Analysis system and method for carrying out an analysis of at least one patent claim

Abstract

The invention relates to an analysis system and to a method for carrying out an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document, the system having a user interface (3) with a display (5), designed and configured to receive a user input, wherein the user input comprises at least one input of at least one first patent document and at least one first patent claim of the first patent document and an input of at least one second patent document, and at least one second patent claim of the second patent document; at least one memory (11); and a processor (10) which interacts with the user interface (3) and the memory (6). Program instructions which can be executed by the processor (10) are stored in the memory (11) for receiving an evaluation of a selected feature of the first patent claim from the user interface (3), and for checking whether the at least one second patent claim of the second patent document contains the feature of the at least one first patent claim of the first patent document linked to the evaluation, and for displaying the evaluation linked to the feature of the first patent claim in context with the at least one second patent claim of the second patent document on the display (5) if the examination has shown that the second patent claim of the second patent document contains the feature of the first patent claim of the first patent document linked to the evaluation.

Description

[0001] DESCRIPTION

[0002] Analysis system and method for performing an analysis of at least one patent claim

[0003] The invention relates to analysis systems for performing an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document according to claim 1 and to a machine-implemented method for performing an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document with the aid of an analysis system according to claim 16 and to a program product for a data processing system containing executable program instructions with which the machine-implemented method can be executed on a data processing system, according to claim 30.

[0004] When analyzing patent documents, especially those of competitors, the independent claims are usually examined for their relevance to a company's own products. A patent document is relevant to a company's own product if all features of at least one independent claim are implemented in the company's own product. To examine the individual features of a patent claim, the claim is broken down into its individual features and each of these is then examined for its implementation in the company's own product. Experience has shown that a lot of time is spent in patent monitoring examining features of the relevant product which, due to their generic properties, are already implemented in the product, even though in the interests of effectiveness the objective should be to find at least one feature not implemented in the product in order to be able to classify the patent document as "not relevant" for the company's own product, in the best case scenario.Especially in the case of long patent claims with many features, this mental work becomes strenuous and time-consuming, especially for employees in development departments of companies, which are usually not staffed with trained specialists such as patent attorneys.

[0005] The invention is based on the object of providing an analysis system for performing an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document and a machine-implemented method for performing an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document using an analysis system, which can provide a meaningful analysis and evaluation of the patent document with minimal user effort. Furthermore, a program product for a data processing system is to be provided, which contains executable program instructions with which the machine-implemented method can be executed on a data processing system.

[0006] This object is achieved according to the invention by the features of claims 1, 16 and 30.

[0007] Disclosure of the invention

[0008] According to a first aspect, the invention proposes:

[0009] An analysis system for performing an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document, comprising at least the following: a) A user interface with a display, designed and configured to receive a user input, wherein the user input comprises at least

[0010] - a selection or input of at least one first patent document and at least one first patent claim of the first patent document, and

[0011] - a selection or input of at least one second patent document and at least one second patent claim of the second patent document, b) at least one memory, c) a processor which interacts with the user interface and the memory, wherein d) program instructions executable by the processor are stored in the memory, for

[0012] - automatically or depending on a user input received via the user interface, dividing or segmenting the at least one first patent claim into a plurality of features or feature groups, in particular by means of a structuring module, and

[0013] - displaying the structure or segmentation of the first patent claim into the plurality of features or feature groups on the display, and - receiving a selection of a feature or feature group from the displayed and segmented or structured plurality of features or feature groups of the first patent claim from the user interface, and

[0014] Receiving an evaluation or comment on the selected feature or group of features of the first patent claim from the user interface, and

[0015] Linking, in particular by a linking module of the selected feature or the selected feature group with the evaluation or the comment as an evaluation linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim or as a linked comment, in particular in a linking module of the program instructions, and for

[0016] Storing, in particular in a storage module, the evaluation or commentary of the first patent claim of the first patent document linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group, and

[0017] Checking, in particular by means of a check module of the program instructions, whether the at least one second patent claim of the second patent document contains the stored feature linked to the evaluation or comment or the stored feature group of the at least one first patent claim of the first patent document identically or synonymously, and for

[0018] Generating an instruction signal for the user interface to display the evaluation or comment linked to the selected feature or the selected group of features of the first patent claim in connection with the at least one second patent claim of the second patent document on the display (5), if the examination has shown that the second patent claim of the second patent document contains the stored feature linked to the evaluation or comment or the stored group of features of the first patent claim of the first patent document identically or synonymously. The term "patent document" should be understood broadly in the sense of a technical property right and, in addition to registered, disclosed and granted patents, also include, for example, utility models.

[0019] A user input received via the user interface is intended to mean that the user interface offers a user of the analysis system an opportunity to enter data and / or to mark options or fields presented by the user interface, in particular by a display of the user interface, in order to thereby enter data into the analysis system.

[0020] An evaluation or comment may, for example, include a comment or a corresponding remark on a feature generated manually by a user of the analysis system or automatically by the analysis system.

[0021] The evaluation or commentary of the first patent claim of the first patent document linked to the selected feature or feature group can be stored in a storage module, which may, in particular, comprise a database. The database can, in particular, be integrated into a cloud.

[0022] The analysis system can also be designed as a structural unit, for example as a PC, tablet, laptop or smartphone, or it can consist of distributed units, whereby in particular the storage device can then be arranged externally from the other units or devices, e.g. as a cloud or external database.

[0023] Advantageously, the particularly automatic structuring or segmentation of at least one patent claim into a plurality of features or feature groups, preferably in a structuring module of the program instructions, saves the effort required for structuring or segmentation by a user who is often inexperienced in these matters. The fact that the evaluations or comments are already stored in the memory module in a linked form and can then be read out in full from there and displayed, for example, via the user interface also contributes to the effort savings.

[0024] In the analysis system, the program instructions executable by the processor may include instructions, particularly in the structuring module, for automatically structuring or segmenting the features or groups of features on the basis of a) sentence parts, punctuation marks, numbers, punctuations, prepositions, conjunctions, logical operators, and / or b) Natural Language Processing (NLP).

[0025] In particular, Natural Language Processing (NLP) can perform at least one of the following functions:

[0026] - Tokenizing, i.e. breaking down into individual words and punctuation marks

[0027] - Stop words, i.e. filler word recognition (in, as, ...)

[0028] - Stemming, i.e. recognizing a word root or a meaning of a word or word root,

[0029] - Detection of sentences, clauses based on punctuation such as commas, periods, spaces,

[0030] - Rule-based matching, i.e. pattern recognition in texts.

[0031] Furthermore, the structure can also be based on patent-typical formulations (“characterized by”, “in particular”).

