Information processing device, determination method, and determination program

Abstract

In order to make it possible to appropriately evaluate a user who has registered or achieved a target, an information processing device (1) is provided with: a target acquisition unit (11) which receives target registration from a plurality of users, and which acquires a target registered in a target sharing service that causes the users to share the achievement states of targets by the users; and a compatibility determination unit (12) for determining compatibility between the acquired target and an evaluation criterion for evaluating the user who has registered or achieved the target.

Description

Information processing device, determination method, and determination program

[0001] This relates to technology that supports goal setting and the challenge of achieving set goals.

[0002] Techniques for supporting users to achieve set goals have been known for some time. For example, Patent Document 1 listed below discloses a goal achievement support device that generates score data of personality factors based on the subject's answers to personality analysis questions and outputs support phrases selected based on the score data, thereby supporting the subject in achieving his or her goal.

[0003] Japanese Patent Publication No. 2019-109719

[0004] In the goal achievement support device of Patent Document 1, the subject who is trying to achieve a goal sets the goal himself / herself. However, since many people feel that setting a goal itself is a high hurdle, the technology of Patent Document 1 has room for improvement in this respect.

[0005] One way to improve the above points is to build a system that accepts goal registrations from multiple users and allows each user to challenge the registered goals. Users of such a system can challenge goals registered by other users without having to set their own goals, and can also register their own goals by referring to the goals registered by other users. Thus, this system can overcome the difficulty of setting goals.

[0006] However, if each user is allowed to register a goal, it is possible that the registered goal may not have evaluation criteria defined, which creates the problem of making it difficult to properly evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goal.

[0007] One aspect of the present invention aims to make it possible to appropriately evaluate a user who has registered or achieved a goal, even if no evaluation criteria are defined for the registered goal.

[0008] An information processing device according to one aspect of the present invention includes a goal acquisition means for acquiring goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows users to share the achievement status of each goal, and a compatibility determination means for determining the compatibility of the acquired goals with evaluation criteria that evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals.

[0009] A determination method according to one aspect of the present invention includes at least one processor acquiring goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows users to share their achievement status of each goal, and determining the compatibility of the acquired goals with evaluation criteria that evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals.

[0010] A judgment program according to one embodiment of the present invention causes a computer to function as a goal acquisition means for acquiring goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows users to share their achievement status of each goal, and a compatibility judgment means for determining the compatibility between the acquired goals and evaluation criteria for evaluating users who have registered or achieved the goals.

[0011] According to one aspect of the present invention, even if evaluation criteria are not defined for a registered goal, it is possible to appropriately evaluate a user who has registered or achieved that goal.

[0012] FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing the configuration of an information processing device according to a first exemplary embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 2 is a flow chart showing the flow of a determination method according to the first exemplary embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 3 is a diagram explaining an overview of a goal sharing service. FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing the configuration of an information processing device according to a second exemplary embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an example of a display of a compatibility determination result. FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of a display of aggregated data. FIG. 7 is a flow chart showing the flow of processing executed by an information processing device according to a second exemplary embodiment of the present invention when registering a goal. FIG. 8 is a flow chart showing the flow of processing executed by an information processing device according to a second exemplary embodiment of the present invention when generating aggregated data. FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of a computer that executes instructions of a program that is software that realizes each function of each device according to each exemplary embodiment.

[0013] [First Exemplary Embodiment] A first exemplary embodiment of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings. This exemplary embodiment is a basic form of the exemplary embodiments described below.

[0014] (Configuration of Information Processing Device 1) The configuration of the information processing device 1 according to this exemplary embodiment will be described with reference to Fig. 1. Fig. 1 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the information processing device 1. As shown in Fig. 1, the information processing device 1 includes a target acquisition unit 11 and a conformance determination unit 12.

[0015] The goal acquisition unit 11 accepts registration of goals from a plurality of users and acquires goals registered in a goal sharing service that allows users to share the progress of each goal achieved by each user among themselves.

[0016] The compatibility determination unit 12 determines compatibility between the goal acquired by the goal acquisition unit 11 and the evaluation criteria for evaluating users who have registered or achieved the goal.

[0017] As described above, the information processing device 1 according to this exemplary embodiment is configured to include a goal acquisition unit 11 that acquires goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows users to share their achievement status of each goal, and a compatibility determination unit 12 that determines compatibility between the acquired goals and evaluation criteria that evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals. Therefore, the information processing device 1 has the advantage of being able to appropriately evaluate users who have registered or achieved a goal, even if evaluation criteria are not defined for the registered goal.

[0018] (Evaluation Program) The functions of the information processing device 1 described above can also be realized by a program. The evaluation program according to this exemplary embodiment causes a computer to function as a goal acquisition unit that acquires goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts goal registrations from multiple users and allows users to share their achievement status for each goal, and a compatibility evaluation unit that determines the compatibility between the acquired goals and evaluation criteria that evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals. This evaluation program makes it possible to appropriately evaluate users who have registered or achieved a goal, even if evaluation criteria are not defined for the registered goal.

[0019] (Flow of Determination Method) The flow of the determination method according to this exemplary embodiment will be described with reference to Fig. 2. Fig. 2 is a flow diagram showing the flow of the determination method. Note that the execution entity of each step in this determination method may be a processor provided in the information processing device 1, or a processor provided in another device, or each step may be executed by a processor provided in a different device.

