Identity Resolution Adjudication Using Recursive Multi-Pass Indicia

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing identity resolution systems face challenges in handling emerging use cases requiring sophisticated and targeted decision making, as they often rely on manual intervention and are not scalable due to varying interpretations of facts, leading to inconsistent and biased outcomes.

Innovation Solution

A semi-automated adjudicated identity resolution method that employs a core capabilities stage for a single pass and an attribution stage to assign multi-indicia assessments, leveraging granular indicia evaluations, while considering client-specific priorities and intent to enhance decision-making accuracy and reduce manual intervention.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual intervention is used for identity resolution decisions, then decision-making can handle varying interpretations of facts, but productivity is reduced and scalability is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedecision-making accuracyVSAvoidresolution throughput
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The identity resolution process is segmented into multiple passes, each evaluating different subsets of indicia independently. This allows the system to handle complex decision-making scenarios by breaking them down into manageable evaluation stages, improving both accuracy and scalability

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback mechanisms where outcomes from multiple passes are aggregated and used to inform the final decision. This feedback loop enables the system to learn from various evaluation perspectives and make more accurate automated decisions without manual intervention

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Measurement precision

If multiple indicia are evaluated comprehensively, then measurement precision improves, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveindicia assessment accuracyVSAvoidsystem architecture complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The evaluation of multiple indicia is segmented across different passes, where each pass focuses on specific subsets of indicia. This segmentation allows comprehensive evaluation without requiring all indicia to be processed simultaneously, reducing system complexity while maintaining measurement precision

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system adds a temporal dimension to the evaluation process by conducting multiple passes at different stages. This transforms the complexity from a single complex evaluation into multiple simpler evaluations over time, making the system more manageable while achieving comprehensive assessment

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

3Speed

If a single pass is used for identity resolution, then processing speed is maintained, but measurement precision decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresolution speedVSAvoidmatch accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system employs periodic action by conducting multiple evaluation passes at different stages rather than a single continuous evaluation. Each pass is executed independently and efficiently, maintaining processing speed while the aggregation of multiple passes improves measurement precision through comprehensive indicia assessment

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

Data Source

PatentUS20260037515A1System and method for semi-automated adjudicated resolution in the context of non-dispositive scenarios for varying use cases
Publication Date: 2026.02.05 THE DUN & BRADSTREET CORP
  • US20260037515A1 patent drawing
  • US20260037515A1 patent drawing
  • US20260037515A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method for semi-automated adjudicated identity resolution comprising: seeking best match entity candidates via a core capabilities stage for the identity resolution wherein the core capabilities are called multiple times in parallel, providing differing subsets of the full inquiry indicia received from client, such that a large number of possible outcomes can be observed depending on which inquiry indica are used in combination with others; and assigning an initial outcome code for the resulting winner for each pass; wherein the initial outcome code may later be promoted or improved when considered in conjunction with the outcome of one or more other pass outcomes. Stewardship intent is monitored and, in the event an “accept” outcome is not initially found, the system recursively leverages the most positive results of prior attempts and generates additional passes in an effort to find a more acceptable outcome. Interim and eventual results are all experiential data and are captured for multiple uses including, but not limited to, tuning methods, input to AI methods for tuning, and informs downstream discovery and curation processes.