[0032] The fact that the at least one second patent claim of the second patent document synonymously contains the feature or feature group of the at least one patent claim of the first patent document means that this second patent claim contains a feature or feature group that represents a synonym with respect to the feature or synonyms with respect to the feature group. In particular, the checking module of the program instructions can therefore be provided with intelligence and configured in such a way that it is capable of generating or finding at least one synonym or synonymous term with respect to a feature or feature group.

[0033] Preferably, the evaluation or commentary of the feature or feature group can then also be linked to the corresponding feature or feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document and stored in the memory module as an evaluation or commentary linked to the feature or feature group.

[0034] The advantage lies in the saving of effort in patent analysis, as features of a patent claim of the first patent document, which have been assessed as relevant or not relevant and have now also been identified in the second patent claim of the second patent document, are automatically assigned the same relevance categories (e.g. "relevant" or not relevant") and these assignments are saved, so that a new categorization of this identical or synonymous feature in the second patent claim by a user can be omitted.

[0035] With regard to the evaluation and commenting on features or groups of features of the second patent claim of the second patent document, the analysis system therefore builds on the experience of at least one previous analysis of the first patent claim of the first patent document.

[0036] The more (first) patent claims of (first) patent documents are analyzed and evaluated or commented on using the analysis system, the greater the number of evaluated or commented features or feature groups, which can then possibly be identified in (second) patent claims of (second) patent documents and then no longer need to be evaluated or commented on.

[0037] Consequently, the analysis system automatically transfers the evaluations and comments of features and feature groups of a patent claim of a patent document to features and feature groups of patent claims of other patent documents, without the need for further evaluations or comments with respect to these features and feature groups. Therefore, the more patent claims of patent documents are analyzed using the analysis system in the manner described above, the more related data is stored, for example, in the storage module or database as evaluations linked to features or feature groups, so that the evaluation effort required for analyzing patent documents decreases over time.

[0038] It can also be provided that the analysis controlled by the analysis system or a method described later for carrying out the analysis of at least one patent claim is aborted depending on the type of evaluation or commentary on a feature or group of features of the patent claim. For example, an evaluation of a feature of a patent claim as "not relevant" may be sufficient for the entire patent claim to then be (automatically) evaluated as "not relevant". The background to this procedure is that it is generally sufficient if a feature of an (independent) patent claim is not realized and has therefore been evaluated as "not relevant" if the corresponding patent claim is not infringed by a device or method.

[0039] It is clear that although the first patent claim of the first patent document must be analyzed using the analysis system before the second patent claim of the second patent document, due to the storage of the linked evaluations or comments, an immediate subsequent analysis of the second patent claim of the second patent document is not required. Rather, any time period can elapse between the analysis of the first patent claim of the first patent document and the analysis of the second patent claim of the second patent document.

[0040] The user interface, the test module, the structuring module, the linking module and the storage module are therefore preferably designed to exchange data with each other and are controlled by the processor.

[0041] Preferably, in the analysis system, if the examination, in particular by the examination module of the program instructions, has shown that the second patent claim of the second patent document does not contain the stored feature linked to the evaluation or comment or the stored feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document that is not identical or synonymous with the stored feature linked to the evaluation or comment, the program instructions executable by the processor can comprise instructions for a) structuring or segmenting the second patent claim into a plurality of features or feature groups by a1) receiving the structuring or segmentation from the user interface, or by a2) automatically structuring or segmenting,and for b) displaying the structure or segmentation of the second patent claim of the second patent document into the plurality of features or feature groups of the second patent claim of the second patent document on the display, and for c) receiving a selection of a feature or feature group from the displayed and segmented or structured plurality of features or feature groups of the second patent claim of the second patent document from the user interface, and for d) receiving an evaluation or comment on the selected feature or the selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document from the user interface,and e) linking the selected feature or feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document to the rating or comment as a rating or comment linked to the selected feature or feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document, and f) storing the rating or comment linked to the selected feature or feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document.

[0042] In other words, selected features or groups of features that are not identical or synonymous in the first patent claim of the first patent document are then provided with an evaluation or comment.

[0043] Then, the second patent claim of the second patent document, with whose features or feature groups evaluations or comments have been linked, can in turn form a basis for the analysis of another second patent claim of another second patent document, in which these features or feature groups of the second patent claim are contained identically or synonymously. Consequently, the above expression "at least one second patent document" means that second patent claims of any number of second patent documents can be analyzed using the analysis system.

[0044] In the analysis system, the program instructions executable by the processor can also include instructions for displaying the rating or comment associated with a feature or feature group on the display, in particular in response to user input via the user interface. In other words, ratings or comments associated with a feature or feature group of any patent claim, in particular the first patent claim and / or the at least one second patent claim, can then be displayed on the display.

[0045] Also, in the analysis system, the processor-executable program instructions may include instructions for a) receiving, as user input, an alternative rating to the rating or an alternative comment to the comment as a replacement for the rating or the comment from the user interface, and b) linking the feature or feature group to the alternative rating or to the alternative comment as an alternative rating linked to the feature or feature group or as an alternative comment linked to the feature or feature group, and c) storing the alternative rating or the linked alternative comment linked to the feature or feature group.

[0046] Consequently, the analysis system also offers the possibility of overwriting previously performed evaluations or comments of features or feature groups with alternative evaluations or comments. This should preferably apply to every (first and / or second) patent claim whose features and feature groups have been assigned an evaluation or comment.

[0047] In the analysis system, the program instructions executable by the processor may also include instructions which make the receipt, linking or storage of the alternative assessment or alternative comment dependent on a) a relevant authorization and / or an identity of a user of the analysis system, wherein the authorization and / or the identity of the user is queried via the user interface, and / or b) a number, type or frequency of matching assessments or comments of the feature or feature group which have been received from different users or from a user of the analysis system via the user interface.For example, the more consistent or similar assessments or comments that have been linked and stored with the feature or feature group in the past, the less justification there may be for replacing the assessment or comment with an alternative assessment or comment of the feature or feature group, and the fewer consistent or similar assessments or comments that have been linked and stored with the feature or feature group in the past, the greater justification there may be for replacing the assessment or comment with an alternative assessment or comment of the feature or feature group.

[0048] The program instructions executable by the processor may also include instructions for a) checking the plausibility of evaluations and comments on features or groups of features that are identical or synonymous in the first patent claim of the first patent document and in the second patent claim of the at least one second patent document, b) and for

[0049] - selecting and storing a specific assessment or comment of the identical or synonymous feature among the different assessments or comments using a selection algorithm, and

[0050] - in particular for displaying the first patent document and / or the first patent claim and the second patent claim and / or the at least one second patent document on the display,

[0051] - if the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous group of features has been assessed or commented on differently in the first patent claim of the first patent document and in the second patent claim of the at least one second patent document.

