Information processing device and information processing method

Abstract

An information processing device SV according to one aspect of the present invention is capable of communicating with a plurality of terminal devices UT, and includes: a terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 that comprehends screen data and text information handled by the terminal devices UT; a trouble word acquisition unit 12 that acquires a trouble word input by a person seeking advice; a suitability evaluation value calculation unit 13 that calculates a degree of recommendation; a shared region acquisition unit 141 that acquires a shared region, which is a range of users among which documents are shared by said users, and extracts shared words; a shared region confirmation unit 142 that identifies a shared region to which the person seeking advice and a given user both belong; an inclusion state confirmation unit 145 that confirms whether the trouble word is included among the shared words of the identified shared region; a recommendation degree correction unit 146 that corrects the degree of recommendation; a recommendation degree evaluation unit 15 that calculates the degree of recommendation of an advisor in accordance with the corrected degree of recommendation; and an output control unit 16 that outputs information for presenting information regarding the advising user.

Description

Information processing device and information processing method

[0001] One aspect of the present invention relates to an information processing device and an information processing method.

[0002] When problems arise during work, there is business support technology that smoothly pairs the person seeking advice with someone who has knowledge of the problem, even in a remote environment.And with the promotion of remote work, there is an increasing need for business support technology that can quickly resolve problems.

[0003] For example, Patent Document 1 proposes a method of recommending consultation providers to a client based on the number of times a character string (word) appears in full-screen data on a terminal used by an employee.

[0004] International Publication No. 2022 / 091281

[0005] The technology disclosed in Patent Document 1 uses information on the "number of times a character string has been viewed (i.e., whether it has appeared in screen data)" as the basis for evaluating the suitability of a person as a consultant. Therefore, it is necessary to constantly acquire screen data displayed on employees' devices and the character strings within the screen data, and collect data on how the character strings are handled. This poses a problem that could lead to violations of internal information security management or privacy.

[0006] This invention has been made in light of the above circumstances, and its purpose is to provide an information processing device and an information processing method that select appropriate users to consult with and provide business support while protecting the user's privacy.

[0007] an information processing device according to one aspect of the present invention is an information processing device capable of communicating with a plurality of terminal devices, and includes: a terminal operation content acquisition unit that grasps screen data and text information handled by the plurality of terminal devices; a problem word acquisition unit that acquires problem words input by a client from the terminal device; an aptitude evaluation value calculation unit that calculates a recommendation level indicating an aptitude evaluation value for a consultation destination based on the screen data, text information, and problem words; a shared area acquisition unit that acquires a shared area that is the range of users with whom a document is shared, for a document that a user has shared with other users, and extracts character strings contained in the document shared in the shared area as shared words of the shared area; a shared area confirmation unit that identifies a shared area to which the client and any user of all users excluding the client belong in common; an inclusion status confirmation unit that confirms whether one or more shared words in the identified shared area contain a problem word; a recommendation level correction unit that corrects the recommendation level in accordance with the confirmation result; a recommendation level evaluation unit that calculates the recommendation level of the consultation destination in accordance with the corrected recommendation level; and an output control unit that outputs information to present information about the consultation destination user to the client.

[0008] According to one aspect of the present invention, it is possible to provide an information processing device and an information processing method that select an appropriate user as a consultation partner and provide business support while protecting the user's privacy.

[0009] FIG. 1 is a diagram showing an example of the overall configuration of a system including an information processing device according to an embodiment. FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of the information processing device according to an embodiment. FIG. 3 is a block diagram showing an example of the functions of the information processing device according to an embodiment. FIG. 4 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing operation of the information processing device according to an embodiment. FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing a specific operation of step S104. FIG. 6 is a diagram for explaining an example of the processing of the information processing device according to an embodiment. FIG. 7 is a diagram for explaining an example of the processing of the information processing device according to an embodiment. FIG. 8 is a diagram for explaining an example of the processing of an information processing device of a comparative example. FIG. 9 is a diagram for explaining a problem of the information processing device of the comparative example. FIG. 10 is a diagram for explaining a problem of the information processing device of the comparative example.

[0010] Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.

[0011] 1 is a diagram showing an example of the overall configuration of a system including an information processing device according to an embodiment. The system according to the embodiment includes an information processing device SV that executes a consultation destination selection support process, and enables data communication via a network NW between this information processing device SV and multiple user terminals UT1 to UTn used by users such as employees. In other words, the information processing device SV can communicate with multiple user terminals UT via the network NW.

[0012] The information processing device SV is configured, for example, by a server computer installed on the cloud or the web. The information processing device SV may be a device separate from the user terminal UT, or may be integrated with one of the user terminals UT. When the information processing terminal SV is configured as an integrated device with one of the user terminals UT, the processing described below is realized by direct communication between multiple user terminals UT via a network NW. For example, the information processing device SV may be configured by a personal computer used by a system administrator. The information processing device SV is managed by an organization such as a company, school, association, or membership community.

