Contextual Answer Generation Through Linguistic Query Analysis

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing question and answer systems, particularly non-factoid-based systems, struggle to provide contextually and grammatically correct answers to queries due to inaccurate passage retrieval and nonsensical document summaries, leading to inefficient user search for relevant information.

Innovation Solution

A system that analyzes the linguistic and syntactic structure of a query to generate contextually, grammatically, and conversationally correct answers by pairing questions with candidate answers, extracting features, and scoring them using a ranking model to provide ranked answers.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If passage retrieval is used to answer non-factoid questions, then relevant text spans are identified, but the accuracy deteriorates because the system does not consider the actual context of the question

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveanswer accuracyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the answer generation process into multiple independent components: passage retrieval, linguistic analysis, feature extraction, and ranking. Each component handles a specific aspect of the problem, allowing the system to consider contextual factors without overwhelming complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary linguistic and syntactic analysis of both the question and candidate answers before final ranking. This advance processing extracts contextual features that inform the subsequent scoring and selection of the most accurate answer.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Loss of information

If document summarization is used to answer questions, then relevant information is extracted, but the quality deteriorates because summaries are often nonsensical and not related to the actual context

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinformation retrievalVSAvoidanswer quality
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses feedback mechanisms where the linguistic analysis of the question informs the selection and scoring of candidate answers. The ranking model continuously refines answer selection based on how well candidate answers match the contextual features extracted from the question, ensuring summaries remain relevant to the actual query context.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the parameters used to evaluate answers from simple relevance matching to comprehensive linguistic and syntactic feature matching. By analyzing multiple linguistic parameters including grammatical structure, semantic relationships, and contextual coherence, the system ensures that summarized information maintains high quality and contextual relevance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Productivity

If natural language generation is used to create answers, then responses are generated, but the quality deteriorates because results often look like word salad and are not contextually correct

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveanswer generation speedVSAvoidcontextual correctness
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary linguistic and syntactic analysis of the question before generating answers. This advance understanding of the question's structure, context, and requirements guides the natural language generation process, ensuring that generated answers are contextually correct rather than random word combinations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system employs multiple parameters for evaluating and refining generated answers, including grammatical correctness, semantic coherence, and contextual relevance. By monitoring and optimizing across these multiple parameters, the system ensures high contextual correctness while maintaining generation efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Reliability

If users must search through identified passages to find answers, then comprehensive search is performed, but the efficiency deteriorates because users spend excessive time searching through irrelevant information

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomprehensive searchVSAvoiduser search time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system extracts and analyzes key linguistic and syntactic features from the question that are essential for identifying the correct answer. By focusing on these extracted features rather than performing exhaustive searches through all passages, the system maintains comprehensive search reliability while significantly reducing the time users need to spend searching.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the search parameters from broad keyword matching to targeted linguistic feature matching. By using extracted linguistic features as search parameters, the system quickly identifies relevant passages without requiring users to manually search through irrelevant information, thus reducing search time while maintaining comprehensive coverage.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS12443596B2Systems and methods for generating a contextually and conversationally correct response to a query
Publication Date: 2025.10.14 THOMSON REUTERS ENTERPRISE CENTRE GMBH
  • US12443596B2 patent drawing
  • US12443596B2 patent drawing
  • US12443596B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The present disclosure relates to systems and methods for generating contextually, grammatically, and conversationally correct answers to input questions. Embodiments provide for linguistic and syntactic structure analysis of a submitted question in order to determine whether the submitted question may be answered by at least one headnote. The question is then further analyzed to determine more details about the intent and context of the question. A federated search process, based on the linguistic and syntactic structure analysis, and the additional analysis of the question is used to identify candidate question-answer pairs from a corpus of previously created headnotes. Machine learning models are used to analyze the candidate question-answer pairs, additional rules are applied to rank the candidate answers, and dynamic thresholds are applied to identify the best potential answers to provide to a user as a response to the submitted question.