result 200 shown in Figure 8 shows the result of verification for rule 140 shown in Figure 4. Verification result 200 includes rule ID 201, main item selection 202, and judgment result 203.

[0035] For Rule 140, the number of options narrowed down is outside the acceptable range. Based on Presentation Rule 160 shown in Figure 6, these options are associated with either "too few options" or "too many options" identifiers. Depending on the identifier, the judgment result 203 (presented item) associated with the main item option 202 is shown. In this example, the identifier and the presented item are the same. Therefore, the string registered as the identifier in Presentation Rule 160 is output as the presented content.

[0036] In the examples shown in Figures 7 and 8, "OK" or "Appropriate number of options" is an example of a first verification result indicating that the rule's filtering criteria are valid. "Too many options" or "Too few options" is an example of a second verification result indicating that the rule's filtering criteria are not valid.

[0037] The output unit 13 outputs the generated verification results in a predetermined file format such as CSV and saves them to a predetermined storage medium. The output unit 13 may also send the data to an external server using File Transfer Protocol (FTP) or the like. The output unit 13 may also perform database communication and insert the data into an external database using Open Database Connectivity (ODBC) or the like. If the output device 40 is a monitor or projector, the output unit 13 may display the verification results on a graphical user interface (GUI) or the like. If the output device 40 is a speaker, it may output sound corresponding to the verification results.

[0038] Figures 9 and 10 are schematic diagrams showing examples of output from the support device according to the embodiment. The output unit 13 displays, for example, the GUI 300 (first user interface) shown in Figure 9 on the output device 40. The GUI 300 displays the rule manager 310. The rule manager 310 includes a table that summarizes items related to any of the rules included in the rule group. The rule manager 310 displays columns for item ID 311, item name 313, and judgment result 314.

[0039] Item ID 311 indicates a unique string used to identify each item. Item name 313 indicates the name assigned to the item. Judgment result 314 indicates the result of the verification of each item and its associated rule. For example, the user operates the pointer 315 using the input device 30 and clicks the icon 316. This allows the support device 10 to verify the validity of each rule displayed in the rule manager 310.

[0040] In the example shown in Figure 9, "OK" indicates that the rule associated with that item is valid. "No Rule" indicates that no rule has been set for that item. "Unassociated Item" indicates that, in a rule where the item in that row is a subordinate item, none of the options in the subordinate item are associated with any of the options in the primary item associated with that rule. It indicates that none of the options in the subordinate item are associated with any of the options in that item. By displaying the reason why the rule is invalid, such as "No Rule" or "Unassociated Item," users can easily understand the cause.

[0041] When a user double-clicks any of the judgment results 314, the output unit 13 displays the details of the double-clicked result. For example, when the result for item name "Hinge 1" is double-clicked, the window 320 shown in Figure 10 is displayed. The window 320 shown in Figure 10 displays the rules related to "Hinge 1".

[0042] As shown in Figure 10, the display of the portion deemed invalid according to the rules may be made different from the display of the other portions by displaying message 321. Alternatively, the output unit 13 may make any of the following in the portion deemed invalid different from those in the other portions: the color of the characters, the font of the characters, the weight of the characters, the size of the characters, the decorations of the characters, and the background color.

[0043] In addition to the screen showing the verification results, the support device 10 may also display a settings screen for setting rules.

[0044] Figures 11 and 12 are schematic diagrams showing examples of output from the support device according to the embodiment. The output unit 13 displays the GUI 400 (second user interface) shown in Figure 11 on the output device 40. The GUI 400 displays the input area 410. The input area 411 displays the input field 411.

[0045] Input field 411 includes an item name input field 411a and an option name input field 411b. The user enters the name of the item in the item name input field 411a. The user also enters the names of each option in the option name input field 411b. The number of option name input fields 411b can be adjusted by the user. Instead of the user entering names, data stored in the storage device 20, etc., may be inserted into input field 411. Once input is complete, the user clicks icon 413 to save the set data. The set data is reflected in all rules associated with that item.

