Candidate Content Selection Using Multi-Armed Bandit Tie-Breaking

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing user interface systems face challenges in breaking ties between top-scoring content items and efficiently selecting the most relevant content to display, leading to potential user error and suboptimal user experiences.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a multi-armed bandit model to break ties between candidate content items based on observed click-through rates (CTR) and user interaction data, using a combination of scoring and probabilistic selection to optimize content display.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional scoring methods are used to select content items, then the selection process is simple and fast, but tie-breaking between top-scoring items is difficult and may lead to suboptimal user experience

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontent selection accuracyVSAvoidselection system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The selection process is divided into two distinct stages: first, a scoring module ranks content items based on relevance to user parameters; second, a multi-armed bandit module breaks ties among top-scoring items using probabilistic models. This segmentation allows each module to specialize in its strength while maintaining overall system efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The multi-armed bandit model acts as an intermediary between the deterministic scoring system and the final content selection. It introduces probabilistic exploration and exploitation mechanisms that resolve ambiguities in tie-breaking scenarios, bridging the gap between simple scoring and optimal selection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Productivity

If a deterministic scoring system is used, then the selection process is efficient and fast, but it lacks exploration of potentially better content items

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontent selection speedVSAvoidcontent performance exploration
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts between exploitation (selecting based on current best scores) and exploration (testing alternative content items) through the multi-armed bandit mechanism. This dynamic behavior allows the system to maintain high productivity while adapting to discover potentially superior content items over time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The multi-armed bandit module modifies selection probabilities based on observed performance metrics, changing the effective parameters of content selection. High-performing items receive higher selection probabilities, while lower-performing items are explored less frequently, creating an adaptive selection process that evolves with accumulated data.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If the system explores performance of all content items equally, then it can discover optimal content, but it wastes time and resources on low-performing items

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontent performance optimizationVSAvoidexploration time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The multi-armed bandit implementation uses epsilon-greedy or similar strategies where only a small proportion of selections (epsilon) are used for exploration, while the majority exploit known high-performing items. This partial exploration approach maintains reliability in content selection while minimizing time loss through unnecessary exploration.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors performance metrics (e.g., click-through rates) of displayed content items and uses this feedback to update selection probabilities in the multi-armed bandit model. High-performing items receive positive feedback that increases their selection probability, while low-performing items are gradually phased out, creating an efficient feedback loop that optimizes content selection over time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS12530713B2Systems, methods, and non-transitory computer readable storage mediums for selection of candidate content items
Publication Date: 2026.01.20 STRIPE LLC
  • US12530713B2 patent drawing
  • US12530713B2 patent drawing
  • US12530713B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Examples of the present disclosure describe improved systems and methods for selection of candidate content items. In one example implementation a system includes a processor and a memory coupled to the processor. The memory includes a plurality of sets of requirements. Each set of requirements may be associated with a corresponding available content item of a plurality of available content items. A comparison module may be configured to compare a set of user parameters to each set of requirements and select two or more candidate content items from the plurality of available content items based on the set of user parameters satisfying the set of requirements. A bandit module may be configured to select one elected content item from the two or more candidate content items using a multi-armed bandit model. A user interface module may be configured to transmit the elected content item.