[0020] In S1, at least one processor acquires goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from a plurality of users and allows users to share the progress of achievement of each goal.

[0021] In S2, at least one processor determines the compatibility of the goal obtained in S1 with evaluation criteria for evaluating users who have registered or achieved the goal.

[0022] As described above, the determination method according to this exemplary embodiment includes a configuration in which at least one processor acquires goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows users to share the progress of each goal among the users, and determines the conformity of the acquired goals with evaluation criteria that evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals. Therefore, the determination method according to this embodiment makes it possible to appropriately evaluate users who have registered or achieved a goal even if evaluation criteria are not defined for the registered goal.

[0023] [Embodiment 2] (Outline of Goal Sharing Service) An information processing device 2 according to this exemplary embodiment is a device used in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows the users to share their achievement status of each goal. More specifically, the information processing device 2 is a device that determines the conformity between the goals registered in the goal sharing service and evaluation criteria that evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals. Here, prior to describing the information processing device 2, an outline of the goal sharing service will be described with reference to FIG. 3.

[0024] 3 is a diagram illustrating an overview of the goal sharing service. The goal sharing service accepts goal registrations from multiple users. The left side of FIG. 3 shows an example in which user X, who owns a terminal device Tx, among three users X to Z, has registered a goal in the goal sharing service.

[0025] An image 3a showing a registered goal is displayed on the display unit of the terminal device Tx. The image 3a includes a content display field 31a that displays the content of the goal and an achievement status display field 32a that displays the achievement status of the goal. A medal icon is displayed in dashed lines in the achievement status display field 32a, and the dashed icon indicates that the goal has not been achieved.

[0026] The content display field 31a displays the title of the registered goal, "Knowledge Sharing," along with a description of the goal and the conditions for achieving it. All of these are entered and registered by user X via the terminal device Tx. In this way, users of the goal sharing service can register goals of any content. Note that the target users of the goal sharing service are not particularly limited. For example, the target users may be employees of a company, students of a school, athletes in a sport, etc.

[0027] In the goal sharing service, the registered goals are shared among users of the service. That is, the goal registered by user X can be challenged by user X, and users who have not registered the goal, such as users Y and Z, can also challenge the goal.

[0028] Therefore, when a new goal is registered, each user of the goal sharing service may be notified of this. In the example of Fig. 3, a message screen 3c indicating that a new goal has been registered is displayed on the display screen of the terminal device Tz owned by user Z. Although not shown in the figure, a similar screen can also be viewed from the terminal device Ty of user Y.

[0029] The message screen 3c displays the title of the registered goal and a message indicating that the goal has been registered, as well as a key 31c for displaying the details of the registered goal and a key 32c for starting a challenge to the goal. When user Z selects key 31c, a description of the goal and the conditions for achieving it are displayed on the terminal device Tz. Furthermore, when user Z selects key 32c, the fact that user Z has started a challenge to the goal is registered in the goal sharing service.

[0030] The above-mentioned notification may be made by sending a message to each user using, for example, email, or by posting a message on a timeline or the like that can be viewed by each user of the goal-sharing service. The notification may be made to all or some of the users of the goal-sharing service. For example, the notification may be made to only users who are registered as members of the same group as the user who registered the goal. The same applies to the notification of message 3d, which will be described later.

[0031] The right side of Figure 3 shows an example in which a user Z who owns a terminal device Tz has achieved the goal registered as described above. An image 3b is displayed on the display unit of the terminal device Tz owned by the user Z. A medal icon is displayed in the achievement status display field 32b in the image 3b, and this icon indicates that the goal has been achieved. Note that there are no particular limitations on how the achiever is notified that the goal has been achieved.

[0032] In the goal sharing service, the achievement of a goal is also shared among users. For example, in the example of Fig. 3, a message screen 3d indicating that the goal has been achieved is displayed on the display screen of the terminal device Tx owned by user X. Although not shown in the figure, a similar screen can also be viewed on the terminal device Ty of user Y.

[0033] The message screen 3d displays the title of the achieved goal and the name of the user who achieved it, as well as a key 31d for positively evaluating the goal achievement and a number 32d indicating the number of times positive evaluations have been made in the goal sharing service. When user X selects key 31d, number 32d is incremented. It is also possible to post a message to user Z who has achieved their goal from the message screen 3d.

[0034] (Configuration of information processing device 2) The configuration of the information processing device 2 according to this exemplary embodiment will be described with reference to Fig. 4. Fig. 4 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the information processing device 2. As described above, the information processing device 2 is a device that determines the compatibility between a goal registered in the goal sharing service and an evaluation criterion.

[0035] As shown in the figure, the information processing device 2 includes a control unit 20 that controls each unit of the information processing device 2, and a storage unit 21 that is a storage device that stores various data used by the information processing device 2. The information processing device 2 also includes a communication unit 22 that enables the information processing device 2 to communicate with other devices, an input unit 23 that accepts input to the information processing device 2, and an output unit 24 that enables the information processing device 2 to output data. The control unit 20 includes a target acquisition unit 201, a conformance determination unit 202, a correction unit 203, an evaluation criterion selection unit 204, an output control unit 205, a reception unit 206, and an evaluation unit 207, and the storage unit 21 stores a classification model 211.