[0046] The output unit 13 displays the rule setting area 420 as shown in Figure 12, based on the data entered in the input field 411. In the rule setting area 420, the main item 421 and options 421a to 421d based on the contents of the input field 411 are displayed. In addition, the rule setting area 420 displays the options 422a to 422b of the subordinate item 422, which correspond to the options 421a to 421d of the main item 421. The user can set filtering conditions in the rule setting area 420 by entering "○" or "×" in cell 423.

[0047] Once the settings are complete, the user clicks icon 424 to save the configured rules. The configured rules are registered in the rule group. The validity of the rules may be verified when the rule settings are complete. For example, if the verification results in invalid filtering conditions, messages 425 and 426 will be displayed as shown in Figure 12.

[0048] Regarding the support system 1, the item group 21, rule group 22, filtering number storage unit 23, allowable range storage unit 24, presentation rule storage unit 25, linked data storage unit 26, and presentation item storage unit 27 may be contained in one storage device 20, or they may be contained in separate storage devices 20. The storage device 20 may be incorporated into the support device 10, or it may communicate with the support device 10 by wire or wireless. The storage device 20 may be connected to the support device 10 via a network.

[0049] Figure 13 is a flowchart illustrating the processing performed by the support device according to this embodiment. In the processing method M1 shown in Figure 13, first, the acquisition unit 11 acquires one or more rules and items related to those rules (step S1). The verification unit 12 counts the number of selections for the subordinate items by each selection of the main item (step S2). The acquisition unit 11 acquires the acceptable range for the acquired rules (step S3). The acquisition unit 11 acquires the suggested rules (step S4). The verification unit 12 acquires identifiers in the suggested rules based on the comparison result between the number of selections and the acceptable range (step S5). The acquisition unit 11 stores the selections associated with the identifiers in the linked data storage unit 26. The verification unit 12 acquires the suggested items corresponding to the identifiers stored in the linked data storage unit 26 from the suggested rule storage unit 25 (step S6). The output unit 13 outputs the verification results showing the comparison result between the number of selections and the acceptable range and the suggested items (step S7).

[0050] I will explain the advantages of using mobile devices in practice. The support device 10 according to this embodiment acquires rules and items and verifies the validity of the filtering conditions of those rules. By using the support device 10, it becomes unnecessary to manually verify the set rules. Variations in the accuracy of verification due to human knowledge and experience regarding specifications can also be eliminated. According to this embodiment, a support device capable of automatically verifying rules is provided.

[0051] Furthermore, as shown in Figures 9 and 10, the support device 10 can display a GUI 300 that includes verification results. Through the GUI 300, the user can easily understand the verified rules and their verification results. In addition, as shown in Figures 11 and 12, the support device 10 can display a GUI 400 that accepts rule settings. Through the GUI 400, the user can easily set rules. Moreover, because the rules are verified, the user can efficiently set rules while checking the verification results.

[0052] For more efficient verification, the acquisition unit 11 may selectively acquire only specific rules. Generally, a product consists of multiple modules. For items relating to any module, an attribute indicating its relationship to that module may be assigned to that item. Two or more items may be assigned attributes indicating their similarity or identity to each other. Attributes for grouping any two or more items may be assigned to those items. When the acquisition unit 11 receives an attribute specification, it acquires rules from the rule group 22 in which items to which the specified attribute is assigned are defined as subordinate items. The verification unit 12 verifies the validity of the rules selectively acquired by the acquisition unit 11. Attribute specifications may be entered by the user or from another system.

[0053] A concrete example of two or more items being similar or identical to each other is when some modules included in two or more products are common to each other. In this case, an attribute indicating similarity or identity is assigned to an item relating to a common module in one product and an item relating to a common module in another product. In many cases, the content of these items is substantially the same. Therefore, rules can be managed efficiently by verifying these items together.

[0054] Furthermore, in the example described above, the number of refinements is compared with an acceptable range, but instead of an acceptable range, an acceptable value may be set. That is, it may be acceptable only if the number of refinements is a specific value. If an acceptable value is set, the verification unit compares the number of refinements for each main item selection with the acceptable value and verifies the validity based on the result of the comparison. If the number of refinements matches the acceptable value, the output unit 13 outputs a first verification result indicating that the refinement condition is valid. If the number of refinements does not match the acceptable value, the output unit 13 outputs a second verification result indicating that the refinement condition is not valid.

