Information processing device, subjective evaluation verification method, and recording medium

Abstract

Provided are an information processing device, a subjective evaluation verification method, and a recording medium with which it is possible to confirm the reliability of evaluation information provided by a user.　This information processing device comprises: an acquisition means for acquiring subjective evaluation information pertaining to a service which uses a vehicle from a user of the service; a first evaluation means for evaluating, on the basis of the behavior of the vehicle when the vehicle was used by the user, the vehicle driving quality which is the subject of evaluation in the subjective evaluation information; and a second evaluation means for evaluating the reliability of the subjective evaluation information on the basis of the driving quality.

Description

Information processing device, subjective evaluation verification method, and recording medium

[0001] The present invention relates to an information processing device, a subjective evaluation verification method, and a recording medium.

[0002] Ride sharing (hereinafter also referred to as "ride sharing," "carpooling," etc.) is known as a paid transportation service using vehicles. Evaluation information from people who have used these services is provided to users who are considering using these services. Patent Literature 1 discloses an evaluation device in an evaluation system for evaluating service providers, which calculates security information indicating the security level of a service user from the facial expression of the service user and calculates an evaluation of the service provider.

[0003] JP 2019-86889 A

[0004] Rating systems for evaluating service providers have the problem of low reliability of ratings due to the possibility of malicious users intentionally giving low ratings and service providers intentionally giving high ratings. In particular, for vehicle-based services, it is expected that individuals will participate in the service provider side, and situations may arise in which individual users evaluate individual service providers. Under these circumstances, there is an urgent need to build a system that can verify the reliability of rating information (subjective rating information) provided by a diverse range of users.

[0005] The present disclosure aims to provide an information processing device, a subjective evaluation verification method, and a recording medium that can confirm the reliability of evaluation information provided by users in a service that uses a vehicle.

[0006] According to a first aspect, there is provided an information processing device including: an acquisition means for acquiring subjective evaluation information regarding a service using a vehicle from a user of the service; a first evaluation means for evaluating the driving quality of a vehicle that is the subject of evaluation in the subjective evaluation information based on the behavior of the vehicle when used by the user; and a second evaluation means for evaluating the reliability of the subjective evaluation information based on the driving quality.

[0007] According to a second aspect, a subjective evaluation verification method is provided, which acquires subjective evaluation information regarding a service using a vehicle from a user of the service, evaluates the driving quality of a vehicle that is the subject of evaluation in the subjective evaluation information based on the behavior of the vehicle when used by the user, and evaluates the reliability of the subjective evaluation information based on the driving quality.

[0008] According to a third aspect, there is provided a recording medium having recorded thereon a program that causes a computer to execute the following processes: a process of acquiring subjective evaluation information regarding a service using a vehicle from a user of the service; a process of evaluating the driving quality of a vehicle that is the subject of evaluation in the subjective evaluation information based on the behavior of the vehicle when used by the user; and a process of evaluating the reliability of the subjective evaluation information based on the driving quality.

[0009] According to the present disclosure, it is possible to provide an information processing device, a subjective evaluation verification method, and a recording medium that can confirm the reliability of evaluation information (subjective evaluation information) provided by various users in a vehicle-based service.

[0010] 1 is a diagram showing one configuration of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a flow chart showing the operation of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining the operation of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining the operation of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining the operation of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining the operation of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining one configuration of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining an example of information held in a rating information database of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a sequence diagram showing the operation of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining a method for evaluating the reliability of subjective rating information by the rating information generating device of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining the operation of another configuration of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining the operation of another configuration of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining the operation of another configuration of the rating information generating device of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining the operation of another configuration of the present disclosure. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining the operation of another configuration of the rating information generating device of the present disclosure.

[0011] First, an overview of one embodiment of the present disclosure will be described with reference to the drawings. In this disclosure, the drawings relate to one or more embodiments. The reference numerals in the drawings attached to this overview are attached to each element for convenience as an example to facilitate understanding, and are not intended to limit the present disclosure to the illustrated form. Furthermore, connecting lines between blocks in the drawings and the like referred to in the following description include both bidirectional and unidirectional lines. Unidirectional arrows are used to schematically indicate the flow of main signals (data) and do not exclude bidirectionality. A program is executed via a computer device, which includes, for example, a processor, a storage device, an input device, a communication interface, and, if necessary, a display device. Furthermore, this computer device is configured to be able to communicate with internal or external devices (including computers) via the communication interface, whether wired or wireless. Although ports or interfaces are present at the input / output connection points of each block in the drawings, they are not shown.