[0013] The network NW comprises, for example, a wide area network centered on the Internet and an access network for accessing this wide area network. Examples of the access network include, but are not limited to, a public communication network using wired or wireless connections, a local area network (LAN) using wired or wireless connections, and a cable television (CATV) network. Note that, if the service provision area is limited to a company's business establishment or office, the network NW may be configured solely with a LAN or wireless LAN.

[0014] The user terminals UT1 to UTn are terminal devices configured, for example, by personal computers equipped with a browser or mailer. Note that the user terminals UT1 to UTn may also be mobile terminals such as smartphones or tablet terminals. Users belong to the above-mentioned organization that manages the information processing device SV, and use the user terminal UT to perform tasks, etc., and can also communicate with other users via the user terminal UT. The user terminal UT may be a dedicated terminal for each user, or may be shared by multiple users. If the user terminal UT is shared by multiple users, it is configured to identify the user currently using the terminal.

[0015] In the following, as an example, a situation will be described in which users as business practitioners belonging to a company use the system using their respective user terminals UT.

[0016] For example, in the prior art such as that disclosed in Patent Document 1, as described above, information on the "number of times a character string has been viewed (i.e., whether it has appeared in screen data)" is used as the basis for evaluating suitability as a contact point for problems. Therefore, it is necessary to constantly acquire the screen data displayed on the employee's terminal and the character strings in the screen data, and to collect data on how the character strings are handled, so it can be said that a real activity record on the employee's terminal is acquired.

[0017] Furthermore, in the conventional technology, the person seeking advice can freely select the problem words to specify when consulting. In other words, for any problem word, it becomes possible for others to grasp "who is knowledgeable about the work related to the problem word."

[0018] However, such conventional technology has problems related to in-house information security management and privacy infringement. For example, when a business document contains screen data containing confidential or company-secret information, other employees may be able to identify "employees who frequently handle the text contained in the screen data," which poses a problem in terms of corporate information security management.

[0019] Furthermore, knowing "who is knowledgeable" about screen data that includes business documents not necessarily related to business and web page browsing content, etc., is problematic in terms of violating personal privacy.

[0020] Furthermore, for users who do not want other users to know the confidential information mentioned above or even the content of their browsing, such as their skill information, such as "what kind of work or content they are knowledgeable about," this can also be a problem in terms of violating personal privacy.

[0021] Therefore, in this embodiment, as described below, in order to prevent other users from realizing that the user has knowledge of information that includes company confidential information and content that the user does not want other users to know, a correction is made to the recommendation level used in conventional technology to evaluate the suitability of a consultation partner.

[0022] Fig. 2 is a block diagram showing a schematic configuration example of an information processing device according to an embodiment. Fig. 3 is a block diagram showing an example of functions of the information processing device according to an embodiment. The information processing device SV includes a control unit 1, a storage unit 2, a communication unit 3, an input unit 4, an output unit 5, and a bus communication line BUS. The control unit 1, the storage unit 2, the communication unit 3, the input unit 4, and the output unit 5 are each connected via the bus communication line BUS, and are capable of transmitting and receiving data, etc.

[0023] The communication unit 3 transmits and receives data to and from the user terminals UT1 to UTn via the network NW. The communication unit 3 also communicates data with an administrator terminal (not shown) used by a system administrator or the like.

[0024] The input unit 4 is operated by an administrator of the information processing device SV and may include a user interface such as a mouse or keyboard for inputting various information (for example, information for changing the numerical values ​​of various settings of the information processing device SV), and various sensors such as a microphone or touch panel.

[0025] The output unit 5 includes, for example, a monitor that visually presents information to the administrator of the information processing device SV. The output unit 5 may also include audio output means, such as a speaker, that audibly supplies information to the administrator of the information processing device SV.

[0026] The storage unit 2 includes, for example, a main storage unit and an auxiliary storage unit. The main storage unit may include, for example, a read-only memory (ROM) and a random-access memory (RAM). The ROM is a non-volatile memory used exclusively for reading data, and can store data and various setting values ​​used by the control unit 1 when performing various processes. The RAM may be used as a so-called work area for temporarily storing data when the control unit 1 performs various processes. The main storage unit in this embodiment is, for example, a RAM, and is used as a memory.

[0027] The auxiliary storage unit is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of a computer centered around the control unit 1. The auxiliary storage unit is, for example, an EEPROM (registered trademark) (electric erasable programmable read-only memory), a hard disk drive (HDD), or a solid state drive (SSD). The auxiliary storage unit can store data used by the control unit 1 when performing various processes, data generated by the processes in the control unit 1, various setting values, etc.

[0028] In the embodiment, the storage unit 2 includes a terminal handling content storage unit 21 and a result storage unit 22 .