[0036] The goal acquisition unit 201 acquires goals registered in the goal sharing service. As described with reference to FIG. 3, the goal sharing service is a service that accepts goal registrations from multiple users and allows the users to share the progress of each goal. Note that a goal here is something that is set to achieve some purpose. Furthermore, acquiring a goal means acquiring data that expresses the goal in any format, such as text.

[0037] The compatibility determination unit 202 determines the compatibility between the goal acquired by the goal acquisition unit 201 and evaluation criteria registered in advance for evaluating users who have registered or achieved the goal. Any evaluation criteria can be registered, and multiple evaluation criteria can also be registered. For example, if a total of three evaluation criteria, "ambition," "contribution to the team," and "foresight," are registered, the compatibility determination unit 202 determines the compatibility between the goal acquired by the goal acquisition unit 201 and these three evaluation criteria. This makes it possible to perform evaluation using evaluation criteria that are compatible with the acquired goal.

[0038] As will be described in detail later, the compatibility determination unit 202 calculates the compatibility between the goal and the evaluation criteria using the classification model 211. The classification model 211 is a model that classifies a goal expressed in text into evaluation criteria that are compatible with the goal.

[0039] The correction unit 203 corrects the degree of conformance calculated by the conformance determination unit 202. Details of the degree of conformance and its correction method will be described later. Note that if correction of the degree of conformance is not necessary, the correction unit 203 is omitted.

[0040] The evaluation criterion selection unit 204 selects, from a plurality of preset evaluation criteria, an evaluation criterion to be used for evaluating a target user who is to be evaluated among users of the goal sharing service, based on the suitability determination result by the suitability determination unit 202. The evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may also select an evaluation criterion based on user-related information about the target user, or may select an evaluation criterion based on both the suitability determination result and the user-related information. Details of the user-related information and a method for selecting an evaluation criterion will be described later.

[0041] The output control unit 205 outputs various information related to the goal sharing service to an output device. The information output mode is not particularly limited, and the output device to which the information is output is also not particularly limited. For example, the output control unit 205 may output information to a device used by a user of the goal sharing service, such as the terminal devices Tx to Tz shown in FIG. 3, or may output information to the output unit 24 provided in the information processing device 2. The information output mode may be, for example, display output, audio output, print output, etc., or a combination of multiple output modes may be used.

[0042] The receiving unit 206 receives a modification of the goal. When the goal is modified, the conformity determination unit 202 determines the conformity of the modified goal with the evaluation criteria. This allows the user who registers a goal to modify the registered goal so that it conforms to the desired evaluation criteria and then re-register it.

[0043] The evaluation unit 207 evaluates users of the goal sharing service. More specifically, the evaluation unit 207 evaluates users from two perspectives: goal achievement and goal registration. In either evaluation, the evaluation criteria selected by the evaluation criteria selection unit 204 are applied. Whether or not a goal has been achieved may be determined based on a self-report by the user who has achieved the goal, or an evaluator such as the user's supervisor may determine whether or not the goal has been achieved and input the determination result into the information processing device 2.

[0044] As described above, the information processing device 2 includes the goal acquisition unit 201 that acquires goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows users to share the achievement status of each goal, and the compatibility determination unit 202 that determines the compatibility between the acquired goals and evaluation criteria that evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals. Therefore, even if evaluation criteria are not defined for the registered goals, it is possible to obtain an effect that it is possible to appropriately evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals.

[0045] Furthermore, the compatibility determination unit 202 determines the compatibility between the goal expressed in the text and the evaluation criteria using a classification model 211 that classifies the goal expressed in the text into evaluation criteria that are compatible with the goal. This provides the effect of being able to determine the compatibility between the goal expressed in the text and the evaluation criteria, in addition to the effect provided by the information processing device 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment.

[0046] As described above, the information processing device 2 includes the receiving unit 206 that receives a modification of the goal, and when the goal is modified, the conformity determination unit 202 determines the conformity of the modified goal with the evaluation criteria. This provides the effects of being able to modify the goal based on the conformity determination result and being able to check whether the modified goal conforms to the evaluation criteria, in addition to the effects provided by the information processing device 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment.

[0047] (Method of determining suitability) The suitability determination unit 202 may determine suitability, for example, for features generated from a goal expressed in text using a classification model 211 generated by machine learning using training data in which evaluation criteria suitable for the goal are associated as correct answer data.

[0048] In this case, the conformance determination unit 202 generates features from the target expressed in text and inputs them to the classification model 211. As a result, the classification model 211 outputs a higher numerical value (for example, a numerical value between 0 and 1) for a target that is more likely to conform to the evaluation criterion. This numerical value will be referred to as conformance hereinafter. Note that feature extraction may also be performed by the classification model 211 (i.e., the classification model 211 is used, which performs both feature extraction and classification). In this case, the conformance determination unit 202 simply inputs text representing the target to the classification model 211.

[0049] The conformance determination unit 202 may use the conformance as a conformance determination result. For example, assume that a classification model 211 is used that is trained using training data in which conforming evaluation criteria are associated as ground truth data with respect to multiple targets that conform to any of three evaluation criteria. In this case, the classification model 211 outputs a conformance for each of the three evaluation criteria, and the conformance determination unit 202 may use these conformances as conformance determination results.