[0052] The selection algorithm can in particular be designed to select and store the specific rating or comment of the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous feature group from the different ratings or comments depending on a) the identity of the user or the identities of the users of the analysis system from which the different ratings of the comments were received, and / or b) the number, frequency or type of matching ratings or comments of the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous feature group received from a user or from different users of the analysis system.

[0053] For example, the user's identity captured by the analysis system can provide an insight into their competence in the field of patents, so that highly competent users are more likely to be given the opportunity to make a selection than less competent users.

[0054] Statistical variables such as the number and / or frequency of consistent ratings or comments for the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous feature group can also play a role in the selection process. For example, the greater the number and / or frequency of consistent ratings or comments, the more likely this may be an argument in favor of selection, and the lower the number and / or frequency of consistent ratings or comments, the more likely this may be an argument against selection.

[0055] The program instructions executable by the processor also include instructions for a) receiving the rating or comment of a feature or group of features as a selection, via the user interface, of a category of rating or comment from a plurality of predefined categories of ratings or comments, and for b) linking and storing the feature or group of features with the selected category of rating or comment.

[0056] The predefined categories of evaluations or comments can, for example, be different relevance categories with respect to the relevance of the feature or feature group, which in particular include at least the category "relevant" and the category "not relevant or irrelevant." The program instructions executable by the processor can also include instructions for linking and storing a patent document, in particular a patent document under the first patent document and the at least one second patent document, with a specific relevance category if at least two features or feature groups, in particular all features or feature groups of a patent claim of this patent document, in particular of the first patent claim or the second patent claim, have been evaluated or commented on with this specific relevance category.

[0057] In a further development, the program instructions executable by the processor may include instructions for displaying a ranking of patent documents on the display based on the specific relevance category or a relevance category selected via the user interface, particularly in response to a request entered via the user interface. Such a ranking may be particularly useful when creating an FTO (Freedom-To-Operate) search.

[0058] With regard to the realization of features or groups of features of patent claims in products or processes, predefined categories of assessments or comments can be, in particular, "relevant," "little relevant," or "not relevant or irrelevant." Furthermore, any intermediate levels are also possible, such as "limited relevance." Therefore, the categories of assessments or comments can be relevance categories with respect to the relevance of the feature or group of features.

[0059] The change of the rating or comment to an alternative rating or alternative comment described above can be carried out within the framework of an rating change module of the program instructions. However, problems can arise if different users of the analysis system assign different ratings or comments to features or feature groups, resulting in, for example, inconsistent or inconsistent ratings or comments for these features or feature groups. This can be particularly important with regard to relevance assessments of features or feature groups. To solve this problem, it can be further provided that, after receiving different ratings or different comments for a feature or feature group, for example,

[0060] - a weighting of the individual ratings or comments, and / or

[0061] - an averaging of ratings or comments, and / or

[0062] - a majority decision is made regarding the number of matching ratings or comments, particularly within the framework of the rating change module. One or more of the measures described above can also be carried out, in particular, depending on which authorization level of several authorization levels a user of the analysis system has, which is received, for example, from the user interface. In particular, the rating change module of the program instructions can therefore include instructions for receiving and checking one authorization level of several authorization levels, whereby the respective authorization level indicates the extent or degree to which the respective user is authorized to make ratings or comments on features or groups of features. This further development should concern both the analysis system and the method described below.

[0063] In the analysis system, the program instructions executable by the processor may also include instructions for displaying different relevances of the relevance categories by different colors on the display of the user interface.

[0064] The program instructions executable by the processor may also include instructions for displaying an evaluation or comment or relevance category associated with a feature or with a group of features or with a patent document on the display, in particular in response to a request entered via the user interface.

[0065] In a further development, the program instructions executable by the processor may comprise instructions for separately representing features or groups of features which a) are listed optionally or alternatively in the first patent claim or in the second patent claim, and / or b) are identical or synonymous in the first patent claim and in the second patent claim.

[0066] In the analysis system, the user interface may also comprise a keyboard and / or a touchscreen for user inputs, designed and configured to enter user inputs comprising alphanumeric characters and / or a selection from predefined and displayed selection options.

[0067] In a second aspect, the invention proposes a machine-implemented method for performing an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document with the aid of an analysis system comprising a user interface with a display, at least one memory and a processor which interacts with the user interface and the memory, wherein program instructions executable by the processor are stored in the memory for performing at least the following steps: a) selecting or entering a first patent document and at least one first patent claim of the first patent document (100) using the user interface, and b) structuring or segmenting the first patent claim into a plurality of features or feature groups by b1) receiving the structuring or segmentation from the user interface, or by b2) automatically structuring or segmenting,and c) displaying the structure or segmentation of the first patent claim of the first patent document into the plurality of features or feature groups of the first patent claim of the first patent document on the display, and d) receiving a selection of a feature or feature group from the displayed and segmented or structured plurality of features or feature groups of the first patent claim of the first patent document from the user interface, and e) receiving an evaluation or comment on the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document from the user interface,and f) linking the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document with the rating or the comment as a rating or comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document, and g) storing the rating or comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document, and h) selecting or entering a second patent document from the plurality of patent documents and at least one second patent claim of the second patent document using the user interface, and i) checking,whether the second patent claim of the second patent document contains the stored feature linked to the rating or comment or the stored feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document identically or synonymously, and j) generating an instruction signal for the user interface to display the rating or comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim in connection with the at least one second patent claim of the second patent document on the display (5), if the examination has shown that the second patent claim of the second patent document contains the stored feature linked to the rating or comment or the stored feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document identically or synonymously.

[0068] In the machine-implemented method described above, steps b) to g) can be repeated until at least some of the features or all of the features or at least some of the feature groups or all of the feature groups have been evaluated or commented on, linked, and the linked evaluations or comments have been saved.

[0069] According to a further development of the machine-implemented method, if the examination has shown that the second patent claim of the second patent document does not contain the stored feature or feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document linked to the evaluation or comment identically or synonymously, at least the following steps can be carried out with respect to the second patent claim of the second patent document: a) structuring or segmenting the second patent claim into a plurality of features or feature groups by a1) receiving the structuring or segmentation from the user interface, or by a2) automatically structuring or segmenting,and b) displaying the structure or segmentation of the second patent claim of the second patent document into the plurality of features or feature groups of the second patent claim of the second patent document on the display, and c) receiving a selection of a feature or feature group from the displayed and segmented or structured plurality of features or feature groups of the second patent claim of the second patent document from the user interface, and d) receiving an evaluation or comment on the selected feature or the selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document from the user interface,and e) linking the selected feature or selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document with the rating or comment as a rating or comment linked to the selected feature or selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document; f) storing the rating or comment linked to the selected feature or selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document. In a further development of the machine-implemented method described above, steps a) to f) can be repeated until at least some of the features or all of the features or at least some of the feature groups or all of the feature groups have been rated or commented on, linked, and the linked ratings or comments have been stored.