[0029] The terminal handling content storage unit 21 is a storage unit that stores screen data of the user terminal UT and text information handled by the user terminal UT, which are acquired by the terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 described below, by distinguishing between business operators. The terminal handling content storage unit 21 may store the acquired text information in its original form, or may store the acquired text information in a processed form, such as the appearance frequency distribution of words included in the text information. Furthermore, the terminal handling content storage unit 21 also stores screen images of the entire screen or window from which the text information was acquired, as well as document paths, etc.

[0030] The result storage unit 22 is a storage unit that stores users who are candidates for consultation and their respective recommendation levels. For each user, the result storage unit 22 may also store, for each problem word, the frequency of appearance in the stored text information, and the degree of experience of the candidate with the problem and the work situation at the time the problem occurred.

[0031] The control unit 1 includes at least one CPU (Central Process Unit), MPU (micro processing unit), GPU (Graphics Processing Unit), FPGA (field-programmable gate array), etc., and can realize various functions of the information processing device SV using computer programs such as system software, application software, or firmware stored in the memory unit 2.

[0032] In the embodiment, the control unit 1 includes a terminal handling content acquisition unit 11, a problem word acquisition unit 12, an aptitude evaluation value calculation unit 13, a shared area correction control unit 14, a recommendation level evaluation unit 15, and a result output control unit 16.

[0033] The terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 acquires screen data of the user terminal UT and text information handled on the screen data. The terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 can acquire text information displayed on the screen of the user terminal UT using, for example, UIAutomation (hereinafter referred to as "UIA"), Microsoft Active Accessibility (hereinafter referred to as "MSAA"), or an interface provided independently by a program running within the user terminal UT. Alternatively, the terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 may acquire information by converting images displayed on the screen of each user terminal UT into text using character recognition technology, or by converting audio signals input and output by each user terminal UT into text using voice recognition technology, etc. The terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 acquires text information by converting electronic data into text using existing technology for various data formats. Furthermore, the terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 acquires, along with the text information, a screen image of the entire screen or window from which the text information was acquired, and the path of the document.

[0034] The terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 also acquires, from the user terminal UT, business documents that the user has shared with other users. The terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 acquires, for example, documents stored in an area on the premise of being shared with other users on a system including the information processing device SV and the user terminals UT1 to UTn connected via the network NW.

[0035] The problem word acquisition unit 12 acquires problem words. For example, suppose a user using the user terminal UT has encountered a problem. Therefore, in order to find someone to consult with, the user who will be the consultant (hereinafter referred to as the consultant) inputs problem words into the user terminal UT. The user terminal UT transmits the input problem words to the information processing device SV. As a result, the problem word acquisition unit 12 acquires the problem words. Here, in the embodiment, the problem words are assumed to be a group of problem words including a plurality of problem words (for example, problem word s1 and problem word s2).

[0036] The aptitude evaluation value calculation unit 13 calculates an aptitude evaluation value. For example, the aptitude evaluation value calculation unit 13 calculates a recommendation level w, which indicates an evaluation value of the user as a consultation destination, for each piece of screen data of the user. Note that the method of calculating the recommendation level w may be a well-known method such as that described in Patent Document 1.

[0037] The shared area correction control unit 14 determines screen data to be subjected to correction of the recommendation degree w from among the screen data for which the aptitude evaluation value calculation unit 13 has calculated the recommendation degree w, and corrects the recommendation degree w. The shared area correction control unit 14 includes a shared area acquisition unit 141, a shared area confirmation unit 142, an intermediary user identification unit 143, a shared area addition generation unit 144, a content status confirmation unit 145, and a recommendation degree correction unit 146.

[0038] The shared area acquisition unit 141 acquires a shared area. For business documents that a user has shared with other users, the shared area acquisition unit 141 identifies the range of users (hereinafter referred to as the shared area) that each business document is intended to share. For example, the shared area acquisition unit 141 references and identifies information security confidentiality level information (such as the person who can view the document or the organization) set in each shared business document to determine the shared area. Alternatively, the shared area acquisition unit 141 acquires, for example, information about the shared users recorded in each business document to determine the shared area. Furthermore, for each acquired shared area, the shared area acquisition unit 141 extracts character strings contained in the business documents shared in each shared area as shared words for that shared area.

[0039] The shared area confirmation unit 142 confirms the common shared areas. For example, for each arbitrary user excluding the client among all users, the shared area confirmation unit 142 identifies one or more shared areas (shared area group) to which the client and the arbitrary user belong in common.

[0040] The intermediary user identification unit 143 identifies an intermediary. For any user determined by the shared area confirmation unit 142 to have no shared area in common with the client, the intermediary user identification unit 143 determines whether there is a user between the client and the given user who satisfies a predetermined condition, and identifies the user as an intermediary. The predetermined condition and the specific operation of the intermediary user identification unit 143 will be described later in the operation description.

[0041] The shared area addition generation unit 144 generates a new shared area. When the intermediary user identification unit 143 determines that an intermediary exists between the seeker and the given user, the shared area addition generation unit 144 additionally generates a shared area common to the seeker and the given user. The additionally generated shared area includes all of the problem words as shared words.