[0012] In one embodiment, the present disclosure can be realized by an information processing device 10 including an acquisition means 11, a first evaluation means 12, and a second evaluation means 13, as shown in FIG. 1 . More specifically, the acquisition means 11 acquires subjective evaluation information regarding a service using a vehicle from a user U of the service. The first evaluation means evaluates the driving quality of the vehicle that is the subject of evaluation in the subjective evaluation information, based on data D indicating the behavior of the vehicle when used by the user. The second evaluation means 13 evaluates the reliability of the subjective evaluation information based on the driving quality.

[0013] The information processing device 10 configured as above operates as follows: First, the information processing device 10 acquires subjective evaluation information on a service using a vehicle from a user of the service (step S01 in FIG. 2).

[0014] Next, the information processing device 10 evaluates the driving quality of the vehicle evaluated in the subjective evaluation information based on the behavior of the vehicle when used by the user (step S02 in FIG. 2). The driving quality is evaluated, for example, from driving data related to the behavior of the vehicle when used, specifically, the degree of compliance with traffic laws and regulations, riding comfort, sense of security, etc.

[0015] Finally, the information processing device 10 evaluates the reliability of the subjective assessment information based on the driving quality (step S03 in FIG. 2).

[0016] For example, as shown in FIG. 3, when the driving quality and the subjective evaluation information are roughly in agreement, the reliability of the subjective evaluation information is evaluated as high.

[0017] On the other hand, as shown in FIG. 4, if the driving quality is good but the subjective evaluation information is low, the information processing device 10 will evaluate the reliability of the subjective evaluation information as low. This makes it possible to identify malicious low evaluations. Also, as shown in FIG. 5, there are cases where the driving quality is not good but the subjective evaluation information is high. In this case, the information processing device 10 will also evaluate the reliability of the subjective evaluation information as low. This makes it possible to identify false high evaluations requested by businesses, etc.

[0018] It is also possible to imagine cases where it is difficult to determine whether the subjective assessment information and the driving quality are clearly inconsistent. To deal with such cases, it is desirable to prepare, for example, a formula for calculating the degree of agreement between the subjective assessment information and the driving quality. This formula may be used to calculate a score indicating the degree of agreement between the subjective assessment information and the driving quality, and whether the two match can be determined based on whether the score exceeds a predetermined threshold. This threshold can be set on both the upper and lower limits. If the calculated score exceeds the upper threshold, it can be determined that the reliability of the subjective assessment information is high, and if the calculated score is below the lower threshold, it can be determined that the reliability of the subjective assessment information is low.

[0019] In this way, according to the present disclosure, it is possible to provide an information processing device, a subjective evaluation verification method, and a recording medium that can confirm the reliability of evaluation information (subjective evaluation information) provided by various users in vehicle-based services.

[0020] [First Embodiment] Next, a first embodiment will be described in which the present disclosure is used to verify the reliability of user reviews (word-of-mouth ratings) of a ride-sharing service. FIG. 6 is a diagram showing one configuration of the present disclosure. Referring to FIG. 6, a rating information generation device 100 connected to a network is shown. The rating information generation device 100 is capable of acquiring user reviews of ride-sharing services from user terminals UT of users via the network. The rating information generation device 100 is also capable of acquiring vehicle behavior data D via the network. Note that the vehicle behavior data may be acquired directly from a vehicle equipped with a communication function, or may be acquired from a telematics server that provides telematics services.

[0021] 7 is a diagram showing one configuration of the evaluation information generation device 100 of the present disclosure. Referring to FIG. 7, the evaluation information generation device 100 includes an acquisition unit 101, a reliability evaluation unit 103, a driving quality evaluation unit 102, and an evaluation information database 104.