[0070] In the machine-implemented method, the evaluation or comment associated with a feature or a group of features can also be shown on the display in response to a request made via the user interface.

[0071] Also, in the machine-implemented method, in particular in response to the presentation of the linked rating or the linked comment, at least the following steps can be carried out: a) receiving an alternative rating with respect to the rating or an alternative comment with respect to the comment as a replacement for the rating or the comment from the user interface, and b) linking the feature or the feature group to the alternative rating or to the alternative comment as an alternative rating linked to the feature or the feature group or as a linked alternative comment, and c) storing the alternative rating or the linked alternative comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group.

[0072] Also, in the machine-implemented method, receiving, linking or storing the alternative evaluation or alternative comment linked to the selected feature or feature group may be dependent on receiving a relevant authorization and / or on the identity of the respective user from the user interface.

[0073] In the machine-implemented method, receiving the rating or comment on the feature or feature group can also include selecting a rating or comment category from a plurality of predefined rating or comment categories. The rating or comment categories can be relevance categories with respect to the relevance of the feature or feature group. Different relevances of the relevance categories can then be represented on the display in different colors, for example, the color "red" for relevant features or feature groups and the color "green" for less or irrelevant features or feature groups.

[0074] The machine-implemented method may also comprise linking and storing a patent document, in particular a patent document under the first patent document and the at least one second patent document with a specific relevance category, if at least two features or feature groups, in particular all features or feature groups of a patent claim of this patent document, in particular of the first patent claim or the second patent claim, have been evaluated or commented on with this specific relevance category.

[0075] In a further development, the machine-implemented system can display a ranking of patent documents on the display related to the specific relevance category or a relevance category selected via the user interface, in particular in response to a request to this effect.

[0076] Preferably, the machine-implemented method can also be characterized by a) checking the plausibility of evaluations and comments of features or groups of features that are identical or synonymous in the first patent claim of the first patent document and in the second patent claim of the at least one second patent document, b) and by

[0077] - selecting and storing a specific assessment or comment of the identical or synonymous feature among the different assessments or comments using a selection algorithm, and

[0078] - in particular for displaying the first patent document and / or the first patent claim and the second patent claim and / or the at least one second patent document on the display,

[0079] - if the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous group of features has been assessed or commented on differently in the first patent claim of the first patent document and in the second patent claim of the at least one second patent document

[0080] It can also preferably be provided in the machine-implemented method that the selection algorithm selects and stores the specific rating or comment of the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous feature group from the different ratings or comments depending on a) the identity of the user or the identities of the users from whom or from whom the different ratings of the comments were received, and / or b) the number, frequency or type of matching ratings or comments of the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous feature group that were received from a user or from different users of the analysis system.

[0081] The machine-implemented method can also automatically structure or segment the features or groups of features on the basis of a) sentence parts, punctuation marks, numbers, punctuations, prepositions, conjunctions, logical operators, and / or b) natural language processing (NLP).

[0082] In a third aspect of the invention, a program product for a data processing system is proposed which contains executable program instructions with which the machine-implemented method described above can be carried out.

[0083] Further measures improving the invention are presented in more detail below together with the description of embodiments of the invention with reference to the drawing.

[0084] drawing

[0085] The drawing shows

[0086] Fig. 1 is a schematic diagram of a preferred embodiment of an analysis system for performing an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document according to a preferred embodiment of the invention;

[0087] Fig. 2 shows a table of features of a patent claim 1 of a first patent document generated by the analysis system of Fig. 1;

[0088] Fig. 3 shows a table of features of a patent claim 1 of a second patent document generated by the analysis system of Fig. 1;

[0089] Fig. 4A is a flowchart of a preferred embodiment of a computer-implemented method according to the invention for performing an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document, in particular with the aid of the analysis system of Fig. 1;

[0090] FIG. 4B shows a flowchart of another embodiment of the computer-implemented method according to the invention.

[0091] Description of the embodiments

[0092] The preferred embodiment of an analysis system 1 shown in Fig. 1 for carrying out an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document uses, for example, hardware 2 in the form of a PC, a laptop or a tablet computer, wherein software is implemented in or on the hardware 2 which embodies a machine-implemented method, described later, for controlling the analysis with the aid of the analysis system 1.

[0093] The analysis system 1 or its hardware 2 comprises a user interface 3 with a display 5 and a keyboard 4, wherein the user interface 3 is designed and configured to receive user input, here in particular via the keyboard 4 and / or via other user input means. Furthermore, the hardware 2 comprises a memory 11 and a processor 10, which interacts with the memory 11 and the user interface 3.

[0094] The memory 11 is preferably a programmable memory (PROM) (read-only memory). Program instructions executable by the processor 10 are stored in the memory 11. These instructions include, for example, a structuring module 7, a linking module 8, and a test module 9. Furthermore, a memory module 6, which is implemented here, for example, as a random access memory (RAM), is also present as part of the hardware 2.

[0095] The user interface 3 can, controlled by the program instructions of the processor 10, read input masks stored there from a memory module 6, which are then shown on the display 5 for receiving inputs and / or data, in particular evaluations and comments on features of patent claims. In particular, it is designed and configured to receive a user input, wherein the user input comprises at least

[0096] - a selection or input of at least one first patent document and at least one first patent claim of the first patent document, and

[0097] - a selection or input of at least one second patent document and at least one second patent claim of the second patent document,

[0098] The selection of a patent document can in particular be made from a plurality of patent documents stored in the storage module 6, here for example a patent document 1. In addition, there is the possibility of selecting one or more patent claims from a plurality of patent claims of this patent document 1 via the user interface 3, here for example a patent claim 1 of the patent document 1.

[0099] Alternatively, the user interface 3 can be designed such that a user enters an official file number such as the number (e.g. EP X YYY ZZZ A1 ) of a patent document via an input mask shown on the display 5 and this patent document identified in this way is then loaded into the storage module 6 from an external database, for example via a connection such as a data network.

[0100] The user interface 3 is therefore designed such that, under the control of the processor, it can read out an input mask stored in the memory module 6, which input mask is then shown on the display 5 to receive inputs and / or data, such as, in particular, patent data from patent documents, evaluations and comments on features of patent claims of patent documents, etc. For example, an input mask can be provided on the user interface 3, via which a user selects, for example, the patent document 1, in particular from a plurality of patent documents stored in the memory module 6, as well as the independent patent claim 1 of this patent document 1, for example. In the present example, it is therefore assumed that the user has selected the patent document 1 indicated in Fig. 2 as the selected patent document via the input mask and has selected the independent patent claim 1 of this patent document 1.

