Declarative Constraint Engine for Tax Return Error Detection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current tax return preparation systems lack effective methods for identifying and correcting errors in electronic tax returns, particularly during the preparation process, as they rely on traditional imperative programming and integrated tax logic within the user interface, which limits error detection and user guidance.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of predictive models, such as logistic regression, naive bayes, K-means clustering, and neural networks, in conjunction with declarative constraint-based error checking, allows for real-time verification and alerting of potential errors in electronic tax return data, using separate tax logic and rule engines to generate non-binding suggestions for user input.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional imperative programming and integrated tax logic within user interface are used, then the system structure is simple, but error detection capability is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror detection capabilityVSAvoidsystem structure
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system separates tax logic from the user interface by introducing a dedicated constraint engine that independently evaluates declarative constraints. This segmentation allows the constraint engine to focus specifically on error detection and validation, improving reliability without requiring complete restructuring of the entire system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

A constraint engine is introduced as an intermediary component between the user interface and the tax calculation logic. This mediator receives tax return data, evaluates it against declarative constraints, and provides error feedback, thereby enhancing error detection capability while maintaining a manageable system structure through clear separation of concerns.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Measurement precision

If predictive models are used to verify tax data, then data accuracy is improved, but processing time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata verification accuracyVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The constraint engine evaluates declarative constraints on tax return data as the data is being entered or processed, rather than performing comprehensive predictive model analysis only at the end. This preliminary validation catches errors early in the data entry process, improving verification accuracy while minimizing additional processing time by avoiding rework.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies constraint evaluation selectively to specific data fields and constraints that are most critical for error detection. Rather than applying all possible predictive models to all data uniformly, the system focuses computational resources on high-priority validation checks, achieving sufficient accuracy without excessive processing time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Reliability

If declarative constraint-based error checking is implemented, then error identification is enhanced, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror identificationVSAvoidsystem architecture
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The constraint evaluation logic is extracted as a separate, dedicated constraint engine that operates independently from the main tax calculation and user interface components. This extraction allows error identification to be enhanced through specialized constraint processing while the overall system architecture remains relatively simple through modular design and clear separation of responsibilities.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

4Measurement precision

If multiple predictive models are executed iteratively, then verification thoroughness is improved, but computational overhead increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveverification thoroughnessVSAvoidcomputational resources
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The constraint engine performs preliminary validation using declarative constraints before more computationally intensive predictive model analysis. This preliminary filtering identifies and flags obvious errors early, reducing the need for iterative execution of multiple predictive models and thereby reducing computational resource consumption while maintaining verification thoroughness for critical data points.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS10013721B1Identification of electronic tax return errors based on declarative constraints
Publication Date: 2018.07.03 INTUIT INC
  • US10013721B1 patent drawing
  • US10013721B1 patent drawing
  • US10013721B1 patent drawing

AI summary

Computer-implemented methods, articles of manufacture and computerized systems for identifying or alerting a user of certain data in electronic tax returns. A computerized tax return preparation system including a tax return preparation software application executed by a computing device receives electronic tax return data and populates a field of the electronic tax return. The system executes a constraint engine that compares the electronic tax return data with a constraint of a tax authority requirement expressed in a declarative format. An alert is generated for the user of the tax return preparation software application when the electronic tax data does not satisfy the declarative constraint.