[0055] (modified version) Figure 14 is a schematic diagram showing the functional configuration of a support system according to a modified embodiment. In the modified support system 2, the support device 10 further includes an extraction unit 14. The extraction unit 14 extracts invalid options that cannot be selected from the options included in the main item of the rule to be verified. The verification unit 12 verifies the validity of the narrowing conditions for the valid options other than the invalid options.

[0056] Specifically, the extraction unit 14 searches for related rules in the rule being verified that relate to one of the items included in the main item and another item included in the main item. For example, in rule 220, identified by rule ID "334" as shown in Figure 2, the items with ID "11" and ID "12" are defined as main items, and the item with ID "13" is defined as a subordinate item. Similarly, in rule 240, identified by rule ID "401", the item with ID "11" is defined as a main item, and the item with ID "12" is defined as a subordinate item. In rule 240, one of the items with ID "11" and ID "12", which are main items in rule 220, is defined as the main item, and the other is defined as a subordinate item. When verifying the validity of rule 220, the extraction unit 14 extracts rule 240 as a related rule to rule 220.

[0057] Figure 15 shows an example of a rule. Figure 15 shows the details of Rule 220 (an example of Rule 1). As shown in Figure 15, Rule 220 concerns item 221 (an example of Item 1) for "Connection Method," item 222 (an example of Item 2) for "Capacity," and item 223 (an example of Item 3) for "Protection." "Connection Method" and "Capacity" are main items. "Protection Function" is a sub-item. Item 221 includes options 221a and 221b. Item 222 includes options 222a to 222g. Item 223 includes options 223a to 223e.

[0058] Figure 16 shows an example of another rule. Figure 16 shows the details of Rule 240 (an example of Rule 2). As shown in Figure 16, Rule 240 relates to item 221 of "Connection Method" and item 222 of "Capacity". According to Rule 240, if option 221a is selected, none of options 222a to 222g will be selected. Conversely, if option 221b is selected, either option 222a or 222b may be selected.

[0059] Figure 17 is a diagram illustrating the function of the extraction unit. Rule 220 defines a filtering condition 225 for options 223a to 223e for any combination of option 221a and any of options 222a to 222g. However, according to Rule 240, if option 221a is selected, none of options 222a to 222g will be selected. Similarly, if option 221b is selected, none of options 222c to 222g will be selected.

[0060] In other words, as shown in Figure 17, the combination of option 221a with any of options 222a to 222g is an invalid option that cannot be selected. Similarly, the combination of option 221b with any of options 222c to 222g is an invalid option that cannot be selected.

[0061] The filtering conditions for subordinate items related to invalid options do not actually function. The validity of these filtering conditions does not affect the product specifications. Therefore, the verification unit 12 does not verify the validity of the filtering conditions for the extracted invalid options. In other words, the verification unit 12 does not perform filtering counts, comparisons with acceptable ranges, etc., for invalid options. The verification unit 12 performs filtering counts, comparisons with acceptable ranges, etc., only for valid options other than invalid options. The output unit 13 does not output verification results regarding invalid options.

[0062] Invalid options are not limited to the examples shown in Figures 15 to 17. As another example, in the first rule, the first item is defined as the main item and the second item is defined as the secondary item. In the second rule, the second item is defined as the main item and the third item is defined as the secondary item. If, according to the first rule, there is an option that cannot be selected for the second item, the extraction unit 14 may extract that option as an invalid option in the second rule.

[0063] By omitting the validation of invalid options, the processing time required for validation can be reduced. Furthermore, by identifying invalid options, users no longer need to check or modify the filtering conditions related to those options, thus improving user convenience. Alternatively, the output unit 13 may output invalid options in a way that distinguishes them from valid options. For example, the user can modify the rules containing invalid options based on the output results. This simplifies the rules included in the rule set.

