Computing Device Notification Alert Rate Limiting

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Computing devices often overwhelm users with frequent notification alerts, leading to distraction and annoyance, as they output alerts for each instance of new notification data received without considering user interaction.

Innovation Solution

A computing device that determines whether to output alerts based on user interaction since the last notification, either maintaining full intensity for alerts if interaction is detected or reducing intensity or refraining from alerting if no interaction is detected, thereby 'rate limiting' notifications.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the computing device outputs an alert each time new notification data is received, then the user is kept informed of all notifications, but the user becomes overwhelmed, distracted, and annoyed due to high volume and frequency of alerts

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenotification delivery completenessVSAvoiduser distraction and annoyance
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically changes the intensity parameter of alerts based on user interaction state. When user interaction is detected, alerts are output at full intensity; when no interaction is detected, alerts are output at reduced intensity or suppressed entirely. This parameter adjustment resolves the contradiction by maintaining notification effectiveness while reducing harmful over-alerting effects.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The alert output mechanism transitions from a static always-on approach to a dynamic state-dependent approach. The system continuously monitors user interaction state and adjusts alert behavior accordingly, enabling the device to adapt between full alert mode, reduced alert mode, and suppressed alert mode based on real-time user engagement levels.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If the computing device outputs alerts at full intensity for every notification, then all notifications are effectively communicated to the user, but power consumption increases due to frequent high-intensity alert output

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenotification effectivenessVSAvoidpower consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts the intensity parameter of alerts based on user interaction detection. By switching between full intensity, reduced intensity, and suppressed alert states, the system maintains notification effectiveness when needed while significantly reducing power consumption during periods of user inactivity or engagement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of always outputting full-intensity alerts, the system applies partial action by outputting alerts at reduced intensity or suppressing them entirely when user interaction is not detected. This partial alerting strategy maintains sufficient notification effectiveness while reducing the excessive energy consumption associated with continuous full-intensity alerting.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Loss of information

If the computing device outputs alerts for every notification data received, then complete information is provided to the user, but the frequency and volume of alerts become overwhelming and distracting

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenotification information completenessVSAvoidalert frequency and volume
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The system modulates the intensity parameter of alerts based on user interaction state, enabling it to maintain information completeness through full-intensity alerts when users are engaged, while reducing alert volume and frequency perception through intensity reduction or suppression when users are not interacting with the device.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback by monitoring user interaction state and using this information to adjust alert output behavior. This closed-loop control allows the device to respond to user needs dynamically, maintaining information delivery when users are available while reducing harmful alert volume when users are engaged with other tasks.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS10992779B2Limiting alerts on a computing device
Publication Date: 2021.04.27 GOOGLE LLC
  • US10992779B2 patent drawing
  • US10992779B2 patent drawing
  • US10992779B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A computing device is described that receives, at a first particular time, first notification data. Responsive to receiving the first notification data, the computing device outputs, at a first intensity level, a first alert associated with the first notification data. The computing device receives, at a second particular time after the first particular time, second notification data. Responsive to the computing device receiving an indication of user interaction with the computing device between the first particular time and the second particular time, the computing device outputs, at the first intensity level, a second alert associated with the second notification data. Conversely, responsive to the computing device not receiving the indication of user interaction with the computing device, the computing device either outputs, at a second intensity level that is less than the first intensity level, the second alert, or refrains from outputting the second alert entirely.