[0042] The inclusion status checking unit 145 checks the inclusion status of the problem word group. For any user other than the requester, the inclusion status checking unit 145 checks the inclusion status of the problem word group and a set of shared words (shared word group) in a shared area group common between the requester and the given user. That is, the inclusion status checking unit 145 checks whether the problem word is included in one or more shared words in the shared area group common between the requester and the given user. The inclusion status checking unit 145 identifies problem words that do not appear in any documents in the shared area group to which the requester and the given user belong in common.

[0043] The recommendation degree correction unit 146 corrects the recommendation degree of the screen data of the user to be corrected. The recommendation degree correction unit 146 corrects the recommendation degree w of screen data of an arbitrary user that includes the problem word identified by the inclusion status checking unit 145. For example, the recommendation degree correction unit 146 multiplies the recommendation degree w of the screen data that includes the problem word identified by the inclusion status checking unit 145 by a predetermined coefficient a (0<a<1), thereby correcting the recommendation degree of the screen data to a lower value.

[0044] The recommendation degree evaluation unit 15 calculates the recommendation degree of a given user based on the corrected screen data. For example, the recommendation degree evaluation unit 15 calculates the sum of the recommendation degrees of the corrected screen data of each user, and calculates the sum as the recommendation degree for the user as a consultation destination.

[0045] The result output control unit 16 outputs the results. The result output control unit 16 reads the corrected recommendation level stored in the result accumulation unit 22. The result output control unit 16 may include a result presentation unit and a result notification unit. For example, the result presentation unit generates information for displaying the results on a display unit (such as an integrated or external display) of the user terminal UT of the person seeking advice, and transmits the information to the user terminal UT. The result notification unit notifies users who are candidate users for consultation and whose ranking in descending order of recommendation level is within a predetermined threshold of the occurrence of a problem. For example, the result notification unit determines users whose recommendation level is within the threshold as users to be consulted, and notifies the user terminal UT of the user to be consulted that they have been selected as a candidate, that a problem has occurred, information about the person seeking advice, etc.

[0046] Next, an example of the operation of the information processing apparatus SV according to the embodiment will be described.

[0047] 4 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing operation of the information processing device according to the embodiment. The operation of this flowchart is realized by the control unit 1 of the information processing device SV reading and executing a program stored in the storage unit 2. For example, the operation shown in this flowchart is started when the information processing device SV is powered on.

[0048] First, the terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 acquires screen data of the user terminal UT and text information handled on the screen data (step S101). Details of the method for acquiring this screen data and text information may be similar to well-known methods such as those described in Patent Document 1, and therefore detailed explanations thereof will be omitted here. The terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 also acquires business documents that the user has shared with other users. The terminal handling content acquisition unit 11 stores the acquired screen data, text information, and business documents in the terminal handling content storage unit 21. The processing of step ST101 may be repeated until problem words, which will be described in the following step ST102, are acquired.

[0049] The problem word acquisition unit 12 acquires problem words (step S102). As described above, the problem word acquisition unit 12 acquires problem words input to the user terminal UT. Then, the problem word acquisition unit 12 outputs the acquired problem words to the aptitude evaluation value calculation unit 13.

[0050] The aptitude evaluation value calculation unit 13 calculates an aptitude evaluation value (step S103). For example, for each handled screen data (screen data stored in the terminal handling content storage unit 21 and text information associated with the screen data), the aptitude evaluation value calculation unit 13 calculates a recommendation degree w indicating an aptitude evaluation value for the screen data as a consultation destination, based on the coverage and handling degree of a group of "problem words" that succinctly express the problem specified by the user. Here, the recommendation degree w can be calculated using a well-known method similar to that described in Patent Document 1, and therefore detailed description thereof will be omitted here. The aptitude evaluation value calculation unit 13 stores the calculated recommendation degree w in the result storage unit 22.

[0051] The shared area correction control unit 14 determines screen data to be subjected to correction of the recommendation degree w from among the screen data for which the recommendation degree w has been calculated, and corrects the recommendation degree w (step S104).

[0052] 5 is a flowchart illustrating the specific operation of step S104. The shared area acquisition unit 141 acquires a shared area (step S1041). The shared area acquisition unit 141 identifies one or more shared areas based on business documents that a user has shared with other users and that are stored in the terminal handling content storage unit 21. The shared area acquisition unit 141 also extracts a group of shared words for each identified shared area.

[0053] The shared area confirmation unit 142 selects an arbitrary user (step S1042). The shared area confirmation unit 142 selects an arbitrary user from among all users who are candidates for consultation, excluding the user who input the problem word. Here, the user selected in step S1042 is referred to as user i.

[0054] The shared area confirmation unit 142 determines whether or not there is a shared area common to the client and user i (step S1043). The shared area confirmation unit 142 determines whether or not there is a shared area that includes the client and user i among the shared areas acquired by the shared area acquisition unit 141.

