Compliant UI Code Generation from Dynamic Compliance Rules

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing UI-UX design tools are unable to seamlessly accommodate compliance objectives and adapt front-end code generation in response to dynamically changing compliance specifications, leading to disjointed processes and limited automation in translating designs into compliant code.

Innovation Solution

A two-stage process involving component identification and code generation, utilizing machine learning models and large language models to automatically adjust UI-UX designs and front-end code to comply with dynamically changing compliance specifications, without requiring modifications to the design tools.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If existing UI-UX design tools are used without modifications, then the design process remains simple and tools are easy to operate, but the tools cannot accommodate compliance objectives and adapt code generation to dynamically changing compliance specifications

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveadaptability to compliance specificationsVSAvoidsystem complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces a compliance specification repository and compliance checking module as intermediaries between the existing UI-UX design tools and the code generation process. These intermediaries enable compliance adaptation without modifying the original design tools, allowing the system to accommodate compliance objectives while maintaining the simplicity of existing tools.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The system is segmented into distinct modular components: component identification module, compliance checking module, code generation module, and compliance specification repository. This segmentation allows each module to handle specific tasks independently, enabling adaptability to compliance specifications without increasing the complexity of the overall system in a manageable way.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

2Productivity

If manual compliance checking and code adjustment processes are used, then compliance can be verified, but the process becomes disjointed and time-consuming

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecode generation efficiencyVSAvoidtime for compliance checking

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The compliance specifications are pre-defined and stored in a compliance specification repository before the code generation process. The component identification module automatically identifies UI components and checks them against pre-established compliance rules, eliminating the need for manual compliance checking and significantly reducing the time required.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The compliance checking module provides automatic feedback on whether identified components comply with the stored specifications. This feedback mechanism enables real-time compliance verification during the design process, improving productivity by eliminating iterative manual checking and allowing developers to immediately address any compliance issues.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

3Extent of automation

If automated component identification and code generation is implemented, then productivity and compliance adaptation improve, but the system requires complex machine learning models and large language models

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveautomation levelVSAvoidmodel complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Extent of automationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent employs universal machine learning models and large language models that can perform multiple functions: identifying UI components, checking compliance, and generating code. These multi-functional models reduce the need for separate specialized systems, achieving high automation while managing complexity through the use of versatile AI technologies.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Manufacturing precision

If compliance checking is performed on all UI components, then compliance accuracy is improved, but the computational resources and processing time increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecompliance checking accuracyVSAvoidcomputational resource consumption

Core Design Contradiction:

Manufacturing precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The compliance checking process focuses on identifying and verifying only those UI components that are subject to compliance specifications, rather than uniformly checking all components. The component identification module determines which components require compliance verification based on their type and context, reducing unnecessary computational resource consumption while maintaining high compliance checking accuracy for relevant elements.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS12430103B1Automatic generation of compliant user interface code

Publication Date: 2025.09.30 US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

AI summary

An embodiment detects, in a structured data corresponding to a graphical user interface (UI) design, a UI component. The embodiment determines, using a compliance specification retrieved from a compliance system repository, that the UI component is non-compliant. The embodiment extracts a code block from the compliance system repository, where the code block is executable to render a compliant component in place of the UI component on a UI rendering from the UI design. The embodiment combines, to automatically output a front-end UI code, the code block with generated code, the generated code corresponding to another element of the UI design, and the front-end UI code rendering a complete UI page corresponding to the UI design.