[0022] The acquisition unit 101 acquires user reviews of the vehicle from ride-sharing users in the form of a questionnaire. For example, the acquisition unit 101 acquires user reviews by sending emails or direct messages to ride-sharing users requesting user reviews and directing them to a user review input page. These user reviews are a type of subjective evaluation information, and the acquisition unit 101 corresponds to the acquisition means 11 described above.

[0023] The driving quality evaluation unit 102 acquires past driving data of the vehicle used for ride sharing from the vehicle or the telematics server, and evaluates the driving quality of the vehicle that was the subject of the user review when providing the service. The driving quality evaluation unit 102 corresponds to the above-mentioned first evaluation means 12. The method for evaluating driving quality by the driving quality evaluation unit 102 will be described later together with the overall operation.

[0024] The reliability evaluation unit 103 evaluates the reliability of the user reviews submitted by the users based on the driving quality. The reliability evaluation unit 103 corresponds to the second evaluation means 13 described above.

[0025] The evaluation information database 104 is a database for storing user reviews submitted by users, their reliability, and overall evaluations based on the reliability.

[0026] FIG. 8 is a diagram showing an example of information stored in the evaluation information database 104. In the example of FIG. 8, it is possible to store the questionnaire responses of each user for each vehicle identified by a vehicle ID. It is also possible to add reliability to the questionnaire responses of each user. Furthermore, it is possible to store an overall evaluation based on the reliability of the questionnaire responses of each user. It is to be noted that the reliability in FIG. 8 ranges from AAA to C, with AAA being the highest value and C being the lowest value.

[0027] Next, the operation of this embodiment will be described in detail with reference to the drawings. FIG. 9 is a sequence diagram showing the operation of the present disclosure. Referring to FIG. 9, first, the evaluation information generation device 100 sends a questionnaire form to the user terminal UT of the ride-sharing user (step S001). The questionnaire form can be sent by including a link to a questionnaire input page in an email or direct message sent to each user, and each user can click or tap on the link. As an alternative method, a link to the questionnaire form or its two-dimensional code can be displayed inside the vehicle, allowing the user to directly access the input page.

[0028] When a ride-sharing user fills in the questionnaire form using the user terminal UT, the entered content is transmitted to the evaluation information generating device 100 (step S002). The evaluation information generating device 100 stores the entered content in the evaluation information database 104 (step S003).

[0029] Next, the evaluation information generation device 100 identifies the vehicle used by the user who responded (step S004). One method for identifying the vehicle is to include vehicle and driver identification information in the questionnaire form in advance. Another method is to include a section in the questionnaire form asking for the date and time of service use, and then identify the vehicle used by the user from the user ID. In this way, the vehicle used by the user can be identified from the vehicle identification information, the vehicle driver, the user, etc.

[0030] Next, the evaluation information generating device 100 acquires driving data of the identified vehicle from the vehicle or the telematics server, and evaluates the driving quality (step S005). For example, the evaluation information generating device 100 measures, from the acquired driving data, the rate of obedience to traffic lights, the rate of obedience to legal speed limits, the rate of obedience to stop signs at stop signs, the presence or absence of swaying during travel, the speed at which the vehicle turns, deceleration at bumps, etc.

[0031] Next, the evaluation information generating device 100 evaluates the reliability of the questionnaire (user review) entered by the user using the evaluated driving quality (step S006). FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of a method for evaluating the reliability of a questionnaire (subjective evaluation information). The left side of FIG. 10 shows subjective evaluation items in the questionnaire form. The right side of FIG. 10 shows driving quality evaluation items. For example, the evaluation of the level of legal compliance entered by the user can be evaluated by comparing it with driving quality factors such as the rate of obedience to traffic lights, the rate of obedience to legal speed limits, and the rate of obedience to stop signs at stop signs. Similarly, when verifying an evaluation of ride comfort entered by the user, it can be evaluated by comparing it with driving quality factors such as the number of swayings, the speed when turning (whether the speed is appropriate for the turning radius R), the number of decelerations over bumps, the number of sudden accelerations, and the number of sudden decelerations. Therefore, the reliability evaluation unit 103 of the evaluation information generating device 100 corresponds to a means for comparing the evaluation of the driving behavior included in the subjective evaluation information with the driving quality corresponding to the driving behavior and evaluating the reliability of the subjective evaluation information. It should be noted that the items illustrated in FIG. 10 and the correspondence between the subjective evaluation items and the driving quality evaluation items are merely examples, and are not limited to those illustrated.

