Hierarchical Entity Ranking via Dynamic AI Metrics

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing ranking methodologies for entities such as individuals and institutions are flawed due to subjective assessments, rigidity, lack of universality, inadequate temporal analysis, inflexible definitions, and failure to capture dynamic changes in research specialties, leading to inaccurate and incomplete rankings.

Innovation Solution

A computer-based system utilizing data mining, artificial intelligence, and machine learning to generate hierarchical rankings that dynamically identify and assign researchers to fields, disciplines, and specialties based on publication history, providing objective, time-dependent, and adaptable rankings across various entities.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If subjective assessment by reviewers is used to rank entities, then flexibility in evaluation criteria is improved, but objectivity and reliability of rankings deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveflexibility in evaluation criteriaVSAvoidobjectivity of rankings
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces the mechanical system of subjective human reviewer assessment with an automated computational system that uses objective metrics and algorithms to evaluate and rank entities. This substitution eliminates human bias while maintaining evaluation flexibility through configurable parameters and multiple ranking dimensions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an intermediary automated evaluation system that mediates between the need for flexible criteria and objective assessment. This intermediary layer processes data through standardized algorithms while allowing flexible configuration of evaluation parameters, bridging the gap between adaptability and reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Device complexity

If static ranking methodologies are used, then simplicity of the ranking system is improved, but ability to capture dynamic changes in research specialties deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesimplicity of ranking systemVSAvoidability to capture dynamic changes
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic ranking methodologies that automatically update entity rankings as new data becomes available. The system continuously monitors research outputs, publications, and other metrics to reflect current standings, ensuring rankings adapt to changing research specialties and emerging fields without requiring manual intervention.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent establishes predetermined update cycles and triggers for ranking recalculations. By planning ahead for when rankings should be updated and what metrics should be monitored, the system maintains simplicity while capturing dynamic changes through automated, pre-scheduled evaluations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Measurement precision

If comprehensive data analysis is performed to improve ranking accuracy, then measurement precision is improved, but computational complexity and time consumption increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveranking accuracyVSAvoidtime consumption for ranking
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies partial analysis by focusing computational resources on the most impactful metrics and entities. Rather than analyzing every possible data point equally, the system identifies and prioritizes key performance indicators that have the greatest influence on ranking accuracy, reducing computational overhead while maintaining precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements periodic ranking updates at scheduled intervals rather than continuously processing all data in real-time. This periodic action allows comprehensive analysis to be performed at manageable intervals, balancing accuracy with time consumption by updating rankings when significant changes occur or according to predetermined schedules.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

Data Source

PatentUS20240273445A1Hierarchical Ranking of Entities Including Individuals and Institutions
Publication Date: 2024.08.15 META ANALYTICS LLC
  • US20240273445A1 patent drawing
  • US20240273445A1 patent drawing
  • US20240273445A1 patent drawing

AI summary

In one embodiment, a method includes receiving a request from a user for a ranking of a plurality of entities, the ranking based on a plurality of ranking metrics for each entity, each entity associated with a profile in a profile database. An entity's associated profile contains information corresponding to each of the plurality of ranking metrics for that entity. The method further includes providing, in response to the request, a user interface comprising a ranking of the plurality of entities.