[0055] Next, a specific example will be given to explain the process to be performed when the shared area confirmation unit 142 determines that a shared area exists between the consultant and user i (step S1043: YES, steps S1046 and S1047).

[0056] 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of processing of the information processing apparatus according to the embodiment. In the example shown in FIG. 6, the user who is seeking advice is a user A1 who belongs to group A, and the trouble word group S consult is a trouble word １ , s ２ It is also assumed that the shared area acquisition unit 141 has acquired the following shared areas: a shared area α to which the users of groups A to E belong, a shared area β to which the users of groups A to C belong, and a shared area γ to which the users of groups D and E belong.

[0057] Here, it is assumed that in step S1042 described above, the sharing area check unit 142 has selected user B1 belonging to group B or user D1 belonging to group D in FIG. 6 as user i.

[0058] If it is determined that a shared area including the client and user i exists (step S1043: YES), the shared area confirmation unit 142 identifies a group of shared areas to which the client and user i belong in common, and proceeds to step S1046.

[0059] The shared area confirmation unit 142 identifies the shared area α and the shared area β to which the users A1 and B1, who are the clients, belong in common as a shared area group. Alternatively, the shared area confirmation unit 142 identifies the shared area γ to which the users A1 and D1, who are the clients, belong in common as a shared area group.

[0060] The inclusion status checking unit 145 checks the inclusion status of the set of shared words in the shared area group common between the consultant and user i and the set of problem words (step S1046). The inclusion status checking unit 145 identifies problem words that do not appear in any document in the identified shared area group.

[0061] The inclusion status checking unit 145 checks the shared word group W in the shared area α for the user B1. α and the shared word group W of the shared area β β A gathering of W α ∪W β And, troublesome word group S consult Alternatively, the inclusion status checking unit 145 checks the inclusion status of the shared word group W in the shared area γ for the user D1 and determines that there is no problem word that does not appear in any document in the shared area group. γ And, troublesome word group S consult Check the content status of the troublesome word group S consult Among them, the problem words s that do not appear in any documents in the shared area group ２ Identify.

[0062] The recommendation degree correcting unit 146 corrects the recommendation degree of the screen data of the user i (step S1047). The recommendation degree correcting unit 146 corrects the recommendation degree w of the screen data of the user i that includes the problem word identified by the inclusion status checking unit 145.

[0063] Because there are no problem words identified for user B1 by the inclusion status checking unit 145, the recommendation degree correction unit 146 excludes screen data including problem words s1 and s2 from the screen data of user B1 as the object of correction, and does not correct the recommendation degree w. Alternatively, the recommendation degree correction unit 146 excludes only screen data including problem word s1 from the screen data of user D1 as the object of correction, and corrects the recommendation degree w of screen data including problem word s2 identified by the inclusion status checking unit 145.

[0064] The recommendation level evaluation unit 15 calculates the recommendation level for the user i as a consultation destination based on the value of the recommendation level w of the corrected screen data. The recommendation level evaluation unit 15 stores the calculated result in the result accumulation unit 22, and proceeds to the processing of step S1048 described below.

[0065] Next, a specific example will be given to explain the process when the shared area confirmation unit 142 determines that there is no shared area common to the client and user i.

[0066] 7 is a diagram illustrating an example of processing of the information processing apparatus according to the embodiment. In the example shown in FIG. 7, the user who is seeking advice is a user A2 who belongs to group A, and the trouble word group S consult is a trouble word １ , s ２ It is also assumed that the shared area acquisition unit 141 has acquired the following shared areas: a shared area α to which the users of groups A to C belong, a shared area β to which the users of groups D and E belong, and a shared area γ to which the users of groups C and D belong.

[0067] Here, it is assumed that in step S1042 described above, the sharing area confirmation unit 142 selected user D2 belonging to group D in FIG. 7 as user i.

[0068] If it is determined that there is no sharing area including the consultant and user i (step S1043: NO), the sharing area checking unit 142 proceeds to step S1044.

[0069] The intermediary user identification unit 143 determines whether or not a user exists that satisfies the following conditions 1 and 2 (step S1044). Condition 1: The user belongs to both the shared area to which the consultant belongs and the shared area to which user i belongs. Condition 2: All of the problem words are included in the shared word group in the shared area listed in condition 1. If a user exists that satisfies the above conditions 1 and 2, the intermediary user identification unit 143 determines that a user that satisfies conditions 1 and 2 exists, and identifies the user that satisfies these conditions as an intermediary.

[0070] Since there is no common shared area between the users A2 and D2, who are the consultants, the intermediary user identification unit 143 determines whether there is a user who satisfies the above-mentioned conditions 1 and 2.