[0101] According to a preferred embodiment, the structuring module 7 is designed and configured for automatically structuring or segmenting, here for example, patent claim 1 of patent document 1 into a plurality 1 to n of features or feature groups.

[0102] For example, if this first patent claim 1 of Patent Document 1 reads:

[0103] “Electro-pneumatic pressure control module with control electronics with a circuit board and a pressure sensor arranged on the circuit board” – the structuring module 7, which is equipped with a certain level of intelligence, recognizes the following features of this patent claim 1, for example, based on the preposition “with” and then structures them accordingly:

[0104] - Electro-pneumatic pressure control module (feature 1.0),

[0105] - with control electronics (feature 1.1 ),

[0106] - with a circuit board and a pressure sensor arranged on the circuit board (feature 1.2).

[0107] The structuring module 7 therefore comprises algorithms that carry out an automatic structuring or segmentation of the features of patent claim 1, for example, on the basis of the preposition “with”.

[0108] The processor 10 therefore cooperates with the structuring module 7 to accomplish the structuring or segmentation of patent claim 1 of patent document 1 into the majority of features or feature groups of patent claim 1. The algorithms of the structuring module 6 then insert the preferably automatic structuring of patent claim 1 into features 1.0 to 1.2, for example, in tabular form, preferably in an Excel spreadsheet according to Fig. 2.

[0109] According to an alternative embodiment, the structuring module 7 can also be designed and configured so that a user of the analysis system 1 can also independently structure or segment the features of a patent claim with the aid of the user interface 3 or with an input mask of this interface, here for example by entering the features 1.0 to 1.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 1 in the left column of the table in Fig. 2.

[0110] In the table of Fig.2, the features 1 .0 to 1 .2, which are structured by the structuring module 7, for example automatically or by a user via the input mask, are then indicated or entered in the left column, and the right column shows ratings assigned to these features 1.0 to 1.2, which here represent ratings with regard to their relevance, for example, in relation to a product and which will be discussed further below.

[0111] Furthermore, the input mask of the user interface 3 also provides the function of receiving a selection of a feature 1.0, 1.1 or 1.2 from the displayed and segmented plurality of features 1.0 to 1.2 from a user. The user can select a feature 1.0, 1.1 or 1.2 from the segmented or structured features 1.0 to 1.2 displayed on the display 5, for example, using the input mask, on which the Excel table from Fig. 2 is then displayed, but initially without the ratings in the right-hand column. The user can then use the input mask to select a feature from the features 1.0 to 1.2, for example by selecting the row of the table from Fig. 2 in which the feature 1.0, 1.1 or 1.2 is specified.

[0112] Furthermore, the input mask of user interface 3 is designed to receive a rating or comment on the selected feature. For example, assume that the user rates all features 1.0 to 1.2 as "relevant" for a product and then enters the term "relevant" for the feature named in the corresponding row in the right-hand column. As an alternative to manually entering the rating "relevant" or "not relevant" by typing in the respective rating, the input mask can also predetermine categories such as "relevant", "less relevant", and "not relevant" for the user, particularly for each feature (here: for each row). The user then confirms these categories, for example, by clicking, whereby the selected category is then automatically entered in the selected row in the right-hand column. The user is then able to select from a plurality of possible predefined ratings.

[0113] In the example of Fig. 2, it is assumed that the user first selects the first feature 1.0 in the left column via the input mask, for example by placing a cursor in the first row in which this feature 1.0 is listed, and then selects or enters the category "relevant" for the right column. The user then places the cursor in the second row, which concerns feature 1.1, and then, for example, also marks the category "relevant" for feature 1.1. Likewise, it is assumed that the user proceeds for feature 1.2 in the same way as for the other features, so that here, for example, all features 1.0 to 1.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 1 have been assessed as "relevant."

[0114] The program instructions executable by the processor 10, which are stored in the memory 11, further comprise the linking module 8, which is set up and designed to link the features selected by the user with the evaluation as a linked evaluation.

[0115] Referring to the example in Fig. 2, the evaluations associated with features 1.0 to 1.2 look as follows:

[0116] Feature 1.0 -> relevant,

[0117] Feature 1.1 -> relevant,

[0118] Feature 1 .2 -> relevant

[0119] These evaluations linked to the assigned features 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 are then stored in the storage module 6, which here is, for example, integrated into the hardware 2 or alternatively is present externally or additionally with respect to the hardware 2 and comprises, for example, a database or cloud.

[0120] The user interface 3 can also include a function that allows, upon request, the ratings associated with the features 1.0 to 1.2 to be read from the memory module 6 and, for example, displayed on the display 5. A display of the ratings can also include different colors for different ratings; for example, the rating "relevant" can be displayed in red and the rating "not relevant" in green in the table of Fig. 2.

[0121] Here, the input mask of the user interface 3, in cooperation with the processor 10, is further designed and configured to receive alternative evaluations with respect to the original evaluations of the features 1.0 to 1.2 as a replacement for the original evaluations within the framework of an evaluation change module 12. This evaluation change module 12 is comprised of the program instructions executable by the processor 10 and can be relevant if, for example, another user wishes to re-evaluate the relevance of the features 1.0 to 1.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 1 with the aid of the analysis system 1. This new or alternative evaluation can then, for example, be carried out individually for each of the features 1.0 to 1.2. Consequently, the analysis system 1 preferably also has the option of overwriting previously performed evaluations of features with alternative evaluations.

[0122] Here, for example, the rating change module 12 is designed and configured such that the receipt of alternative ratings as a replacement for original ratings via the user interface 3 is dependent on an input in an input mask which represents an authorization for this receipt and for this replacement.

[0123] If this user input via the user interface 3 has been checked, in particular in the rating change module 12, and the user's authorization has been assessed as sufficient, then the linking module 8 is further designed and configured to link the feature or features with the alternative rating as an alternative or current linked rating and to store the alternative or current linked rating in the storage module 6.

[0124] In the example, the above-mentioned evaluation linked to feature 1.1 is then used, for example, with the help of the evaluation change module 12

[0125] Feature 1.1 -> relevant changed to

[0126] Feature 1.1 -> Not relevant

[0127] The user interface 3, in cooperation with the processor 10, is preferably further configured and set up to select further patent documents, the features of which can be evaluated in terms of their relevance. In the example, a patent document 2 is selected via the user interface 3, and from this patent document 2, for example, the independent patent claim 1 is selected, which, for example, reads as follows:

[0128] “Electronic control unit for an electropneumatic module with a circuit board and a pressure sensor arranged on the circuit board”

[0129] Via the input mask, the user can then request the automatic structure of patent claim 1 by the structure module 7, as already described above for patent claim 1 of patent document 1, which then structures patent claim 1 of patent document 2, for example, as follows:

[0130] - Electronic control unit for an electropneumatic module (Feature 2.0)

[0131] - with one circuit board (feature 2.1)

[0132] - and with pressure sensor arranged on the circuit board (feature 2.2)

[0133] The structuring module 7 then preferably automatically enters this feature structure into a table, here for example in the left column of the table according to Fig. 3.