[0032] Furthermore, the correspondence between the subjective evaluation items and the driving quality evaluation items illustrated in FIG. 10 may be changed for each vehicle. For example, the items evaluated as the driving quality may be changed based on the user's evaluation of each vehicle. For example, for a vehicle that is identified as having problems with ride comfort in many user reviews, the driving quality may be evaluated in more detail to verify the accuracy of the user reviews. If it is determined that many user reviews are correct, the driver of the vehicle may be instructed to improve their driving.

[0033] Finally, the evaluation information generating device 100 records the evaluation results in the corresponding record in the evaluation information database 104 (step S007). In this way, the subjective evaluation information with evaluated reliability, as shown in FIG. 8, can be obtained. Furthermore, by appropriately filtering and correcting the subjective evaluation information using this reliability, an overall evaluation can be obtained. In the example of FIG. 8, the overall evaluation is created by excluding (not adopting) items with a reliability of C.

[0034] The overall rating obtained in this way can be used as a highly authentic reference for judging the quality of service of each vehicle. In addition, this overall rating can be provided to a comparison site for ride-sharing services and made public.

[0035] Second Embodiment Next, a second embodiment in which an evaluation function for users who have written user reviews is added to the evaluation information generation device 100 will be described in detail with reference to the drawings. FIG. 11 is a diagram showing another configuration of the present disclosure. The difference from the evaluation information generation device 100 of the first embodiment shown in FIG. 7 is that a user evaluation unit 105 is added to the evaluation information generation device 100a. The other configuration is the same as the configuration of FIG. 7, so the following description will focus on the differences.

[0036] The user evaluation unit 105 evaluates the users based on the contents of the user reviews for each user recorded in the evaluation information database 104 .

[0037] As user reviews are accumulated in the evaluation information database 104, it becomes possible to compare the reliability of the user reviews entered by each user. FIG. 12 is a list of extracted user reviews by a user with user ID 0003, whose user review for the vehicle with vehicle ID 0001 was determined to be reliable C. As shown in FIG. 12, it can be seen that the user reviews of this user are generally low in reliability. FIG. 13 is a list of extracted user reviews by a user with user ID 0001, whose user review for the vehicle with vehicle ID 0001 was determined to be reliable AAA. As shown in FIG. 13, it can be seen that the user reviews of this user are generally high in reliability.

[0038] According to this embodiment, the system can evaluate users from this perspective. By offering benefits to highly reliable users, it is possible to provide an incentive for them to write highly reliable user reviews. Conversely, it is also possible to impose penalties on low-reliability users, such as denying them access to the questionnaire form for a certain period of time.

[0039] [Third Embodiment] Next, a third embodiment in which a user review presentation function is added to the evaluation information generation device 100 will be described in detail with reference to the drawings. Fig. 14 is a diagram showing another configuration of the present disclosure. The difference from the evaluation information generation device 100 of the first embodiment shown in Fig. 7 is that a presentation unit 106 is added to the evaluation information generation device 100b. Since the other configurations are the same as the configuration of Fig. 7, the following description will focus on the differences.

[0040] The presentation unit 106 processes the overall evaluation accumulated in the evaluation information database 104 and makes it public via the Internet, etc. FIG. 15 is a diagram for explaining the operation of another configuration of the present disclosure, showing an example of vehicle information including user reviews published by the presentation unit 106. In the example of FIG. 15, an image of the driver of vehicle ID 0001 and a radar chart for each subjective evaluation item are displayed using the overall evaluation recorded in the evaluation information database 104. The example of FIG. 15 also displays comments posted by each user. An important point is that the reliability of each user's user review is displayed as "reliability." For example, in the example of FIG. 15, the user review of user 0001 has the highest reliability of AAA, which indicates that it is more authentic than the user review of user 0002, whose reliability is B.