[0071] In the example of Fig. 7, user C2 belonging to group C belongs to shared area α to which user A2, the person seeking advice, belongs, and also belongs to shared area γ to which user D2, the selected user i, belongs (satisfying condition 1). In addition, for user C2, both shared area α and shared area γ listed in condition 1 have the problem word s as a shared word group. １ , s ２ (satisfies condition 2). Therefore, in FIG. 7, the intermediary user identification unit 143 determines that there is a user who satisfies condition 1 and condition 2, and identifies user C2 as the intermediary.

[0072] If the intermediary user identification unit 143 determines that a user who satisfies Condition 1 and Condition 2 exists (step S1044: YES), the process proceeds to step S1045. On the other hand, if the intermediary user identification unit 143 determines that a user who satisfies Condition 1 and Condition 2 does not exist (step S1044: NO), the process proceeds to step S1046.

[0073] The shared area addition and generation unit 144 generates a new shared area common to the client and user i (step S1045). The shared area addition and generation unit 144 generates a new shared area including the client and user i. Here, the new shared area generated by the shared area addition and generation unit 144 includes all of the problem words as a shared word group.

[0074] The shared area addition and generation unit 144 creates a shared word group S2 including the user C2 as an intermediary and the users A2 and D2 as consultants. consult (Problem words １ , s ２ ) and a new shared area D2 is generated.

[0075] The inclusion status checking unit 145 checks the inclusion status of the set of shared words in the shared area group between the consultant and user i and the problem words (step S1046). The inclusion status checking unit 145 identifies problem words that do not appear in any document in the identified shared area group.

[0076] The inclusion status checking unit 145 checks the shared area D2 additionally generated by the shared area addition generating unit 144 and the trouble word group S consult Here, the additionally generated shared area D2 contains the trouble word S as a shared word group, as described above. consult Therefore, the inclusion status checking unit 145 determines that there is no problem word that does not appear in any document in the shared area group.

[0077] The recommendation degree correcting unit 146 corrects the recommendation degree of the screen data of the user i (step S1047). The recommendation degree correcting unit 146 corrects the recommendation degree w of the screen data of the user i that includes the problem word identified by the inclusion status checking unit 145.

[0078] Since there is no problem word identified by the inclusion status checking unit 145 for the user D2, the recommendation degree correcting unit 146 checks whether the problem word s is included in the screen data of the user D2. １ , s ２ The screen data including the above is excluded from the correction target, and the recommendation degree w is not corrected.

[0079] The recommendation degree evaluation unit 15 calculates the recommendation degree for the user i as a consultation destination based on the value of the recommendation degree w of the corrected screen data. The recommendation degree evaluation unit 15 stores the calculated result in the result accumulation unit 22, and proceeds to step S1048.

[0080] The shared area confirmation unit 142 determines whether all users have been selected (step S1048). The shared area confirmation unit 142 checks whether all users who are candidates for consultation have been selected in step S1042, and if not, returns to step S1042. The shared area confirmation unit 142 repeatedly executes steps S1042 to S1047 until all users who are candidates for consultation have been selected in step S1042.

[0081] If the shared area check unit 142 determines that all users who are candidates for consultation have been selected, the process of step S104 ends and the process proceeds to step S105.

[0082] The result output control unit 16 outputs the results (step S105). The result output control unit 16 reads the corrected recommendation degree stored in the result storage unit 22. The result output control unit 16 then generates and outputs presentation information for presenting the results to the client. The output presentation information is transmitted, for example, via the network NW to the user terminal UT used by the client. Upon receiving the presentation information, the user terminal UT generates a corresponding display screen, displays it on a display, or the like, and presents it to the client. The presentation information may include information for displaying contact information of the candidate users on the display screen. Optionally, upon receiving the client's selection of a candidate user via the display screen of the user terminal UT, communication (by phone, email, business chat, etc.) with the selected user may be initiated from the client's user terminal UT.

[0083] Furthermore, the result output control unit 16 generates and outputs notification information to notify users (hereinafter referred to as "consultation users") of the occurrence of a problem among the extracted consultation candidate users whose ranking in descending order of recommendation level falls within a predetermined threshold. The output notification information is transmitted, for example, via the network NW to the user terminal UT used by each consultation user. Upon receiving this notification information, the user terminal UT generates a corresponding display screen, displays it on a display, or the like, and presents it to each consultation user. Optionally, the output notification information may include information for identifying text information of the consultation user stored in the terminal handling content storage unit 21 that includes problem information, and displaying an associated screen image or path.

[0084] As a further option, when a consultation acceptance operation by the user being consulted is accepted via the display screen of the user terminal UT, communication (telephone, email, business chat, etc.) with the person seeking advice may be initiated from the user terminal UT of the user being consulted.

[0085] Next, the effects of the information processing device SV according to the embodiment will be described by presenting a comparative example.

[0086] 8 is a diagram illustrating an example of processing of an information processing device of the comparative example. Similar to the information processing device SV according to the embodiment, the information processing device of the comparative example is an information processing device connected to one or more user terminals via a network, acquires trouble words via the user terminals, and evaluates the suitability of users who are candidates for consultation.