[0134] The program instructions executable by the processor 10 preferably further comprise a check module 9 which is configured and designed to automatically check whether or not the patent claim 1 of the patent document 2 contains features of the patent claim 1 of the patent document 1 stored in the memory module 6 and each linked to an evaluation.

[0135] In the present case, for example, the examination module 9 finds that features 1.1 and 1.2 of claim 1 of Patent Document 1 and features 2.1 and 2.2 of claim 1 of Patent Document 2 are the same:

[0136] - with one board (features 1 .1 and 2.1 )

[0137] - and with a pressure sensor arranged on the circuit board (features 2.1 and 2.2). The correspondence between features 1.1 and 1.2 on the one hand and features 2.1 and 2.2 on the other hand is symbolised in Figures 2 and 3 by the bold print.

[0138] Following this determination, the checking module 9 is configured and designed to automatically read the evaluations linked to features 1.1 and 1.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 1 from the storage module 6 and to control the user interface 3 to display these linked evaluations, for example, on the display 5. Due to the previously determined matches, the checking module 9 also automatically enters these linked evaluations into the right-hand column of the table in Fig. 3 for features 2.1 and 2.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 2, without the user having to submit their own evaluations. A further categorization of features 2.1 and 2.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 2 by a user can therefore be omitted.

[0139] However, the user can evaluate feature 2.0 of Patent Document 2, which is not part of the features of claim 1 of Patent Document 1, in the manner described above, for example, as “relevant”.

[0140] In addition, the user preferably also has the option, provided he has the appropriate authorization and indicates this to the analysis system 1 by entering it into the user interface 3, of changing the evaluations of features 2.1 and 2.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 2 as described above via the evaluation change module 12, provided he is authorized to do so.

[0141] The evaluations automatically performed by the checking module 9 and, if necessary, modified with the aid of the evaluation modification module 12, as well as the evaluations of features 2.0 to 2.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 2 performed by the user himself, are then stored in the storage module 6 and can be used for an evaluation of features of patent claims of further patent documents if there are again feature matches.

[0142] The more patent claims of patent documents are analyzed using the analysis system 1 in the manner described above, the more related data is stored in the storage module 6 as evaluations linked to features, so that the evaluation effort for patent documents decreases over time. It is understood that, instead of independent patent claims as in the example, dependent patent claims can also be manually or automatically structured and evaluated into features or feature groups using the analysis system 1.

[0143] Fig. 4A shows a flowchart of an embodiment of a computer- or machine-implemented method according to the invention for performing an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document with the aid of the analysis system 1 of Fig. 1, here for example with reference to patent claims 1 and 2 of patent documents 1 and 2.

[0144] In a step 100, the selection of patent document 1 and patent claim 1 of patent document 1 takes place using the user interface 3 of the analysis system 1.

[0145] Preferably, in response to step 100, in a step 200, the patent claim 1 is then automatically or manually divided or segmented into the above-listed features 1.0 to 1.2 by the structuring module 7.

[0146] Preferably, as a reaction to step 200, the automatically or manually performed structuring or segmentation of patent claim 1 of patent document 1 into features 1.0 to 1.2 is then displayed on the user interface in a step 300, here in particular in table form (e.g. Excel table) and on the display 5.

[0147] Preferably, in response to step 300, a selection of a feature from the displayed and segmented or structured plurality of features 1.0 to 1.2 is then received by the user interface 3 in a step 400, and in a subsequent step 500, an evaluation of the selected feature is received by the user interface 3, here for example from predefined categories “relevant” or “not relevant”.

[0148] Preferably, in response to step 500, the selected feature is then linked to the evaluation as a linked evaluation by the linking module 8 in a step 600, and the linked evaluation of the feature of patent claim 1 of patent document 1 is stored in the storage module 6.

[0149] The steps 300 to 500 are then run through, for example, until preferably all features 1.0 to 1.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 1 have been evaluated and stored in the memory module 6 as evaluations linked to the features 1.0 to 1.2.

[0150] An optional step 700 may comprise displaying the ratings associated with the features 1.0 to 1.2 by the user interface 3, in particular by the display 5, for example in the tabular form of Fig. 2.

[0151] In response to the display of the linked ratings of the ratings associated with features 1.0 to 1.2 in step 700, alternative ratings can be generated in an optional step 1100 as replacements for the original ratings of features 1.0 to 1.2 by the rating change module 12 using the user interface 3. Execution of step 1100 can be dependent on a user input in the user interface 3, which represents the user's authorization for this replacement.

[0152] A loopback to step 600 can then take place, in which the alternative evaluations of the features 1.0 to 1.2 are then stored in the memory module 6 as an alternative evaluation linked to them.

[0153] Fig. 4B shows a flow chart of a further embodiment of the computer-implemented method according to the invention, which here preferably follows the embodiment of Fig. 4A.

[0154] In a step 800 following step 600 or 700 of Fig. 4A, a patent document 2 and a patent claim 2 of the patent document 2 are selected using the user interface 3.

[0155] Preferably, in response to step 800, the checking module 9 checks in a query step 900 whether or not the patent claim 2 of the patent document 2 contains features of the patent claim 1 of the patent document 1 stored in the storage module 6 and each linked to an evaluation.

[0156] If this check shows that, as in the example here, patent claim 1 of patent document 2 contains features 1.1 and 1.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 1 (“Y”), in a step 1000 the evaluations of features 1.1 and 1.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 1 are automatically read from the memory module 6 and preferably linked with the corresponding features 2.1 and 2.2 of patent claim 1 of patent document 2 by the linking module 8 and shown on the display 5, in particular in the table form of Fig. 3

[0157] Based on the automatic check in step 900, the check module 9 then determines, for example, that patent claim 1 of patent document 2 does not contain feature 1.0 of patent document 1 ("N"), but does contain the not-yet-evaluated feature 2.0. Then, at least steps 500 to 600 or 500 to 700 are performed with respect to feature 2.1, and an evaluation linked to feature 2.0 is stored in the storage module 6.

[0158] However, if the test module 9 determines in step 900 that none of the features 2.0 to 2.2 matches one of the features 1.0 to 1.2 (“N”), the process loops back to step 200 and, automatically or by the user, a classification and evaluation of the features 2.0 to 2.2 is carried out in accordance with steps 200 to 600 and the evaluations linked to the features 2.0 to 2.2 are stored in the memory module 6, for example in the table form of Fig. 3, and optionally also displayed on the display 5 in accordance with step 700.

