Incremental Data Processing for Network Route Selection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In network routing, existing technologies lack the ability for clients to have control over data packet transfer modalities and quality-of-service guarantees, relying solely on network operators and automated procedures, which limits flexibility and efficiency in meeting diverse client requirements across heterogeneous networks.

Innovation Solution

A method for incremental data processing that allows a source device to sequentially process priority lists from multiple network operators to determine the most suitable quality-of-service guarantees for network conditions, enabling the selection of optimal network routes based on client requirements, such as latency, bandwidth, and packet loss rate, thereby providing control over data packet transmission.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If network operators and automated procedures solely determine transfer paths, then network management and routing control are simplified, but client control over data packet transfer modalities and quality-of-service guarantees is lost

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenetwork management controlVSAvoidclient control over transfer modalities
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the routing decision-making process into two parts: network operators provide route sections with quality metrics, while client devices independently evaluate these sections against their own requirements using priority lists. This segmentation allows both simplified network management and client control to coexist.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Client devices perform self-service by autonomously evaluating route sections and selecting optimal paths based on their specific quality requirements. The client device processes priority lists and determines transfer modalities without requiring direct network operator intervention for each decision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Reliability

If all priority lists from multiple network operators are fully processed to determine optimal routes, then quality-of-service guarantees are maximized, but computational costs increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvequality-of-service guaranteesVSAvoidcomputational costs
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies partial action by processing priority lists incrementally and aborting early when sufficient quality information is obtained. The client device does not need to exhaustively process all priority lists to find an acceptable route,而是 stops when quality requirements are met, reducing computational effort while maintaining reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The processing method skips unnecessary evaluations by aborting sequential processing of priority lists once quality-of-service requirements are satisfied. This rushing through of the evaluation process after reaching adequacy point reduces computational costs without sacrificing the quality guarantees.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #21Skipping (Rushing through)

3Productivity

If sequential processing of priority lists is aborted early to reduce computational costs, then processing efficiency is improved, but completeness of quality-of-service evaluation may be compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocessing efficiencyVSAvoidcompleteness of quality evaluation
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The sequential processing incorporates feedback mechanisms where the client device continuously evaluates whether current route section quality meets requirements. The abort decision is based on feedback from quality assessments, ensuring that early termination does not compromise evaluation completeness when requirements are already satisfied.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS11516144B2Incremental data processing
Publication Date: 2022.11.29 AMADEUS SAS
  • US11516144B2 patent drawing
  • US11516144B2 patent drawing
  • US11516144B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Incremental data processing at a computerized device includes determining a number of data sets from a plurality of data sets, each comprising values in at least two dimensions. The device accesses priority lists for a subset of the data sets. The priority lists specify data values for an ordered number of dimension value sets. Each priority list is sequentially processed to determine the specified data values for combinations of dimension values that apply to device requirements. Processing is aborted when a data value is determined for each combination of the dimension values that apply to the device requirements. A data value is selected among the determined data values. A number of data sets is determined based on the selected data values. A network route from a source device to a target device can be determined in this manner.