Application Stability Analysis System for Platform Resiliency

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In systems with multiple applications, it is challenging to assess the quality, stability, and resiliency of individual applications, especially when dealing with large numbers, due to the difficulty in identifying underlying issues and patterns, and determining the importance of each application relative to others.

Innovation Solution

A system that evaluates stability, resiliency, and criticality scores for each application by gathering data on past incidents, supportability, and operational factors, and generates graphical user interfaces to present these scores and recommended actions for improvement, allowing users to filter and prioritize applications based on functionality and platform.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If the number of applications operating on the platform increases, then the functionality of the platform increases, but the difficulty of identifying application quality and underlying issues increases

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovefunctionalityVSAvoiddifficulty of identifying application quality
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDifficulty of detecting and measuring

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an intermediary system that automatically collects, analyzes, and visualizes application quality data. This intermediary layer (the quality assessment system) mediates between the complex application ecosystem and the user, translating raw data into actionable insights through automated scoring, filtering, and presentation mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual inspection and analysis of application quality with an automated computational system. Instead of manually examining applications, the system uses automated data collection, analysis algorithms, and presentation mechanisms to assess and display application quality, stability, and resiliency metrics.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Measurement precision

If manual assessment of each application is performed, then detailed quality information can be obtained, but the time and resources required increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvequality information accuracyVSAvoidtime required for assessment
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a self-service system where applications automatically provide their own quality data through integrated data collection mechanisms. The system autonomously gathers performance metrics, stability data, and resiliency information without requiring manual intervention, enabling continuous automated assessment at scale.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent transforms quality assessment from a manual process to an automated parameter-based evaluation system. By defining specific measurable parameters (stability score, resiliency score, data quality score, criticality score) and using automated data collection and analysis, the system maintains measurement precision while dramatically reducing time requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Loss of information

If all application data is presented to the user, then complete information is available, but the user interface becomes overwhelming and difficult to navigate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinformation completenessVSAvoiduser interface usability
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the comprehensive application quality information into distinct, manageable components: stability scores, resiliency scores, data quality scores, and criticality scores. Each aspect is evaluated and presented separately, allowing users to understand specific quality dimensions without being overwhelmed by a monolithic data set.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent adds a new dimension of presentation by introducing automated filtering and scoring mechanisms that organize data along multiple axes (quality, stability, resiliency, criticality). This multi-dimensional organization transforms raw data into structured, navigable information that users can explore systematically.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

4Productivity

If automated scoring systems are implemented, then assessment speed increases, but the complexity of the system increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveassessment speedVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a universal assessment framework that handles multiple applications across different platforms using a single standardized system. The same data collection, analysis, and scoring mechanisms work universally for all applications, reducing the need for application-specific complexity while maintaining high assessment speed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentUS11307955B2Graphical user interface and analysis system for determining platform stability and resiliency
Publication Date: 2022.04.19 BANK OF AMERICA CORP
  • US11307955B2 patent drawing
  • US11307955B2 patent drawing
  • US11307955B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Embodiments of the invention are directed to a system, method, or computer program product structured for determining platform stability and resiliency. In some embodiments, the system is structured for, for each of a plurality of applications deployed or scheduled to be deployed on a platform, gathering data, evaluating stability factor(s), evaluating resiliency factor(s), determining an overall stability score for the application from the stability factor(s) and overall resiliency score for the application from the resiliency factor(s), and determining a data quality score and criticality score for the application from the stability factor(s) and resiliency factor(s); generating a first GUI including selectable filters; receiving a selection of at least one filter; identifying a subset of applications using the selected filter(s); determining an aggregated stability score, resiliency score, data quality score, and criticality score for the identified subset; and generating a second GUI including the aggregated scores.