Geolocation Probe Trust Scoring for Malicious Data Filtering

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing internet geolocation methods face challenges in achieving precision, timeliness, reliability, and resilience, particularly in the presence of malicious probes that can compromise the accuracy of geolocation results.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method that computes trust scores for each probe based on trust score penalties, which are calculated by comparing probe distances to the target and distances between probes. This method selects the most trustworthy probes for subsequent geolocation instances, thereby enhancing the reliability and accuracy of geolocation results.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If all probes are used in geolocation instances, then the quantity of probes increases, but the reliability and accuracy decrease due to malicious probes

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegeolocation reliabilityVSAvoidnumber of probes
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts malicious probes from the probe set by computing trust scores and removing probes with scores below a threshold. This separates the harmful elements (malicious probes) from the useful elements (trustworthy probes), thereby improving geolocation reliability while maintaining an optimized number of probes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a feedback mechanism where trust scores are computed based on historical probe performance and distance consistency, and these scores feed back into the probe selection process for future geolocation instances. This continuous feedback loop enables the system to adaptively improve reliability by learning from past probe behavior.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If trust score computation is performed for all probes, then the reliability improves, but the computational complexity and time increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegeolocation reliabilityVSAvoidcomputation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by computing trust scores differently for different probes based on their individual characteristics and historical performance. Rather than applying a uniform complex computation to all probes, the system tailors the trust score computation to each probe's specific data availability and reliability profile, optimizing the balance between reliability improvement and computational complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Measurement precision

If distance comparisons are performed for all probe pairs, then the measurement precision improves, but the productivity decreases due to increased computation time

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedistance measurement precisionVSAvoidgeolocation processing speed
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies partial action by performing distance comparisons only for probe pairs that are necessary for computing trust scores, rather than exhaustively comparing all possible probe pairs. The system computes distances selectively based on probe proximity and relevance, achieving sufficient measurement precision without the computational overhead of complete pairwise comparison.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP4530658A1geolocation
Publication Date: 2025.04.02 FUJITSU LTD
  • EP4530658A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4530658A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4530658A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A computer-implemented method comprising: computing, for each probe of a plurality of probes used in a first instance of geolocation for locating a target, a trust score based on a trust score penalty corresponding to the probe; and selecting, based on the trust scores, at least one probe from the plurality of probes for use in a second instance of geolocation, wherein the computer-implemented method comprises, before computing the trust scores based on the trust score penalties, computing the trust score penalties by performing a penalty computation process.