Image Object Disambiguation via Learner Model Conversation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current learning applications face challenges in accurately detecting objects in images, particularly in noisy images and handling user input errors, and lack interaction with users through digital objects, leading to misclassification and incomplete information handling.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of image object recognition techniques using multimodal conversation templates that leverage a learner model and wordweb to generate personalized questions, auto-remediate incorrect answers, and handle incomplete information, thereby disambiguating object labels through iterative questioning based on user knowledge and confidence thresholds.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If object recognition techniques are used to identify objects in images, then object detection capability is improved, but misclassification occurs when confidence values are low

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveobject detection accuracyVSAvoidclassification reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements feedback by comparing confidence values against threshold values and using learner models to evaluate user answers. When confidence is low, the system asks questions to users, evaluates their responses using belief scores, and iteratively refines classification until confidence exceeds the threshold or a maximum number of questions is reached.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary classification using object recognition techniques before user interaction. Confidence values are calculated in advance, and only when these preliminary results fall below the threshold does the system initiate the questioning process, allowing efficient handling of high-confidence cases without user involvement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If traditional learning applications require user interaction to resolve ambiguous classifications, then classification accuracy can be improved, but user interaction complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveclassification accuracyVSAvoiduser interaction simplicity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies partial action by only engaging users when necessary - specifically when confidence values fall below the threshold. High-confidence classifications are resolved automatically without user interaction, while low-confidence cases trigger targeted questioning about specific properties that would resolve the ambiguity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts the questioning process based on learner model assessments of user knowledge levels. Properties are selected and questions are formulated adaptively according to the user's demonstrated understanding, making the interaction process flexible and tailored to individual users rather than following a fixed script.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Reliability

If the system asks multiple questions to verify user answers, then classification reliability is improved, but the number of interaction steps increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveclassification reliabilityVSAvoidinteraction time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary verification by calculating belief scores based on the learner model before presenting questions to users. This allows the system to pre-assess which properties are most likely to resolve ambiguity and structure questions accordingly, reducing the number of iterative questions needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The learner model automatically tracks user knowledge levels and provides self-service by selecting appropriate properties and formulating questions without requiring manual intervention. The system autonomously manages the questioning process, adjusting based on user responses and confidence value changes until classification is resolved.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

4Adaptability or versatility

If the system uses learner models to personalize questions, then user experience is improved, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepersonalization capabilityVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the classification process into distinct components: initial object recognition, confidence evaluation, learner model assessment, property selection, question formulation, and verification. Each component handles a specific aspect of the task, making the overall complex system manageable through modular organization where the learner model focuses specifically on tracking user knowledge and guiding question selection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS11487949B2Image object disambiguation resolution using learner model based conversation templates
Publication Date: 2022.11.01 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINE CORPORATION
  • US11487949B2 patent drawing
  • US11487949B2 patent drawing
  • US11487949B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Methods, systems, and computer program products for image object disambiguation resolution are provided herein. An example of a method includes: obtaining a group of classification labels and corresponding confidence values for an object in an image; using a wordweb to determine one or more properties that distinguish between at least a first one of the classification labels and at least a second one of the classification labels within the group; selecting a first property from the properties to generate a question based on information indicating a level of prior knowledge of the user with each of the properties and each of the one or more labels; assigning a belief score to an answer; and determining whether to present at least a second question to verify the first answer based on a comparison of the belief score to a belief threshold value.