[0050] The method of determining conformance is not limited to the above example. For example, the conformance determination unit 202 may determine whether a target conforms to the evaluation criteria by, for example, comparing the calculated conformance with a threshold value. In this case, the conformance determination result indicates the conforming evaluation criteria. For example, suppose the conformance threshold is 0.6, and the conformance of a certain target with respect to three evaluation criteria is 0.7, 0.2, and 0.1, respectively. In this case, the conformance determination unit 202 determines that the target conforms to the first evaluation criterion, and outputs information indicating the first evaluation criterion as the determination result.

[0051] The conformance determination unit 202 may also determine conformance between a goal and an evaluation criterion by comparing a feature generated from the text representing the goal with a feature generated from the text representing the evaluation criterion. For example, the conformance determination unit 202 may calculate the cosine similarity between the feature generated from the text representing the goal and the feature generated from the text representing the evaluation criterion as the conformance of the goal with the evaluation criterion.

[0052] (Method of correcting the degree of conformance) It is only necessary to determine in advance the method of correcting the degree of conformance by the correction unit 203. For example, the correction unit 203 may correct the degree of conformance based on user-related information regarding a target user who is to be evaluated among users of the goal sharing service.

[0053] For example, if an evaluator who is in a position to evaluate the target user, such as the target user's boss, has registered evaluation criteria that the target user wants to emphasize in evaluating the target user, the correction unit 203 may use the evaluation criteria as user-related information to correct the degree of conformance. Similarly, if the target user has registered evaluation criteria that the target user wants to emphasize, such as annual goals, the correction unit 203 may use the evaluation criteria as user-related information to correct the degree of conformance.

[0054] In these cases, the correction unit 203 may correct the degree of conformance with the evaluation criterion that the evaluator or target user wants to emphasize to a larger value. For example, if the evaluation criterion that the evaluator or target user wants to emphasize is "ambition," the correction unit 203 may correct the degree of conformance with "ambition" calculated by the conformance determination unit 202 by multiplying it by a weight greater than 1. The weight may be set in advance.

[0055] Furthermore, if a category is set for the registered target, the correction unit 203 may correct the degree of conformance using the category. For example, weights according to conformance with various categories may be set in advance for each evaluation criterion. This allows the correction unit 203 to correct the degree of conformance by multiplying the degree of conformance by the weight according to the category.

[0056] For example, suppose a category of concepts that is included in some of multiple evaluation criteria or a category of concepts similar to some of multiple evaluation criteria is set for a certain goal. For example, if a category of "skill improvement" that is included in the evaluation criterion of "ambition" is set, the correction unit 203 may correct the suitability of the evaluation criterion by multiplying it by a weight greater than 1. This allows the suitability to be corrected to a value corresponding to the category set for the goal.

[0057] For example, if evaluation criteria related to work are set and the category set for a certain goal indicates that the goal is a private goal that is not directly related to work (e.g., a category such as "health management"), the correction unit 203 may correct the degree of conformance to the evaluation criteria to a lower value by, for example, multiplying the degree of conformance by a weight less than 1.

[0058] In this way, goals that are unlikely to conform to the set evaluation criteria may be excluded from the conformance assessment and evaluation. However, it is preferable to allow users to register private goals. This is to contribute to increasing the frequency of use of the goal sharing service and to making it a habit.

[0059] (Display Example of Compatibility Determination Result) Fig. 5 is a diagram showing a display example of the compatibility determination result by the compatibility determination unit 202. More specifically, Fig. 5 shows an image 3a (the same as that shown in Fig. 3) showing the registered goal, along with a graph 5 showing the compatibility determination result. The graph 5 is a radar chart showing the compatibility of the goal shown in the image 3a with respect to five evaluation criteria: foresight, ambition, initiative, contribution to the team, and strategy. Note that the compatibility may be corrected by the correction unit 203.

[0060] The output control unit 205 may display the determination result of the conformity determination unit 202 in the form of such a graph, thereby allowing the user to recognize at a glance how well the target conforms to each evaluation criterion.

[0061] The output control unit 205 may display the evaluation criteria selected by the evaluation criteria selection unit 204. In this case, it is possible to present to the user the evaluation criteria that match the target (which can also be rephrased as criteria used for evaluation) from among the multiple evaluation criteria.

[0062] The goal sharing service also allows users to modify goals. For example, the receiving unit 206 may receive modifications to at least one of the title, description, and achievement conditions on the image 3 a. The receiving unit 206 may also receive modifications to associate a category with the goal.

[0063] When the receiving unit 206 receives a goal modification, the compatibility determination unit 202 calculates the compatibility between the modified goal and the evaluation criteria. Then, the output control unit 205 displays the newly calculated compatibility. At this time, the output control unit 205 may display a radar chart showing the compatibility between the pre-modification goal and each evaluation criterion and a radar chart showing the compatibility between the modified goal and each evaluation criterion superimposed on one graph. This allows the user to recognize the extent to which the goal modification has affected the compatibility with each evaluation criterion.

[0064] (Method of selecting evaluation criteria) The method of selecting evaluation criteria by the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may also be determined in advance. For example, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may select a predetermined number of evaluation criteria in descending order of the degree of conformance calculated by the conformance determination unit 202 (which may be after correction by the correction unit 203). The number of evaluation criteria to be selected is determined in advance. Furthermore, for example, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may select one or more evaluation criteria whose degree of conformance calculated by the conformance determination unit 202 (which may be after correction by the correction unit 203) is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold.

