Automated Data Validation in Program Build Processes

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for validating data incorporated into computer programs are time-consuming and expensive, as they rely on human verification or manual checks, and data from third-party websites can change without notice, leading to invalidation of programs.

Innovation Solution

A method that automatically validates data by incorporating a source identifier status code and checksum query into the program's source code, ensuring data validity through build-break functions and validation functions, allowing only current and valid data to be used in the program build process.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If human verification methods are used to check data validity, then data accuracy can be ensured, but time consumption and expense increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedata validityVSAvoidvalidation time

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables self-service validation by incorporating checksum queries and validation functions directly into the computer program. The program automatically queries remote locations to verify data integrity using embedded checksums, eliminating the need for human verification while maintaining data validity through automated self-checking mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The invention applies preliminary action by embedding checksums and validation functions into the program during the build process. Before the program executes, the build-break function pre-validates data by comparing current remote data against embedded checksums, ensuring data validity is established in advance rather than during runtime or through manual review.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If manual data validation methods are employed, then data currentness can be verified, but expense and time burden increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedata currentnessVSAvoidvalidation efficiency

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-service validation by automatically querying remote locations and comparing returned data against embedded checksums. The build-break function and validation functions execute autonomously during the build process, eliminating manual validation steps and significantly improving productivity while ensuring data currentness through automated comparison.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The invention replaces manual mechanical verification processes with automated computational mechanisms. Checksum queries and validation functions substitute human reviewers, using algorithmic comparison of data hashes to determine data currentness instantly, thereby eliminating time burden and expense associated with manual validation.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Productivity

If data from third-party websites is used without verification, then program development speed increases, but program reliability decreases due to potential data changes

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedevelopment speedVSAvoidprogram reliability

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies preliminary action by embedding checksums and validation logic into the program during the build process, before the program is deployed. This allows rapid development using third-party data while ensuring reliability through pre-configured verification mechanisms that automatically detect data changes at runtime or during subsequent builds.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The invention implements feedback through checksum queries that continuously verify data integrity. When the program or build system queries the remote location, it receives feedback by comparing current data against embedded checksums. If data has changed, the build-break function detects this through the mismatched checksum and prevents proceeding, thereby maintaining program reliability while allowing fast development cycles.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

4Reliability

If comprehensive data validation is performed, then data integrity is ensured, but build process complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedata integrityVSAvoidbuild process complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system merges data validation functionality directly into the existing build process by incorporating checksum queries and validation functions as integral parts of the build workflow. The build-break function combines multiple validation checks (checksum comparison, data format verification) into a single unified process step, ensuring data integrity without requiring separate complex validation systems.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Data Source

PatentUS11650906B2Automatically validating data incorporated into a computer program

Publication Date: 2023.05.16 COTIVITI INC

AI summary

Embodiments disclosed herein relate to methods, systems, and computer programs for verifying that data incorporated into a computer program is current. The methods, systems, and computer programs compare a source identifier status code associated with the data to a current source identifier status code at the location where the data was obtained. The methods, systems, and computer programs include at least one validation function which determines the validity of the data according to selected parameters. If the source identifier status code and current source identifier status code match and the at least one validation function determines the data is valid, an executable computer program incorporating the data and one or more functions is produced as output.