Document Comparison Interface With Switchable Review Indications

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional document review systems impose a significant operational burden and lack user convenience, particularly in document examination tasks involving comparisons between multiple documents.

Innovation Solution

An information processing system and method that compares a first document with a template document, categorizing items as similar or dissimilar, and generates display screens with differentiated indications for dissimilar items, allowing users to switch between initial and full display modes for enhanced review efficiency.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Loss of information

If all indications are displayed for every item in the document comparison, then complete information is provided, but the display becomes complex and difficult to review

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinformation completenessVSAvoiddisplay complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The display is segmented into two distinct modes: a first display screen showing only dissimilar items with full indications, and a second display screen showing all items with simplified indications. This segmentation allows users to choose between detailed review of differences only or comprehensive review with simplified visual cues, resolving the contradiction between information completeness and display complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements dynamic switching between two display modes based on user needs. The first display screen provides detailed indications for dissimilar items, while the second display screen provides simplified indications for all items. Users can switch between these dynamic display states to balance information completeness against visual complexity during the review process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If detailed indications are shown for all items, then complete review information is available, but the review process becomes time-consuming

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereview accuracyVSAvoidreview time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The review process is segmented into two display options: a first screen showing only dissimilar items with detailed indications for accurate review of changes, and a second screen showing all items with simplified indications for quicker overall review. This segmentation allows reviewers to allocate time efficiently by focusing detailed attention only where needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies partial action by showing detailed indications only for dissimilar items in the first display screen, rather than applying full detailed indication to all items. This partial detailed review reduces time consumption while maintaining review accuracy for the critical differing portions of the document.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Productivity

If the system displays only dissimilar items, then review efficiency is improved, but information about similar items is lost

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereview efficiencyVSAvoidinformation completeness
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically switches between two display states: the first display screen shows only dissimilar items with detailed indications to maximize review efficiency, while the second display screen shows all items with simplified indications to preserve information completeness. This dynamic capability allows users to toggle between efficiency-oriented and completeness-oriented views as needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The second display screen creates a simplified copy of the full document comparison with reduced visual indications. This copy maintains the structural information about all items including similar ones, while using simplified visual cues that preserve essential information without the complexity of full detailed indications.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Data Source

PatentUS20260023924A1Information processing method, information processing apparatus, information processing system, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium
Publication Date: 2026.01.22 LEGALON TECHNOLOGIES INC
  • US20260023924A1 patent drawing
  • US20260023924A1 patent drawing
  • US20260023924A1 patent drawing

AI summary

An information processing method according to an embodiment may compare a first document including a plurality of items to be reviewed with a second document including a plurality of items and in which indications are set to the plurality of items, determine whether the plurality of items of the first document are similar items or dissimilar items, generate a first display screen including the display in which the indication set in the second document is associated with the dissimilar item with respect to the dissimilar item and the display in which the indication simpler than the indication displayed when the item is the dissimilar item is associated with the similar item, and generate the second display screen in which the set indications are displayed with respect to the dissimilar item and the similar item, in which the first display screen and the second display screen can be switched and displayed.