[0041] Additionally, by clicking the "Sort" button B in FIG. 15, the presentation unit 106 accepts the sorting of user reviews. Sorting criteria include the registration date of the user review, the order of users who have most frequently cast their user reviews, and the reliability of the user review. By referring to user reviews sorted by the reliability of the user review, it is possible to prioritize referencing user reviews with a higher degree of authenticity. While the "Sort" function in FIG. 15 is an example, a filtering function based on the reliability of the user review may also be added. In this case, for example, if a ride-sharing user specifies a reliability of AA or higher, user reviews with a reliability of AA or higher will be displayed.

[0042] Ride-sharing users refer to these user reviews for each vehicle when making vehicle reservations, etc. At that time, malicious user reviews and so-called "fake" user reviews are filtered out or modified, reducing the possibility that ride-sharing users will make the wrong choice.

[0043] [Fourth Embodiment] Next, a fourth embodiment in which an automatic reply function for user comments in user reviews is added to the evaluation information generation device 100 will be described in detail with reference to the drawings. FIG. 16 is a diagram showing another configuration of the present disclosure. The difference from the evaluation information generation device 100b of the third embodiment shown in FIG. 14 is that an automatic comment generation unit 107 has been added to the evaluation information generation device 100c. Since the other configurations are the same as the configuration of FIG. 14, the following description will focus on the differences.

[0044] The automatic comment generation unit 107 refers to the user reviews stored in the evaluation information database 104 and automatically adds comments to user reviews of users with low reliability, instead of the vehicle driver. Therefore, the automatic comment generation unit 107 corresponds to an automatic comment generation means that automatically generates an evaluation for the subjective evaluation information when there is a discrepancy between the subjective evaluation information and the driving quality, and adds the evaluation to the user's evaluation.

[0045] FIG. 17 shows user reviews with low reliability and comments generated by the automatic comment generation unit 107 in response to the reviews. In the example of FIG. 17, vehicles with vehicle ID 0001 are uniformly rated low, and their reliability is determined to be C. In such a case, the automatic comment generation unit 107 adds a comment such as "This user's driving is evaluated as good when riding" as a "supplementary comment from the system" in response to the comment in the user review, "The driving was rough and terrible." Of course, it is preferable to change the content of the comment depending on the degree of discrepancy between the subjective evaluation information and the driving quality, and the content of the comment.

[0046] Rideshare users can refer to these automated reply comments to determine whether the content of the user review is trustworthy.

[0047] Although the embodiments of the present disclosure have been described above, the present disclosure is not limited to the above-described embodiments, and further modifications, substitutions, and adjustments can be made without departing from the basic technical concept of the present disclosure. For example, the network configurations, element configurations, and data representation formats shown in the drawings are examples intended to aid in understanding the present disclosure, and are not limited to the configurations shown in these drawings.

[0048] For example, in the first to fourth embodiments described above, the user reviews are collected by a questionnaire method, but the method of collecting the user reviews is not limited to this. For example, the user reviews may be requested to be input in free text format, and then converted into subjective evaluation information using various text mining tools, etc.

[0049] (Hardware Configuration) In each embodiment of the present disclosure, each component of each device represents a functional unit block. Some or all of the components of each device are realized by an arbitrary combination of an information processing device 900 and a program, for example, as shown in FIG. 18 . FIG. 18 is a block diagram showing an example of the hardware configuration of the information processing device 900 that realizes each component of each device. The information processing device 900 includes, as an example, the following configuration: - CPU (Central Processing Unit) 901 - ROM (Read Only Memory) 902 - RAM (Random Access Memory) 903 - Program 904 loaded into RAM 903 - Storage device 905 that stores the program 904 - Drive device 907 that reads and writes to a recording medium 906 - Communication interface 908 that connects to a communication network 909 - Input / output interface 910 that inputs and outputs data - Bus 911 that connects each component

[0050] Each component of each device in each embodiment is realized by the CPU 901 acquiring and executing a program 904 that realizes the function. That is, the CPU 901 in FIG. 18 executes a data acquisition program and a driving quality evaluation program, and performs an update process for each calculation parameter stored in the RAM 903, the storage device 905, etc. The program 904 that realizes the function of each component of each device is stored in the storage device 905 or the ROM 902 in advance, for example, and is read out by the CPU 901 as needed. The program 904 may be supplied to the CPU 901 via the communication network 909, or may be stored in advance on the recording medium 906, and the drive device 907 may read out the program and supply it to the CPU 901.