[0159] LIST OF REFERENCE SYMBOLS

[0160] 1 analysis system

[0161] 2 Hardware 3 User interface

[0162] 4 Keyboard

[0163] 5 Display

[0164] 6 memory module

[0165] 7 Structure module 8 Linking module

[0166] 9 Test module

[0167] 10 processor

[0168] 11 storage

[0169] 12 Valuation change module

Claims

PATENT CLAIMS 1. Analysis system for carrying out an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document, comprising at least the following: e) A user interface (3) with a display (5), designed and configured to receive a user input, wherein the user input comprises at least - a selection or input of at least one first patent document and at least one first patent claim of the first patent document, and - a selection or input of at least one second patent document and at least one second patent claim of the second patent document, f) at least one memory (11), g) a processor (10) which interacts with the user interface (3) and the memory (6), wherein h) program instructions executable by the processor (10) are stored in the memory (11), for - automatically or depending on a user input received via the user interface (3) dividing or segmenting the at least one first patent claim into a plurality of features or feature groups, and - displaying the structure or segmentation of the first patent claim into the majority of features or feature groups on the display (5), and - receiving a selection of a feature or a feature group from the displayed and segmented or structured plurality of features or feature groups of the first patent claim from the user interface (3), and Receiving an evaluation or comment on the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim from the user interface (3), and Linking the selected feature or feature group to the rating or comment as with the selected feature or the selected group of features of the first patent claim linked assessment or as linked commentary, and Saving the evaluation or comment on the first patent claim of the first patent document linked to the selected feature or group of features, and Checking whether the at least one second patent claim of the second patent document contains the stored feature linked to the evaluation or comment or the stored feature group of the at least one first patent claim of the first patent document identically or synonymously, and Generating an instruction signal for the user interface (3) for displaying the evaluation or comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim in connection with the at least one second patent claim of the second patent document on the display (5), if the check has shown that the second patent claim of the second patent document contains the stored feature linked to the evaluation or comment or the stored feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document identically or synonymously.

2. Analysis system according to claim 1, characterized in that if the examination has shown that the second patent claim of the second patent document does not contain the stored feature linked to the evaluation or comment or the stored feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document that is not identical or synonymous, the program instructions executable by the processor (10) comprise instructions for b) structuring or segmenting the second patent claim into a plurality of features or feature groups (200) by a1) receiving the structure or segmentation from the user interface (3), or by a2) automatic structuring or segmenting, and g) displaying the structure or segmentation of the second patent claim of the second patent document into the plurality of features or feature groups of the second patent claim of the second patent document (300) on the display (5), and h) receiving a selection of a feature or feature group from the displayed and segmented or structured plurality of features or feature groups of the second patent claim of the second patent document (400) from the user interface (3), and i) receiving an evaluation or comment on the selected feature or the selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document (500) from the user interface (3),and j) linking the selected feature or the selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document to the rating or the comment as the rating or comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document, and k) storing the rating or comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document (600).

3. Analysis system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the program instructions executable by the processor (10) comprise instructions for d) receiving an alternative rating in relation to the rating or an alternative comment in relation to the comment as a replacement for the rating or the comment from the user interface (3) as user input, and e) linking the feature or the group of features with the alternative rating or with the alternative comment as with the feature or the alternative assessment linked to the feature group or as an alternative comment linked to the feature or feature group, and f) storing the alternative assessment linked to the feature or feature group or the linked alternative comment.

4. Analysis system according to claim 3, characterized in that the program instructions executable by the processor (10) comprise instructions for receiving, linking or storing the alternative rating or the alternative comment as a replacement for the rating or comment depending c) on a relevant authorization and / or on an identity of a user of the analysis system (1), wherein the authorization and / or the identity of the user is queried via the user interface (3), and / or d) on a number, type or frequency of matching ratings or comments of the feature or the group of features which have been received from different users or from a user of the analysis system (1) via the user interface.

5. Analysis system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the program instructions executable by the processor (10) comprise instructions for c) checking the plausibility of evaluations and comments of features or groups of features that are identical or synonymous in the first patent claim of the first patent document and in the second patent claim of the at least one second patent document, d) and for - selecting and storing a specific assessment or comment of the identical or synonymous feature among the different assessments or comments using a selection algorithm, and - in particular for displaying the first patent document and / or the first patent claim and the second patent claim and / or the at least one second patent document on the display (5), - if the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous group of features has been assessed or commented on differently in the first patent claim of the first patent document and in the second patent claim of the at least one second patent document 6. Analysis system according to claim 5, characterized in that the selection algorithm is designed to select and store the specific rating or comment of the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous feature group from the different ratings or comments depending c) on the identity of the user or on the identities of the users of the analysis system (1) from whom or from whom the different ratings of the comments were received, and / or d) on the number, frequency or type of matching ratings or comments of the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous feature group which were received from a user or from different users of the analysis system (1).

7. Analysis system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the program instructions executable by the processor (10) comprise instructions for c) receiving the rating or comment of a feature or a group of features as a selection of a category of rating or comment from a plurality of predetermined categories of ratings or comments made via the user interface (3), and for d) linking and storing the feature or the group of features with the selected category of rating or comment.

8. Analysis system according to claim 7, characterized in that the predetermined categories of evaluations or comments have different relevance categories with regard to a relevance of the feature or the group of characteristics which in particular include at least the category “relevant” and the category “not relevant or irrelevant”.

9. Analysis system according to claim 8, characterized in that the program instructions executable by the processor (10) comprise instructions for linking and storing a patent document, in particular a patent document under the first patent document and the at least one second patent document, with a specific relevance category if at least two features or feature groups, in particular all features or feature groups of a patent claim of this patent document, in particular of the first patent claim or of the second patent claim, have been evaluated or commented on with this specific relevance category.

10. Analysis system according to claim 9, characterized in that the program instructions executable by the processor (10) comprise instructions for displaying a ranking of patent documents on the display (5) related to the specific relevance category or a relevance category selected via the user interface (3), in particular in response to a request to this effect entered via the user interface (3).

11. Analysis system according to one of claims 7 to 10, characterized in that the program instructions executable by the processor (10) comprise instructions for displaying the different relevance categories by means of different colors on the display (5) of the user interface (3).

12. Analysis system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the program instructions executable by the processor (10) comprise instructions for displaying an evaluation or comment (700) or relevance category linked to a feature or to a feature group or to a patent document on the display (5), in particular in response to a request entered via the user interface (3).

13. Analysis system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the program instructions executable by the processor (10) comprise instructions for separately displaying features or groups of features which c) are listed optionally or alternatively in the first patent claim or in the second patent claim, and / or d) are identical or synonymous in the first patent claim and in the second patent claim.

14. Analysis system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the user interface (3) comprises a keyboard (4) and / or a touchscreen, designed and configured to enter user inputs which comprise alphanumeric characters and / or a selection from predetermined and displayed selection options.