[0064] Figures 18 and 19 are schematic diagrams illustrating the method for extracting related rules. The method used by the extraction unit 14 to extract related rules is arbitrary. Here, we will explain an example using a graph structure. The extraction unit 14 treats items defined by rules as nodes and the connections between items by rules as edges. The extraction unit 14 detects the connections between nodes (items) from the resulting graph structure.

[0065] In the example shown in Figure 18, the direction of the arrows indicates the hierarchical relationship of the rules. The starting point of the arrow indicates the primary item. The ending point (tip) of the arrow indicates the secondary item. Figure 18 illustrates the rules associated with item a. In Rule A, item a is defined as the primary item and item b is defined as the secondary item. In Rule B, item a is defined as the primary item and item x is defined as the secondary item. In Rule C, item x is defined as the primary item and item y is defined as the secondary item. In Rule D, item y is defined as the primary item and item b is defined as the secondary item. In Rule E, item a is defined as the primary item and item w is defined as the secondary item. In Rule F, item a is defined as the primary item and item z is defined as the secondary item.

[0066] The extraction unit 14 treats each item as a node for rules A to F, and the master-slave relationships between the rules as edges. This results in a graph structure G, as shown in Figure 19, which includes nodes N1 to N6 corresponding to items a, b, w, x, y, and z, and edges E1 to E6 corresponding to their master-slave relationships. From the graph structure G, the extraction unit 14 extracts rule B concerning items a and x, rule C concerning items x and y, and rule D concerning items y and b as related rules for rule A. From rules B to D, the extraction unit 14 extracts invalid choices for item a for rule A.

[0067] When generating a graph structure, the number of levels (depth) of nodes to explore is arbitrary. The more levels set, the easier it becomes to extract undirected options. However, if the number of levels is too high, the time required to extract invalid options will increase.

[0068] Figure 20 is a flowchart illustrating the processing performed by the support device according to a modified embodiment. The processing method M2 shown in Figure 20 includes steps S11 and S12 in addition to the processing method M1 shown in Figure 13. Steps S11 and S12 are performed between steps S1 and S2. In step S11, the extraction unit 14 extracts related rules associated with the rule to be verified. In step S12, the extraction unit 14 extracts invalid options from the main item options of the rule to be verified based on the related rules. Thereafter, for valid options other than invalid options, the same processes as in processing method M1 are performed, such as counting the number of refinements and comparing them with the acceptable range.

[0069] Figure 21 is a schematic diagram showing the hardware configuration. The support device 10 includes, for example, the hardware configuration shown in Figure 21. The computer 90 shown in Figure 21 includes a CPU 91, ROM 92, RAM 93, storage device 94, input interface 95, output interface 96, and communication interface 97. The functions of the support device 10 may be realized by a single computer 90 or by the cooperation of multiple computers 90.

[0070] ROM92 stores programs that control the computer's operation. ROM92 contains the programs necessary for the computer to perform the processes described above. RAM93 functions as a memory area where the programs stored in ROM92 are deployed.

[0071] The CPU 91 includes processing circuits. The CPU 91 uses the RAM 93 as work memory and executes programs stored in at least one of the ROM 92 or the storage device 94. During program execution, the CPU 91 controls each component via the system bus 98 and performs various processes.

[0072] The memory device 94 stores data necessary for program execution and data obtained through program execution.

[0073] The input interface (I / F) 95 connects the computer 90 and the input device 95a. The input I / F 95 is, for example, a serial bus interface such as USB. The CPU 91 can read various data from the input device 95a via the input I / F 95.

[0074] The output interface (I / F) 96 connects the computer 90 to the output device 96a. The output I / F 96 is a video output interface such as a Digital Visual Interface (DVI) or a High-Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI®). The CPU 91 can send data to the output device 96a via the output I / F 96 and display an image on the output device 96a.

[0075] The communication interface (I / F) 97 connects the computer 90 to a server 97a located outside the computer 90. The communication I / F 97 is, for example, a network card such as a LAN card. The CPU 91 can read various data from the server 97a via the communication I / F 97.

