Geospatial Service Ranking via Feedback Aggregation
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current methods lack a reliable way to evaluate and rank geospatial processes and datasets, leading to inconsistent and potentially biased results due to differences in data collection and processing methods, resulting in suboptimal decision-making.
Innovation Solution
A method is introduced to determine a value indicator for geospatial information services by aggregating feedback data from multiple respondents, evaluating usage frequency, and providing a ranking system for process-dataset solutions, allowing users to select the most suitable solutions based on user feedback and statistical analysis.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If multiple different geospatial processes and datasets are used, then the variety of geospatial information available increases, but the consistency and reliability of results decrease due to different biases in data collection and processing
Solution Approach 1:
The system collects feedback data from multiple respondents about their experiences with different geospatial processes and datasets. This feedback is aggregated to determine value indicators that reflect the reliability and quality of each process-dataset combination. The feedback loop allows the system to learn from user experiences and adjust rankings accordingly, resolving the contradiction by providing a mechanism to evaluate and compare diverse processes against a common reliability metric.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces an intermediary evaluation system that acts as a mediator between multiple geospatial processes/datasets and the final user decision. This intermediary aggregates feedback from multiple respondents and computes value indicators that standardize the evaluation of diverse processes. By inserting this intermediary layer, the system can maintain variety in available processes while ensuring consistency in evaluation through the feedback aggregation mechanism.
2Manufacturing precision
If expert process developers are specialized in specific datasets, then the processing quality for those datasets improves, but the availability of processes for other datasets is limited
Solution Approach 1:
The patent creates a universal evaluation framework that can assess any geospatial process regardless of which specific dataset it was originally designed for. The feedback aggregation system and value indicator computation are dataset-agnostic, allowing processes developed for specific datasets to be evaluated and ranked when applied to other datasets. This universality enables specialized processes to be made available across multiple datasets through the common evaluation platform.
Solution Approach 2:
The system changes the evaluation parameters from dataset-specific metrics to universal feedback-based value indicators. By collecting feedback data from multiple respondents about process performance across different datasets, the system transforms specialized processing quality metrics into comparable universal indicators. This parameter change allows processes to be evaluated and ranked based on their actual performance rather than their original dataset specialization.
3Ease of operation
If no systematic evaluation method is used, then the simplicity of process selection is maintained, but the accuracy of selecting the best process-dataset solution decreases
Solution Approach 1:
The system enables automatic evaluation and ranking of geospatial processes through self-service feedback collection and aggregation. Respondents automatically provide feedback about their experiences, and the system automatically computes value indicators and rankings without requiring manual expert evaluation. This self-service approach maintains operational simplicity while improving selection accuracy through systematic data collection and analysis.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces manual expert evaluation mechanics with an automated feedback aggregation system. Instead of relying on experts to manually assess and rank processes, the system uses automated collection of feedback data from multiple respondents and computational aggregation to determine value indicators. This substitution of mechanical evaluation processes with automated systems maintains simplicity for users while significantly improving the precision of process selection through systematic analysis of multiple data points.
Data Source
AI summary
A method for determining a value indicator in a broker-mediated geospatial information service (GIS) environment includes receiving, from a second system via a communication network at a first system of the broker-mediated GIS environment, from a plurality of respondents, feedback data relating to: a broker-mediated GIS based upon geospatial data relating to at least one of natural features, constructed features and boundaries on the Earth, the geospatial data including location and characteristic data, and a geospatial information process for geospatially processing a dataset provided to each respondent of the plurality of respondents. Each respondent of the plurality of respondents is a prior requestor of a process-dataset solution for performing the broker-mediated GIS. Based on the feedback data, a value indicator is determined relating to a process-dataset solution based upon the geospatial data and the geospatial information process. The value indicator is transmitted, via the communication network from the broker-mediated GIS, in association with the process-dataset solution transmitting. The process-dataset solution relating to selection of a restaurant.