[0065] The evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may select, from among a plurality of preset evaluation criteria, an evaluation criterion to be used for evaluating a target user who is a target of evaluation among users of the goal sharing service, based on the user-related information about the target user and the suitability determination result. This provides the effect of being able to select an evaluation criterion appropriate for the target user, in addition to the effect provided by the information processing device 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment.

[0066] A method for selecting an evaluation criterion based on the user-related information may also be determined in advance. For example, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may select the evaluation criterion with the highest degree of suitability corrected by the correction unit 203 based on the user-related information as the evaluation criterion to be used for evaluating the target user.

[0067] Furthermore, for example, when specific user-related information is acquired, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may preferentially select evaluation criteria corresponding to the user-related information. For example, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may acquire, as user-related information, information indicating evaluation criteria that the target user or their evaluator wants to emphasize (e.g., annual goals). In this case, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may select evaluation criteria indicated in the user-related information from among evaluation criteria with a high degree of suitability (which may be corrected or uncorrected) (or above a predetermined threshold). Note that the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may select evaluation criteria indicated in the user-related information regardless of their degree of suitability.

[0068] Furthermore, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may change the method of selecting an evaluation criterion depending on the value of the degree of suitability calculated by the suitability determination unit 202. For example, when it is difficult to select an optimal evaluation criterion for evaluating the target user based only on the degree of suitability, such as when the degrees of suitability calculated by the suitability determination unit 202 for multiple evaluation criteria are all within a range of 0.45 to 0.55, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may select an evaluation criterion by referring to user-related information.

[0069] (Display example of aggregated data) The evaluation unit 207 evaluates users who have achieved goals registered in the goal sharing service, as well as users who have registered the goals. The evaluation criteria selected by the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 are applied to these evaluations. That is, the evaluation unit 207 evaluates the target user based on the evaluation criteria selected by the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 for each goal registered or achieved by the target user to be evaluated. Specifically, the evaluation unit 207 generates aggregated data that aggregates the evaluation criteria selected by the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 for each goal registered or achieved by the target user, as data indicating the evaluation result of the target user.

[0070] 6 is a diagram showing an example of the display of aggregated data. More specifically, FIG. 6 shows images 3a-1 to 3a-n showing n (n is an integer of 2 or greater) goals registered by the target user, along with graph 6 showing the number of goals registered by the target user tallied for each evaluation criterion. Graph 6 is an example of the aggregated data described above, and is a radar chart showing the results of tallying the number of evaluation criteria (any one of foresight, ambition, initiative, contribution to the team, and strategy) selected by evaluation criterion selection unit 204 for each goal shown in images 3a-1 to 3a-n.

[0071] The output control unit 205 may display the results of the evaluation criteria selected for each goal by the evaluation criteria selection unit 204 using such a graph. This allows the user to see at a glance how many goals have been registered and which evaluation criteria they meet. Similarly, the evaluation unit 207 may generate, as aggregate data, a graph that tallies the number of goals achieved by the target user for each evaluation criterion.

[0072] In addition, the above aggregation may be weighted by the degree of suitability. For example, if the degree of suitability of the evaluation criterion "foresight" selected for one target is 0.7 and the degree of suitability of the evaluation criterion "foresight" selected for another target is 0.3, the evaluation unit 207 may calculate the aggregation result of the evaluation criterion "foresight" as 0.3 + 0.7 = 1.0. Furthermore, the aggregated data does not necessarily have to be in the form of a graph; for example, the output control unit 205 may display a numerical value indicating the number of targets for each evaluation criterion.

[0073] As described above, the information processing device 2 includes the output control unit 205 that causes the output device to output aggregate data that is an aggregate of the evaluation criteria selected by the evaluation criteria selection unit 204 for the goals that the target user has registered or achieved. This provides the effect of allowing the target user to recognize what evaluation criteria the goals that the target user has registered or achieved so far correspond to, in addition to the effect provided by the information processing device 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment.

[0074] The graph 6 also includes radar charts 61 and 62, which are aggregated data generated for goals registered by the target user during different periods. Specifically, the radar chart 61 shows the number of goals registered by the target user during the most recent predetermined period, aggregated for each evaluation criterion selected by the evaluation criterion selection unit 204. On the other hand, the radar chart 62 shows the number of goals registered by the target user before the predetermined period, aggregated for each evaluation criterion selected by the evaluation criterion selection unit 204.

[0075] By displaying the radar charts 61 and 62 superimposed on one graph, it is possible to see at a glance how the evaluation criteria for the target user's most recently registered goal have changed from the evaluation criteria for the previously registered goals. Similarly, it is also possible to display aggregated results for three or more periods. Similarly, the output control unit 205 may also display aggregated data (which may or may not be a graph) that aggregates the number of goals the target user has achieved over multiple different periods for each evaluation criterion.

[0076] As described above, the output control unit 205 may associate and display aggregated data generated for goals registered or achieved by the target user over multiple different time periods. This provides the effect of allowing the target user to recognize changes in the evaluation criteria for the goals registered or achieved by the target user, in addition to the effect provided by the information processing device 1 according to the exemplary embodiment 1.

[0077] In the above case, the evaluation unit 207 may set the period so that the number of goals in each period is equal, or may normalize the number of times each evaluation criterion is met to create aggregate data. This allows accurate recognition of changes in the evaluation criteria for the goals in each period.

