Autonomous Support Case Creation From Limited Case Histories

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing automated technical support systems face challenges in efficiently addressing issues for products with limited volumes of technical support cases, as fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs) with a large corpus of case information is not feasible, leading to inefficiencies and the need for significant human oversight.

Innovation Solution

A method utilizing a semantic analysis model trained on a limited volume of existing cases to identify related technical support issues, creating an initial communication template and question-answer pairings, enabling automated resolution without human intervention.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If fine-tuning LLM with large corpus of case information is used to improve automated support accuracy, then support quality improves, but it becomes infeasible for products with limited case volumes and requires significant human oversight

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveautomated support accuracyVSAvoidtraining data requirement
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the training process into two distinct phases: unsupervised pre-training on available case data to learn basic patterns, followed by targeted supervised fine-tuning only on identified common issues. This segmentation allows the system to achieve competent performance with limited data without requiring exhaustive fine-tuning across all possible cases.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of performing complete fine-tuning on the entire case corpus (excessive action), the system applies partial action by selectively fine-tuning only on the subset of common issues identified through clustering analysis. This partial approach reduces computational requirements and data needs while maintaining effectiveness for the most frequent problems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

2Reliability

If comprehensive fine-tuning is applied to improve automated case handling, then resolution accuracy improves, but human oversight requirements increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecase resolution accuracyVSAvoidhuman oversight requirement
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSExtent of automation

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary unsupervised pre-training on all available case data before deployment, establishing a baseline level of automated capability. This preliminary action reduces the need for ongoing human oversight by pre-learning patterns from the case corpus, allowing the system to handle routine cases autonomously.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback mechanisms where automated resolution outcomes are continuously monitored and used to identify common issues that require additional fine-tuning. This feedback loop enables the system to progressively improve accuracy while maintaining automation, as human reviewers only need to validate and annotate cases that fall into identified common patterns rather than reviewing all cases.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Loss of time

If automated case handling is implemented without sufficient training data, then deployment speed improves, but support quality deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedeployment timeVSAvoidsupport quality
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs unsupervised pre-training on all available case data as a preliminary step before deployment, establishing baseline automated capabilities without requiring extensive fine-tuning. This preliminary action enables faster deployment while maintaining acceptable support quality for non-common cases, as the model learns general patterns from the available data corpus.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the training parameter from requiring large volumes of finely-tuned data to accepting smaller datasets with unsupervised pre-training followed by selective fine-tuning on common issues. This parameter change allows deployment with limited data while maintaining quality through the two-phase training approach, balancing speed and effectiveness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS12536234B2Auto-creation of autonomous technical support cases
Publication Date: 2026.01.27 CISCO TECHNOLOGY INC
  • US12536234B2 patent drawing
  • US12536234B2 patent drawing
  • US12536234B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A technical support system identifies a plurality of technical support cases that were previously resolved and identifies related technical support cases of the plurality of technical support cases based on problem descriptions and resolution summaries associated with the plurality of technical support cases. A Large Language Model (LLM) is used to create an initial contact template for potential technical support issues associated with the related technical support cases. Question and answer pairings associated with the potential technical support issues are identified based on communications in the related technical support cases. A machine learning model is trained to communicate with potential users associated with the potential technical support issues based on the question and answer pairings. The initial contact template and the machine learning model are used to resolve a subsequently received technical support issue associated with the related technical support cases.