[0051] There are various variations in the method of realizing each device. For example, each device may be realized by any combination of a separate information processing device 900 and a program for each component. Furthermore, multiple components of each device may be realized by any combination of a single information processing device 900 and a program. That is, each unit (processing means, function) of the evaluation information generation device shown in the first to fourth embodiments can be realized by a computer program that causes a processor installed in the device to execute each of the above-mentioned processes using its hardware.

[0052] In addition, some or all of the components of each device may be realized by other general-purpose or dedicated circuits, processors, etc., or a combination of these. These may be configured by a single chip, or by multiple chips connected via a bus.

[0053] Some or all of the components of each device may be realized by a combination of the above-mentioned circuits and programs.

[0054] When some or all of the components of each device are realized by multiple information processing devices, circuits, etc., the multiple information processing devices, circuits, etc. may be centrally or decentralized. For example, the information processing devices, circuits, etc. may be realized as a client-server system, a cloud computing system, or the like, in a form in which each device is connected via a communication network.

[0055] It should be noted that the above-described embodiments are preferred embodiments of the present disclosure, and the scope of the present disclosure is not limited to only the above-described embodiments. In other words, those skilled in the art can modify or substitute the above-described embodiments to construct various modified forms without departing from the gist of the present disclosure.

[0056] A part or all of the above-described embodiments can be described as, but not limited to, the following supplementary notes.

[0057] [Supplementary Note 1] An information processing device comprising: an acquisition means for acquiring subjective evaluation information regarding a service using a vehicle from a user of the service; a first evaluation means for evaluating the driving quality of a vehicle evaluated in the subjective evaluation information based on the behavior of the vehicle when used by the user; and a second evaluation means for evaluating the reliability of the subjective evaluation information based on the driving quality. [Supplementary Note 2] The second evaluation means of the information processing device may be configured to compare an evaluation of a driving behavior included in the subjective evaluation information with the driving quality corresponding to the driving behavior to evaluate the reliability of the subjective evaluation information. [Supplementary Note 3] The information processing device may further be configured to include a user evaluation unit that evaluates the user who provided the subjective evaluation information using the reliability of the subjective evaluation information. [Supplementary Note 4] The information processing device may further be configured to include a presentation means for presenting the user's evaluation of each vehicle in response to a request from another user. [Supplementary Note 5] The presentation means of the information processing device may be configured to change the display order of the user's evaluation of each vehicle using the reliability of the subjective evaluation information. [Supplementary Note 6] The above-mentioned information processing device may further be configured to include a comment generating means for automatically generating an evaluation of the subjective evaluation information and adding it to the user's evaluation when there is a discrepancy between the subjective evaluation information and the driving quality. [Supplementary Note 7] The above-mentioned information processing device may be configured to change the items to be evaluated as the driving quality based on the user's evaluation for each vehicle. [Supplementary Note 8] The above-mentioned information processing device may be configured to identify the vehicle that is the subject of the subjective evaluation by identifying at least one of the vehicle's identification information, the driver of the vehicle, and the user. [Supplementary Note 9] A subjective evaluation verification method comprising: acquiring subjective evaluation information regarding a service from a user of a service that uses a vehicle; evaluating the driving quality of the vehicle that is the subject of the evaluation in the subjective evaluation information based on the vehicle's behavior when used by the user; and evaluating the reliability of the subjective evaluation information based on the driving quality.[Supplementary Note 10] A recording medium storing a program that causes a computer to execute the following steps: acquiring subjective evaluation information about a service using a vehicle from a user of the service; evaluating the driving quality of a vehicle evaluated in the subjective evaluation information based on the vehicle's behavior when used by the user; and evaluating the reliability of the subjective evaluation information based on the driving quality. Note that the embodiments described in each of the above supplementary notes can be combined with each other after making necessary modifications. For example, a configuration that combines the contents of Supplementary Note 2 and Supplementary Note 4, compares the subjective evaluation with the driving quality, evaluates the reliability of the subjective evaluation information, and presents the results is also within the scope of the present specification. Note that the embodiments of Supplementary Note 9 to Supplementary Note 10 can be expanded into the embodiments of Supplements 2 to 8, as in Supplementary Note 1.