[0076] The storage device 94 includes one or more selected from Hard Disk Drive (HDD) and Solid State Drive (SSD). The input device 95a includes one or more selected from mouse, keyboard, microphone (voice input), and touchpad. The output device 96a includes one or more selected from monitor, projector, speaker, and printer. Devices that have the functions of both input device 95a and output device 96a, such as a touch panel, may be used. The storage device 94 may be used as storage device 20. The input device 95a and output device 96a may be used as input device 30 and output device 40, respectively.

[0077] The processing of the various data described above may be recorded as a program that can be executed by a computer on a magnetic disk (flexible disk and hard disk, etc.), an optical disk (CD-ROM, CD-R, CD-RW, DVD-ROM, DVD±R, DVD±RW, etc.), a semiconductor memory, or another non-transitory computer-readable storage medium.

[0078] For example, information recorded on a recording medium can be read by a computer (or embedded system). The recording format (storage format) of the recording medium is arbitrary. For example, a computer reads a program from the recording medium and has the CPU execute the instructions written in the program based on this program. In a computer, program acquisition (or reading) may be performed via a network.

[0079] According to the embodiments described above, a support device, a processing method, a program, and a storage medium capable of automatically verifying rules are provided.

[0080] Although several embodiments of the present invention have been illustrated above, these embodiments are presented as examples only and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention. These novel embodiments can be implemented in various other forms, and various omissions, substitutions, and modifications can be made without departing from the spirit of the invention. These embodiments and their variations are included in the scope and spirit of the invention, as well as in the claims of the invention and its equivalents. Furthermore, the embodiments described above can be implemented in combination with each other. [Explanation of symbols]

[0081] 1,2: Support system, 10: Support device, 11: Acquisition unit, 12: Verification unit, 13: Output unit, 14: Extraction unit, 20: Storage device, 21: Item group, 22: Rule group, 23: Filter count storage unit, 24: Allowable range storage unit, 25: Presentation rule storage unit, 26: Linked data storage unit, 27: Presentation item storage unit, 30: Input device, 40: Output device, 90: Computer, 91: CPU, 92: ROM, 93: RAM, 94: Storage device, 95: Input interface, 95a: Input device, 96: Output interface, 96a: Output device, 97: Communication interface, 97a: Server, 98: System bus, 100: Table, 101: Rule ID, 102: Item ID, 103: Filtering condition, 120: Rule, 121: Item, 121a,121b: Options, 122: Item, 122a~122c: Options, 123: Item, 123a~123c: Options, 124: Item, 124a~124d: Options, 125: Filtering Condition, 140: Rule, 141: Item, 141a~141d: Options, 142: Item, 142a,142b: Options, 145: Filtering Condition, 160: Providing Rule, 161: Providing Rule ID, 163: Identifier, 180: Verification Result, 181: Rule ID, 182: Main Item, 184: Acceptable Range, 185: Number of Filters, 186: Judgment Result, 200: Verification Result, 201: Rule ID, 202: Main Item Options, 203: Judgment Result, 220: Rule, 221: Item, 221a,221b: Choice, 222: Item, 222a~222g: Choice, 223: Item, 223a~223e: Choice, 225: Filtering Condition, 240: Rule, 310: Rule Manager, 311: Item ID, 313: Item Name, 314: Judgment Result, 315: Pointer, 316: Icon, 320: Window, 321: Message, 410: Input Area, 411: Input Field, 411a: Item Name Input Field, 411b: Choice Name Input Field, 413: Icon, 420: Rule Setting Area, 421: Main Item, 421a~421d: Choice, 422: Sub-Item, 422a,422b: Choices, 423: Cells, 424: Icons, 425: Messages, E1~E6: Edges, F: Rules, G: Graph Structure, M1,M2: Processing Methods, N1~N6: Nodes

Claims

1. An acquisition unit acquires rules that define the filtering conditions for the options of the dependent items based on the options of the primary items, for a group of items that includes multiple items having one or more options, with one or more items in the group of items designated as primary items and one or more other items in the group of items designated as dependent items. A verification unit calculates the number of selections for the subordinate items that are narrowed down for the selections of the main item, compares the number of selections for each selection of the main item with a preset tolerance range, and verifies the validity of the narrowing conditions of the rule based on the result of the comparison. An output unit that outputs a first verification result indicating that the filtering conditions are valid if the number of filtering results falls within the allowable range, and outputs a second verification result indicating that the filtering conditions are not valid if the number of filtering results falls outside the allowable range. A support device equipped with this device.

