Hybrid Document Classification via Automated and Human Review

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current automatic document classification methods are often inaccurate and prone to manipulation, lacking the reliability of human judgment, and are not practical for large volumes of content, especially in the context of product-related documents where relevance and spam detection are critical.

Innovation Solution

A system that combines automated classification with human judgment through a hybrid approach, utilizing machine learning algorithms, rule-based classifiers, and crowdsourcing to validate and improve classification accuracy, incorporating feedback loops to refine training data and classification models.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If automated classification methods are used, then productivity is improved, but reliability deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveclassification speedVSAvoidclassification accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent combines automated classification algorithms with human reviewer judgment into a hybrid system. The automated system handles initial classification to maintain productivity, while human reviewers validate and correct classifications to ensure reliability. This merging of automated and manual processes resolves the contradiction between speed and accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an intermediary validation layer where human reviewers act as mediators between the automated classification system and the final classified output. This intermediary step allows the system to maintain high productivity through automation while ensuring reliability through human oversight of potentially problematic classifications.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If human classification is used, then reliability is improved, but productivity deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveclassification accuracyVSAvoidclassification speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies partial human intervention rather than complete manual classification. Human reviewers only examine and validate a subset of classifications (particularly those with lower confidence scores or from new categories), while the majority of clear-cut cases are handled automatically. This partial action maintains reliability for critical cases while preserving overall productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Productivity

If automated classification is used for large volumes, then productivity is improved, but measurement precision deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevolume processing capacityVSAvoidclassification accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the classification process into multiple stages: automated initial classification, confidence scoring, selective human review of low-confidence or novel cases, and iterative model retraining. This segmentation allows high-volume processing through automation while maintaining precision through targeted human validation of problematic segments.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements feedback loops where human reviewer corrections are used to retrain and improve the automated classification model over time. This continuous feedback mechanism allows the system to maintain high productivity while progressively improving measurement precision through learned patterns from human expertise.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS9483741B2Rule-based item classification
Publication Date: 2016.11.01 WALMART APOLLO LLC
  • US9483741B2 patent drawing
  • US9483741B2 patent drawing
  • US9483741B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems and methods are disclosed herein for rule-based item classification. The methods include receiving, by a computing device, an item record for analysis. The computing device may determine ranked lists of item types using rule-based classifiers and machine learning-based classifiers. Then, the computing device may aggregate the ranked lists of item types to generate a combined ranked list of item types.