[0058] The disclosures of the above-cited patent documents are incorporated herein by reference and may be used as the basis or part of this disclosure, as necessary. Modifications and adjustments of the embodiments and examples are possible within the scope of this disclosure (including the claims), and further based on its basic technical concept. Furthermore, various combinations and selections (including partial deletions) of various disclosed elements (including elements of each claim, each element of each embodiment or example, each element of each drawing, etc.) are possible within the scope of this disclosure. In other words, this disclosure naturally includes various modifications and alterations that would be possible by a person skilled in the art in accordance with the entire disclosure, including the claims, and the technical concept. In particular, with regard to the numerical ranges described herein, any numerical value or subrange within that range should be construed as specifically described, even if not otherwise specified. Furthermore, the disclosures of the above-cited documents, when used in part or in whole in combination with the disclosures herein as part of this disclosure, in accordance with the spirit of this disclosure, are also deemed to be included in the disclosures of this application.

[0059] REFERENCE SIGNS LIST 10 Information processing device 11 Acquisition means 12 First evaluation means 13 Second evaluation means 100, 100a, 100b, 100c Evaluation information generation device 101 Acquisition unit 102 Driving quality evaluation unit 103 Reliability evaluation unit 104 Evaluation information database 105 User evaluation unit 106 Presentation unit 107 Automatic comment generation unit 900 Information processing device 901 CPU (Central Processing Unit) 902 ROM (Read Only Memory) 903 RAM (Random Access Memory) 904 Program 905 Storage device 906 Recording medium 907 Drive device 908 Communication interface 909 Communication network 910 Input / output interface 911 Bus B Button D Data U User UT User terminal

Claims

1. An information processing device comprising: an acquisition means for acquiring subjective evaluation information regarding a service using a vehicle from a user of the service; a first evaluation means for evaluating the driving quality of a vehicle that is the subject of evaluation in the subjective evaluation information based on the behavior of the vehicle when used by the user; and a second evaluation means for evaluating the reliability of the subjective evaluation information based on the driving quality.

2. The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the second evaluation means compares the evaluation of the driving behavior contained in the subjective evaluation information with the driving quality corresponding to the driving behavior, and evaluates the reliability of the subjective evaluation information.

3. The information processing device according to claim 2, further comprising a user evaluation unit that evaluates the user who provided the subjective evaluation information using the reliability of the subjective evaluation information.

4. An information processing device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, further comprising a presentation means for presenting the user's evaluation of each vehicle in response to a request from another user.

5. The information processing device according to claim 4, wherein the presentation means uses the reliability of the subjective evaluation information to change the display order of the user evaluations for each vehicle or to perform filtering.

6. An information processing device according to claim 4 or 5, further comprising a comment generating means for automatically generating an evaluation of the subjective evaluation information and adding it to the user's evaluation when there is a discrepancy between the subjective evaluation information and the driving quality.

7. An information processing device according to any one of claims 1 to 6, which changes the items to be evaluated as the driving quality based on the user's evaluation of each vehicle.

8. An information processing device according to any one of claims 1 to 7, which identifies a vehicle to be subjected to the subjective evaluation by identifying at least one of the identification information of the vehicle, the driver of the vehicle, and the user.

9. A subjective evaluation verification method that acquires subjective evaluation information regarding a service using a vehicle from a user of the service, evaluates the driving quality of a vehicle that is the subject of evaluation in the subjective evaluation information based on the behavior of the vehicle when used by the user, and evaluates the reliability of the subjective evaluation information based on the driving quality.

10. A recording medium having recorded thereon a program that causes a computer to execute the following processes: a process of acquiring subjective evaluation information regarding a service using a vehicle from a user of the service; a process of evaluating the driving quality of a vehicle that is the subject of evaluation in the subjective evaluation information based on the behavior of the vehicle when used by the user; and a process of evaluating the reliability of the subjective evaluation information based on the driving quality.

Images