[0078] The evaluation unit 207 may also generate an evaluation result that comprehensively evaluates the registered goals and the achieved goals. For example, the evaluation unit 207 may calculate a score for each evaluation criterion for each registered goal, and may also calculate a score for each evaluation criterion for the achieved goals, and may total these scores for each evaluation criterion to obtain the evaluation result.

[0079] The score calculation method may be determined in advance. For example, for goal registration, the score may be calculated according to a rule such that, for each goal registration, +10 points are added to the evaluation criterion that matches the goal, and for goal achievement, +15 points are added to the evaluation criterion that matches the goal, for each goal achievement. In this case, the output control unit 205 may display the calculated scores for each evaluation criterion as a radar chart, for example, as shown in FIG. 6.

[0080] (Processing flow when registering a target) The processing flow executed by the information processing device 2 when registering a target will be described with reference to Fig. 7. Fig. 7 is a flow chart showing the processing flow executed by the information processing device 2 when registering a target. An example of registering a target using the terminal device Tx shown in Fig. 3 will be described below.

[0081] In S21, the target acquisition unit 201 accepts the registration of a target. Specifically, the target acquisition unit 201 accepts the registration of a target by the terminal device Tx through communication via the communication unit 22, and thereby acquires the target (specifically, text representing the target). In this way, the process of acquiring a target by the target acquisition unit 201 may be a process of accepting the registration of a target.

[0082] In S22, the conformance determination unit 202 determines conformance between the goal acquired in S21 and each evaluation criterion. Specifically, the conformance determination unit 202 generates features from the text representing the goal acquired in S21 and inputs the features to the classification model 211, thereby calculating the conformance indicating conformance with the goal for each of the multiple evaluation criteria. In other words, although it is assumed here that multiple evaluation criteria are registered in advance, it is sufficient that at least one evaluation criterion is registered.

[0083] In S23, the correction unit 203 corrects the degree of conformance calculated in S22. For example, the correction unit 203 may acquire information indicating an evaluation criterion that the user values ​​as user-related information, and correct the degree of conformance to the evaluation criterion so as to increase the degree of conformance.

[0084] In S24, the output control unit 205 outputs the degree of conformance corrected in S23 as the determination result of conformance. For example, the output control unit 205 may output the degree of conformance corrected in S23 to the terminal device Tx by communication via the communication unit 22. The manner in which the degree of conformance is output is not particularly limited, and for example, the output control unit 205 may present the degree of conformance for each evaluation criterion by displaying a radar chart as shown in FIG.

[0085] In S25, the reception unit 206 determines whether or not to modify the target. For example, when the reception unit 206 detects that an input operation for modifying the target has been performed on the terminal device Tx, the reception unit 206 may determine that the target should be modified (YES in S25). Alternatively, when the reception unit 206 detects that an input operation for confirming the target without modifying it has been performed, the reception unit 206 may determine that the target should not be modified (NO in S25). If the determination in S25 is YES, the process proceeds to S26, and if the determination in S25 is NO, the illustrated process ends.

[0086] In S26, the reception unit 206 receives the target correction. For example, the reception unit 206 receives the target correction from the terminal device Tx through communication via the communication unit 22. After that, the process returns to S22, and the suitability of the corrected target is determined.

[0087] S21 and S22 in the flow diagram of Fig. 7 constitute a determination method according to this exemplary embodiment. That is, the determination method shown in Fig. 7 includes acquiring goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows users to share their achievement status of each goal, and determining the conformity of the acquired goals with evaluation criteria used to evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals. Therefore, even if evaluation criteria are not defined for the registered goals, it is possible to appropriately evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals.

[0088] Each user of the goal sharing service can select a goal that suits them from the registered goals as described above and challenge it. The start of a goal challenge is accepted, for example, by the accepting unit 206, and this is registered in the goal sharing service. In addition, the fact that the user has started challenging the goal is notified to other users (which may be limited to users in the same group as the user challenging the goal) by, for example, the output control unit 205. Then, when the user achieves the goal, this is registered in the goal sharing service, and the achievement of the goal is notified to other users (which may be limited to users in the same group as the user challenging the goal) by, for example, the output control unit 205.

[0089] It is also possible that after starting a challenge, the user may find it difficult to achieve or decide that the challenge is not suitable for them. For this reason, the accepting unit 206 may accept a withdrawal of the challenge. When accepting a withdrawal of the challenge, the accepting unit 206 deletes the withdrawn goal from the list of goals being challenged by the user who withdrew the challenge.

[0090] (Processing flow when generating aggregated data) The processing flow executed by the information processing device 2 when generating aggregated data will be described with reference to Fig. 8. Fig. 8 is a flow diagram showing the processing flow executed by the information processing device 2 when generating aggregated data. An example of generating aggregated data for user X shown in Fig. 3 will be described below.

[0091] In S31, the goal acquisition unit 201 acquires one of the goals registered in the goal sharing service by user X. The goals registered by each user are recorded in the storage unit 21 or the like in association with the identification information of each user.

[0092] In S32, the conformance determination unit 202 determines the conformance between the goal acquired in S31 and each evaluation criterion. Specifically, the conformance determination unit 202 generates features from the text representing the goal acquired in S21 and inputs the features to the classification model 211, thereby calculating the conformance indicating the conformance with the goal for each of the multiple evaluation criteria. In other words, although it is assumed here that multiple evaluation criteria are registered in advance, it is sufficient that at least one evaluation criterion is registered.