[0087] The information processing device of the comparative example differs from the information processing device SV in that it determines whether a group of problem words is contained in a public document made public by a given user, and subjects the screen data of that user that contains problem words that are not contained in the public document of that user to correction of the recommendation level.

[0088] For example, as shown in FIG. 8, when a problem word s is used by a person seeking advice, １ , s ２At this time, for user A, both of the public documents A-1 and A-2 that user A has published in the public domain contain the problem word s １ , s ２ Therefore, the screen data of user A includes the problem word s １ , s ２ Therefore, user A is more likely to be selected as a person to consult.

[0089] On the other hand, for user B, the public documents B-1 and B-2 that user B has published in the public area contain the problem words s １ Contains only troublesome words ２ Therefore, in the screen data of user B, the problem word s ２ The screen data including this will be subject to correction of the recommendation level, and user B will be less likely to be selected as a person to consult.

[0090] As described above, the information processing device of the comparative example can be said to solve the problems of the prior art, which are problems in corporate information security management and privacy violations, such as the possibility that other employees may be able to determine "employees who handle a lot of the character string contained in the relevant screen data" and the problem that they may be able to determine "who is knowledgeable" about screen data that includes business documents that are not necessarily related to work and the contents of homepages viewed on the web, by using public documents as a filter when selecting a person to consult and adjusting the recommendation level of screen data that includes character strings that are not disclosed to others to a lower level.

[0091] However, the information processing device of the comparative example has the following problems.

[0092] 9 and 10 are diagrams illustrating the problems with the information processing device of the comparative example. Generally, work is carried out in teams consisting of multiple employees (such as members working on the same project or employees from related organizations), and business documents are often created and published after discussion within the team. In this case, published business documents should be treated as business documents published as a team effort, not as documents published solely by the specific employee who actually published them. However, in a real business environment, the employee who actually publishes a business document is limited to one specific employee.

[0093] Here, according to the above processing in the information processing device of the comparative example, when a character string contained in a business document is designated as a problem word, only the employee who actually published the business document is excluded from the adjustment of the recommendation level of the screen data, while other employees in the team who should be subjected to the same processing are judged to be the target of adjustment, and there is a problem in that they are less likely to be selected as employees with a high evaluation value of suitability as a person to consult with.

[0094] For example, as shown in Figure 9, document C-1 is a business document created through the collaboration of users A, B, and C. Each user allows themselves to be selected as a consultation point when a character string contained in the business document is designated as a problem word. However, since only user C actually makes the document public, public document C-1 is included in user C's public documents but not in users A and B's public documents.

[0095] At this time, the trouble words specified by the trouble of the person seeking advice １ However, if this is written in document C-1, user C will not be subject to the adjustment of the recommendation level of the screen data, but users A and B, who similarly allow it, will be determined that "the relevant problem words are not allowed to be used in aptitude evaluation calculations using conventional technology," and will be subject to the adjustment of the recommendation level, making user C, who has allowed it to be selected as a person to consult, less likely to be selected as a person to consult.

[0096] In general, business documents are rarely made publicly available for access and viewing by all other departments and individuals, and there is a wide range of organizations and individuals who can access and view them. In other words, it is thought that business documents are often shared by a set range of departments and individuals.

[0097] However, according to the above-mentioned processing of the information processing device of the comparative example, even business documents for which a sharing range has been set are all considered to be documents that have been made public to others, which creates the problem that even for people or organizations that have not made their business documents public, i.e., who do not allow or expect to be selected as people to consult with, if the business document contains words that represent a problem, they will likely be selected as people to consult with.

[0098] For example, as shown in Fig. 10, consider the case where document X-2 exists as a public document of user X and is shared only with specific organizations and persons in charge (groups X and Z). In this case, when a consultation arises with a person in group Y who is not the target of sharing document X-2, according to the process of the information processing device of the comparative example, document X-2 is treated as a public document, and therefore the specified problem word (s １ ) is included in the document X-2, the suitability evaluation for the user X as a person to consult is １ ) is allowed to be handled, and in the conventional technology using screen data, the aptitude evaluation value is not subject to correction. As a result, User X is likely to be selected as a consultant for consultations from consultants belonging to Group Y, which is outside the shared scope.

[0099] In response to the problems described above with the information processing device of the comparative example, the information processing device SV of the embodiment, when selecting a person to consult with, grasps the shared area between users based on the shared range of the shared document and selects a person to consult with based on that shared area, making it easier for users other than the user who shared the document to be selected as a person to consult with, and making it more difficult for users outside the shared area to be selected as a person to consult with.

[0100] That is, the information processing device SV according to the embodiment identifies a shared area, which is the range of users who are the target of sharing, for a business document that a user has shared with other users, and determines whether there is a shared area common to the user who is the requester and the user who is the requester, and whether the shared word group in the common shared area group includes the problem word. As a result, the information processing device SV according to the embodiment can select a consultation destination from a wider range than the information processing device of the comparative example in selecting a consultation destination, and can also adjust the recommendation level for users who have not shared documents with the requester, making them less likely to be selected as consultation destinations.