15. Analysis system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the program instructions executable by the processor (10) comprise instructions for automatically structuring or segmenting the features or groups of features on the basis of c) sentence parts, punctuation marks, numbers, punctuations, prepositions, conjunctions, logical operators, and / or d) natural language processing (NLP).

16. A machine-implemented method for performing an analysis of at least one patent claim of at least one patent document with the aid of an analysis system (1) comprising a user interface (3) with a display (5), at least one memory (11) and a processor (10) which interacts with the user interface (3) and the memory, wherein program instructions executable by the processor (10) are stored in the memory (11) for performing at least the following steps: c) selecting or entering a first patent document and at least one first patent claim of the first patent document (100) using the user interface (3), and d) structuring or segmenting the first patent claim into a plurality of features or feature groups (200) by b1) receiving the structuring or segmentation from the user interface (3), or by b2) automatically structuring or segmenting, and k) displaying the structuring or segmentation of the first patent claim of the first patent document into the plurality of features or feature groups of the first patent claim of the first patent document (300) on the display (5), and l) receiving a selection of a feature or feature group from the displayed and segmented or structurized plurality of features or feature groups of the first patent claim of the first patent document (400) from the user interface (3),and m) receiving an assessment or comment on the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document (500) from the user interface (3), and n) linking the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document to the assessment or comment as an assessment or comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document, and o) storing the assessment or comment (600) linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document, and p) selecting or entering a second patent document from the plurality of patent documents and at least one second patent claim of the second patent document (800) using the user interface (3), and q) checking,whether the second patent claim of the second patent document contains the feature stored and linked to the rating or comment or the feature stored and provided with the rating or comment, feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document identically or synonymously, and r) generating an instruction signal for the user interface (3) to display the evaluation or comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the first patent claim in connection with the at least one second patent claim of the second patent document on the display (5), if the check has shown that the second patent claim of the second patent document contains the stored feature linked to the evaluation or comment or the stored feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document identically or synonymously.

17. Machine-implemented method according to claim 16, characterized in that if the examination has shown that the second patent claim of the second patent document does not contain the stored feature or feature group of the first patent claim of the first patent document linked to the evaluation or comment identically or synonymously, at least the following steps are carried out with respect to the second patent claim of the second patent document: g) structuring or segmenting the second patent claim into a plurality of features or feature groups (200) by a1) receiving the structuring or segmentation from the user interface (3), or by a2) automatically structuring or segmenting,and h) displaying the structure or segmentation of the second patent claim of the second patent document into the plurality of features or feature groups of the second patent claim of the second patent document (300) on the display (5), and i) receiving a selection of a feature or feature group from the displayed and segmented or structured plurality of features or, Feature groups of the second patent claim of the second patent document (400) from the user interface (3), and j) receiving an evaluation or comment of the selected feature or the selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document (500) from the user interface (3), and k) linking the selected feature or the selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document to the evaluation or the comment as an evaluation or comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document, l) storing the evaluation or comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group of the second patent claim of the second patent document (600).

18. Machine-implemented method according to claim 16 or 17, characterized in that it further comprises: a repetition of steps b) to g) of claim 16 or steps a) to f) of claim 17 until at least some of the features or all of the features or at least some of the feature groups or all of the feature groups have been evaluated or commented on, linked and the linked evaluations or comments have been stored in the memory area.

19. Machine-implemented method according to one of claims 16 to 18, characterized in that in response to a request made by means of the user interface (3), the evaluation or comment (700) linked to a feature or to a feature group is shown on the display (5).

20. Machine-implemented method according to one of claims 16 to 19, characterized in that at least the following steps are carried out: d) receiving an alternative rating with respect to the rating or an alternative comment with respect to the comment as a replacement for the rating or the comment (1100) from the user interface (3), and e) linking the feature or the feature group to the alternative rating or to the alternative comment as an alternative rating linked to the feature or the feature group or as a linked alternative comment, and f) storing the alternative rating or the linked alternative comment (600) linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group.

21. Machine-implemented method according to claim 20, characterized in that the receiving, linking or storing of the alternative rating or alternative comment linked to the selected feature or the selected feature group is dependent on receiving a relevant authorization and / or on the identity of the respective user from the user interface (3).

22. Machine-implemented method according to one of claims 16 to 21, characterized in that receiving the rating or comment on the feature or feature group comprises selecting a category of rating or comment from a plurality of predetermined categories of ratings or comments, wherein the selected category of rating or comment is linked to the feature or feature group and stored.

23. Machine-implemented method according to claim 22, characterized in that the categories of evaluations or comments are relevance categories with respect to a relevance of the feature or feature group, and in particular comprise at least the relevance category “relevant” and the relevance category “not relevant”.

24. Machine-implemented method according to claim 23, characterized in that a representation of different relevancy of the relevance categories on the display (5) takes place in different colors.

25. Machine-implemented method according to claim 23 or 24, characterized by linking and storing a patent document, in particular a patent document under the first patent document and the at least one second patent document with a specific relevance category, if at least two features or feature groups, in particular all features or feature groups of a patent claim of this patent document, in particular of the first patent claim or of the second patent claim, have been evaluated or commented on with this specific relevance category.

26. Machine-implemented method according to claim 25, characterized by displaying a ranking of patent documents on the display (5) related to the specific relevance category or a relevance category selected via the user interface (3), in particular in response to a request to this effect.

27. Machine-implemented method according to one of claims 16 to 26, characterized by c) plausibility check of evaluations and comments of identical or synonymous features or groups of features in the first patent claim of the first patent document and in the second patent claim of the at least one second patent document, d) and by - selecting and storing a specific assessment or comment of the identical or synonymous feature among the different assessments or comments using a selection algorithm, and - in particular for displaying the first patent document and / or the first patent claim and the second patent claim and / or the at least one second patent document on the display (5), - if the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous group of features has been assessed or commented on differently in the first patent claim of the first patent document and in the second patent claim of the at least one second patent document 28. Machine-implemented method according to claim 27, characterized in that the selection algorithm selects and stores the specific rating or comment of the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous feature group from the different ratings or comments depending on c) the identity of the user or the identities of the users from whom or from whom the different ratings of the comments were received, and / or d) the number, frequency or type of matching ratings or comments of the identical or synonymous feature or the identical or synonymous feature group which were received from a user or from different users of the analysis system (1).

29. Machine-implemented method according to one of claims 16 to 28, characterized in that the features or groups of features are automatically structured or segmented on the basis of e) sentence parts, punctuation marks, numbers, punctuations, prepositions, conjunctions, logical operators, and / or f) natural language processing (NLP).

30. A program product for a data processing system, which contains executable program instructions with which the machine-implemented method according to one of claims 16 to 29 can be executed on a data processing system.

Images