[0093] In S33, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 determines whether to select an evaluation criterion using user-related information. The criteria for determining whether to use user-related information may be determined in advance. For example, when selecting one evaluation criterion for one goal, the user-related information may be used if the difference between the maximum and second-largest fitness values ​​calculated for each evaluation criterion is equal to or less than a predetermined threshold. If S33 returns YES, the process proceeds to S34; if S33 returns NO, the process proceeds to S35. Note that the processing of S33 may be omitted. In this case, the evaluation criterion may always be selected using user-related information, or the evaluation criterion may always be selected without using user-related information.

[0094] In S34, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 acquires user-related information about user X and selects an evaluation criterion using the acquired user-related information. For example, if information indicating an evaluation criterion that user X wants to emphasize is acquired as user-related information, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may select that evaluation criterion. Note that if a category is set for the goal acquired in S31, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may select an evaluation criterion taking the set category into consideration. After this, the process proceeds to S36.

[0095] On the other hand, in S35, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 selects evaluation criteria without using user-related information. For example, the evaluation criterion selection unit 204 may select a predetermined number of evaluation criteria in descending order of suitability. After this, the process proceeds to S36.

[0096] In S36, the goal acquisition unit 201 determines whether all goals registered by user X have been acquired. If the determination in S36 is YES, the process proceeds to S37. On the other hand, if the determination in S36 is NO, the process returns to S31, where the goal acquisition unit 201 acquires one of the goals registered by user X that has not yet been acquired.

[0097] In S37, the evaluation unit 207 generates aggregated data based on the results of the processes in S31 to S36. For example, the evaluation unit 207 may generate a radar chart 61 as shown in Fig. 6 as the aggregated data. Furthermore, the output control unit 205 may output the generated aggregated data to the terminal device Tx.

[0098] Note that output of the aggregated data is not essential. For example, the process of FIG. 8 may be executed when a predetermined number of goals are registered or achieved, or when a predetermined deadline is reached. In this case, the generated aggregated data may be stored in the storage unit 21 or the like without being output. This allows the stored aggregated data to be read out and quickly presented when the user performs an operation to view the aggregated data.

[0099] Furthermore, by setting the target acquired in S31 as a target registered for a predetermined period, it is possible to generate aggregated data for that predetermined period. Then, by changing the period and repeatedly performing the process of FIG. 8, aggregated data for each different period can be generated and output in association with each other.

[0100] Although the example of generating aggregated data for registered goals has been described above, the evaluation unit 207 can also generate aggregated data for achieved goals in a similar manner. Furthermore, as described above, the evaluation unit 207 may generate an evaluation result that comprehensively evaluates the goals achieved by the target user and the registered goals.

[0101] S31 and S32 in the flow diagram of Fig. 8 constitute a determination method according to this exemplary embodiment. That is, the determination method shown in Fig. 8 includes acquiring goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows users to share their achievement status of each goal, and determining the conformity of the acquired goals with evaluation criteria that evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals. Therefore, even if evaluation criteria are not defined for the registered goals, it is possible to appropriately evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals.

[0102] [Modification] The execution entity of each process described in the above exemplary embodiment is arbitrary and is not limited to the above example. For example, a system having the same functions as the information processing devices 1 and 2 can be constructed using multiple devices that can communicate with each other. Furthermore, the execution entities of each process shown in each flowchart in Figures 7 and 8 may be a single device (which may also be referred to as a processor) or multiple devices (which may also be referred to as processors).

[0103] [Example of Software Implementation] Some or all of the functions of the information processing devices 1 and 2 may be implemented by a logic circuit (hardware) formed on an integrated circuit (IC chip) or the like, or may be implemented by software.

[0104] In the latter case, the information processing devices 1 and 2 are realized, for example, by a computer that executes instructions of a program, which is software that realizes each function. An example of such a computer (hereinafter referred to as computer C) is shown in FIG. 9. The computer C includes at least one processor C1 and at least one memory C2. The memory C2 stores a program P (determination program) for operating the computer C as the information processing device 1 or 2. In the computer C, the processor C1 reads and executes the program P from the memory C2, thereby realizing each function of the information processing device 1 or 2.

[0105] The processor C1 may be, for example, a central processing unit (CPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU), a digital signal processor (DSP), a microprocessing unit (MPU), a floating point number processing unit (FPU), a physics processing unit (PPU), a tensor processing unit (TPU), a quantum processor, a microcontroller, or a combination thereof. The recording medium may be a non-transitory tangible medium, such as a read-only memory (ROM), a tape, a disk, a card, a semiconductor memory, a programmable logic circuit, or a combination thereof. The computer may further include a random access memory (RAM) for expanding the program. The program may be supplied to the computer via any transmission medium capable of transmitting the program (such as a communication network or broadcast waves). Note that one aspect of the present invention may also be realized in the form of a data signal embedded in a carrier wave, in which the program is embodied by electronic transmission.

[0106] [Additional Note 1] The present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments, and various modifications are possible within the scope of the claims. For example, embodiments obtained by appropriately combining the technical means disclosed in the above-described embodiments are also included in the technical scope of the present invention.

[0107] [Additional Note 2] Part or all of the above-described embodiment can also be described as follows: However, the present invention is not limited to the following described aspects.

[0108] The information processing device according to aspect 1 includes a goal acquisition means for acquiring the goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows users to share the achievement status of each goal by each user, and a compatibility determination means for determining the compatibility between the acquired goals and evaluation criteria that evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals.