2. An acquisition unit acquires rules that define the filtering conditions for the options of the dependent items based on the options of the primary items, for a group of items that includes multiple items having one or more options, with one or more items in the group of items designated as primary items and one or more other items in the group of items designated as dependent items. A verification unit calculates the number of selections for the subordinate items that are narrowed down for the selections of the main item, compares the number of selections for each selection of the main item with a preset tolerance value, and verifies the validity of the narrowing conditions of the rule based on the result of the comparison. A support device equipped with this device.

3. If the number of narrowing criteria matches the allowable value, a first verification result indicating that the narrowing criteria are valid is output. If the number of filters does not match the allowable value, a second verification result indicating that the filtering conditions are not valid is output. The support device according to claim 2, further comprising an output unit.

4. The support device according to claim 1 or 3, wherein the output unit causes the output device to display a first user interface showing the main item, the subordinate item, and at least one of the first verification result and the second verification result.

5. The support device according to claim 1 or 3, wherein the second verification result includes the cause of the narrowing condition being inappropriate.

6. The output unit causes the output device to display a second user interface capable of accepting the setting of the rule. The support device according to claim 1 or 3, wherein the verification unit verifies the validity of the rule set in the second user interface.

7. The acquisition unit acquires a plurality of the aforementioned rules, The support device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the verification unit verifies the validity of at least one of the plurality of rules.

8. The system further comprises an extraction unit that extracts invalid options that cannot be selected from the one or more options included in the main item, based on related rules associated with at least one of the aforementioned plurality of rules, The support device according to claim 7, wherein the verification unit does not verify the validity of the narrowing conditions based on the invalid options.

9. The aforementioned group of items includes the first item, the second item, and the third item, The aforementioned rules are, The first item and the second item are designated as the main items, the third item as the subordinate items, and a first rule defines the conditions for narrowing down the options of the third item based on the options of the first item and the second item, The first item is the main item, the second item is the subordinate item, and a second rule defines the conditions for narrowing down the options of the second item based on the options of the first item, Includes, The support device according to claim 8, wherein the extraction unit extracts invalid options from the options for the first item and the second item in the first rule based on the second rule.

10. The acquisition unit is, Accepts attribute specifications, From a group of rules including multiple such rules, retrieve the rule to which the item to which the specified attribute is assigned is defined as a subordinate item. The support device according to any one of claims 1 to 3.

11. On the computer, For a group of items that includes multiple items having one or more options, one or more of the items in the group are designated as main items, and one or more other items in the group are designated as subordinate items. A rule is then obtained that defines the filtering conditions for the options of the subordinate items based on the options of the main items. The number of selections for the sub-items that are narrowed down for each of the main items is calculated, and for each of the main items, the number of selections is compared with a preset tolerance range, and the validity of the narrowing conditions of the rule is verified based on the result of the comparison. If the number of narrowed-down results falls within the acceptable range, a first verification result indicating that the narrowing-down conditions are valid is output; if the number of narrowed-down results falls outside the acceptable range, a second verification result indicating that the narrowing-down conditions are invalid is output. Processing method.

12. On the computer, For a group of items that includes multiple items having one or more options, one or more of the items in the group are designated as main items, and one or more other items in the group are designated as subordinate items. A rule is then obtained that defines the filtering conditions for the options of the subordinate items based on the options of the main items. The number of selections for the sub-items that are narrowed down for each of the main items is calculated, and for each of the main items, the number of selections is compared with a preset tolerance range, and the validity of the narrowing conditions of the rule is verified based on the result of the comparison. If the number of narrowed-down results falls within the acceptable range, a first verification result indicating that the narrowing-down conditions are valid is output; if the number of narrowed-down results falls outside the acceptable range, a second verification result indicating that the narrowing-down conditions are invalid is output. program.

13. A storage medium storing the program described in claim 12.

Images