[0101] Furthermore, for a user who does not have a shared area in common with the person seeking advice, the information processing device SV according to the embodiment determines whether or not there is a user who can act as an intermediary between the user and the person seeking advice, and if there is an intermediary, creates a new shared area in common between the user and the person seeking advice. As a result, for a user who has business knowledge appropriate for the problem of the person seeking advice but does not have a shared area in common with the person seeking advice, the information processing device SV according to the embodiment can identify the user through the intermediary, thereby making it easier for the user to be selected as a person to seek advice from.

[0102] Therefore, the information processing device SV according to the embodiment can select an appropriate user to consult with and provide business support while protecting the user's privacy.

[0103] It should be noted that the present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiment. For example, the information processing device SV may extract, as "peripheral information," vocabulary that appears frequently from the text information of the user terminal UT of the client stored in the terminal handling content storage unit 21, and calculate the recommendation degree for the peripheral information of the screen data of an arbitrary user by combining the extracted vocabulary with the recommendation degree for the problem word of the screen data of the arbitrary user.

[0104] The present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments, and various modifications can be made in the implementation stage without departing from the spirit of the invention. Furthermore, the embodiments may be implemented in appropriate combinations, in which case the combined effects can be obtained. Furthermore, the above-described embodiments include various inventions, and various inventions can be extracted by combining selected elements from the disclosed elements. For example, if the problem can be solved and the desired effect can be obtained even if some elements are deleted from all elements shown in the embodiments, the configuration from which these elements are deleted can be extracted as an invention.

[0105] SV...information processing device UT1 to UTn...user terminal 1...control unit 2...storage unit 3...communication unit 4...input unit 5...output unit 11...terminal handling content acquisition unit 12...trouble word acquisition unit 13...aptitude evaluation value calculation unit 14...shared area correction control unit 15...recommendation level evaluation unit 16...result output control unit 21...terminal handling content accumulation unit 22...result accumulation unit 141...shared area acquisition unit 142...shared area confirmation unit 143...intermediary user identification unit 144...shared area addition and generation unit 145...inclusion status confirmation unit 146...recommendation level correction unit

Claims

1. An information processing device capable of communicating with a plurality of terminal devices, comprising: a terminal operation content acquisition unit for grasping screen data and text information handled by the plurality of terminal devices; a problem word acquisition unit for acquiring problem words input from the terminal device by a person seeking advice; an aptitude evaluation value calculation unit for calculating a recommendation level indicating an aptitude evaluation value for a consultation destination based on the screen data, the text information, and the problem words; a shared area acquisition unit for acquiring a shared area that is the range of users with whom a document has been shared by a user with other users, and extracting character strings contained in the document shared in the shared area as shared words of the shared area; a shared area confirmation unit for identifying the shared area to which the person seeking advice and any user out of all users excluding the person seeking advice belong in common; an inclusion status confirmation unit for confirming whether the problem word is included in one or more of the shared words of the identified shared area; a recommendation level correction unit for correcting the recommendation level according to the results of the confirmation; and a recommendation level evaluation unit for calculating the recommendation level of the consultation destination according to the corrected recommendation level. an output control unit that outputs information for presenting information about a consultation user to the consultation subject.

2. The information processing device described in claim 1, wherein the inclusion status confirmation unit identifies, for the arbitrary user, the problem words that do not appear in the documents shared in the shared area identified by the shared area confirmation unit, and the recommendation degree correction unit corrects the recommendation degree of the screen data of the arbitrary user that includes the problem words identified by the inclusion status confirmation unit.

3. The information processing device according to claim 1 or claim 2, further comprising: an intermediary user identification unit that determines whether or not an intermediary who satisfies predetermined conditions exists between the user and the requester, for the user determined by the shared area confirmation unit to have no shared area in common with the requester; and a shared area addition generation unit that, when it is determined by the intermediary user identification unit that an intermediary exists, additionally generates a shared area between the requester and the user that includes the problem word as the shared word.

4. An information processing method executed by an information processing device capable of communicating with a plurality of terminal devices, comprising: grasping screen data and text information handled by the plurality of terminal devices; acquiring problem words input by a person seeking advice from the terminal devices; calculating a recommendation level indicating an evaluation value of the person's suitability as a person to consult based on the screen data, the text information, and the problem words; acquiring a shared area covering the range of users with whom the document is shared for a document that a user has shared with other users; extracting character strings contained in the document shared in the shared area as shared words of the shared area; identifying the shared area to which the person seeking advice and any user out of all users excluding the person seeking advice belong in common; confirming whether the problem word is included in one or more shared words of the identified shared area; correcting the recommendation level according to the results of the confirmation; calculating the recommendation level of the person to consult based on the corrected recommendation level; and outputting information for presenting information about the person to consult to the person seeking advice.

Images