[0109] The information processing device of aspect 2, in aspect 1, is provided with an evaluation criterion selection means that selects, from among a plurality of pre-set evaluation criteria, an evaluation criterion to be used for evaluating a target user who is the subject of evaluation among users of the goal sharing service, based on user-related information about the target user and the suitability determination result.

[0110] The information processing device according to aspect 3 is the same as in aspect 2, and further includes an output control means for causing an output device to output aggregated data that aggregates the selected evaluation criteria for the goals registered or achieved by the target user.

[0111] In the information processing device according to aspect 4, in addition to aspect 3, the output control means associates and displays the aggregated data generated for goals registered or achieved by the target user during a plurality of different periods.

[0112] In the information processing device of aspect 5, in any of aspects 1 to 4, the compatibility determination means determines the compatibility between the goal expressed in text and the evaluation criteria using a classification model that classifies the goal expressed in text into the evaluation criteria that are compatible with the goal.

[0113] The information processing device of aspect 6 is any of aspects 1 to 5, and includes a receiving means for receiving a modification of the goal, and when the goal is modified, the conformity determination means determines the conformity of the modified goal with the evaluation criteria.

[0114] A determination method according to aspect 7 includes at least one processor acquiring the goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows users to share the achievement status of each goal, and determining the compatibility of the acquired goals with evaluation criteria that evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals.

[0115] In the determination method according to aspect 8, in the determination of compatibility in aspect 7, a classification model is used to classify the goal expressed in text into the evaluation criteria that are compatible with the goal, and the compatibility between the goal expressed in text and the evaluation criteria is determined.

[0116] The judgment program of aspect 9 causes a computer to function as a goal acquisition means for acquiring goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from multiple users and allows users to share their achievement status of each goal, and a compatibility judgment means for determining the compatibility between the acquired goals and evaluation criteria for evaluating users who have registered or achieved the goals.

[0117] In the judgment program of aspect 10, in aspect 9, the compatibility judgment means judges the compatibility between the goal expressed in text and the evaluation criteria using a classification model that classifies the goal expressed in text into the evaluation criteria that are compatible with the goal.

[0118] [Additional Note 3] Part or all of the above-described embodiment can also be expressed as follows.

[0119] An information processing device having at least one processor that executes a goal acquisition process that acquires the goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts goal registrations from multiple users and allows users to share the achievement status of each goal by each user, and a compatibility determination process that determines the compatibility between the acquired goals and evaluation criteria that evaluate users who have registered or achieved the goals.

[0120] The information processing device may further include a memory that stores a determination program for causing the processor to execute the target acquisition process and the conformity determination process. The determination program may be recorded on a computer-readable, non-transitory, tangible recording medium.

[0121] REFERENCE SIGNS LIST 1 Information processing device 11 Target acquisition unit (target acquisition means) 12 Conformity determination unit (conformity determination means) 2 Information processing device 201 Target acquisition unit (target acquisition means) 202 Conformity determination unit (conformity determination means) 204 Evaluation criterion selection unit (evaluation criterion selection means) 205 Output control unit (output control means) 206 Reception unit (reception means) 211 Classification model

Claims

1. a goal acquisition means for acquiring the goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from a plurality of users and allows the users to share the progress of achievement of each goal; An information processing device comprising: a conformity determination means for determining conformity between the acquired goal and an evaluation standard for evaluating a user who has registered or achieved the goal.

2. 2. The information processing device according to claim 1, further comprising an evaluation criterion selection means for selecting, from among a plurality of pre-set evaluation criteria, an evaluation criterion to be used for evaluating a target user among users of the goal sharing service who is to be evaluated, based on user-related information about the target user and the suitability determination result.

3. The information processing device according to claim 2 , further comprising an output control means for causing an output device to output summary data obtained by summarizing the selected evaluation criteria for the goals registered or achieved by the target user.

4. The information processing device according to claim 3 , wherein the output control means displays the aggregated data generated for the goals registered or achieved by the target user in a plurality of different periods in association with each other.

5. 3. The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the conformance determination means determines conformance between the goal expressed in text and the evaluation criteria using a classification model that classifies the goal expressed in text into the evaluation criteria that conform to the goal.

6. a receiving means for receiving a correction of the target; The information processing apparatus according to claim 1 , wherein the conformity determination means determines conformity between the revised target and the evaluation criterion when the target is revised.

7. At least one processor Acquiring the goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from a plurality of users and allows users to share the achievement status of each goal; and determining the conformity between the acquired goal and evaluation criteria for evaluating users who have registered or achieved the goal.

8. The method of claim 7, wherein the determination of compatibility involves determining compatibility between the goal expressed in text and the evaluation criteria using a classification model that classifies the goal expressed in text into the evaluation criteria that are compatible with the goal.

9. Computer, a goal acquisition means for acquiring the goals registered in a goal sharing service that accepts registration of goals from a plurality of users and allows the users to share the achievement status of each goal; a judgment program that functions as a conformity judgment means for judging conformity between the acquired goal and an evaluation criterion for evaluating a user who has registered or achieved the goal;

10. 10. The evaluation program according to claim 9, wherein the compatibility determination means determines compatibility between the goal expressed in text and the evaluation criteria using a classification model that classifies the goal expressed in text into the evaluation criteria that are compatible with the goal.

Images