Machine Learning Content Quality Scoring for Q&A Systems

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Online question-and-answer systems face challenges in managing abusive, obscene, or low-quality user-generated content, leading to system corruption, user dissatisfaction, and potential legal issues due to the scale and resource constraints of manual moderation.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a machine learning mechanism that scores and rates submissions based on patterns identified from initial human or automated ratings, allowing for automatic detection and filtering of unwanted content, and taking actions such as deletion or penalization, while also considering submitter behavior and community feedback.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If operators manually review and approve submissions before they become available for viewing, then the quality and safety of content is improved, but the system becomes stale and submission rate decreases due to backlog accumulation

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontent qualityVSAvoidsubmission rate
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables submissions to self-evaluate their quality by automatically comparing them against previously approved submissions and learned patterns. The machine learning mechanism allows content to be automatically scored and filtered without requiring operator intervention for each submission, thus maintaining quality while improving throughput.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The manual mechanical review process by operators is replaced with an automated machine learning system that uses pattern recognition and scoring mechanisms. This substitution eliminates the bottleneck of human review capacity while maintaining content quality standards through automated filtering of low-scoring submissions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Reliability

If operators frequently examine and delete unwanted submissions, then the quality of system content is improved, but the system requires extensive human resources and cannot keep up with the scale of submissions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontent qualityVSAvoidhuman resources
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-moderation by automatically identifying and filtering unwanted content using machine learning patterns. The machine learning mechanism enables the system to autonomously maintain content quality without requiring extensive human operator intervention, thus reducing resource complexity while improving reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The manual content moderation process is replaced with an automated machine learning-based filtering system. This substitution eliminates the need for extensive human resources while maintaining content quality through automated detection and removal of unwanted submissions based on learned patterns.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Productivity

If the system allows open-ended submissions without filtering, then the system remains fresh and responsive, but abusive and low-quality content corrupts the system

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesubmission rateVSAvoidabusive content
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary evaluation of submissions by automatically scoring them against learned patterns before they become publicly visible. Submissions that fall below quality thresholds are filtered out in advance, allowing the system to maintain open submission channels while preventing harmful content from corrupting the system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The machine learning scoring mechanism acts as an intermediary between submission and public display. It automatically evaluates submissions against quality patterns and filters out unwanted content, thus enabling open submissions while blocking abusive and low-quality material from reaching users.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS7571145B2Social knowledge system content quality
Publication Date: 2009.08.04 VERIZON PATENT & LICENSING INC
  • US7571145B2 patent drawing
  • US7571145B2 patent drawing
  • US7571145B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Techniques for automatically scoring submissions to an online question-and-answer submission system are disclosed. According to one such technique, an initial set of user submissions are scored by human operators and/or automated algorithmic mechanisms. The submissions and their accompanying scores are provided as training data to an automated machine learning mechanism. The machine learning mechanism processes the training data and automatically detects patterns in the provided submissions. The machine learning mechanism automatically correlates these patterns with the scores assigned to the submissions that match those patterns. As a result, the machine learning mechanism is trained. Thereafter, the machine learning mechanism processes unscored submissions. The machine learning mechanism automatically identifies, from among the patterns that the machine learning mechanism has already detected, one or more patterns that these submissions match. The machine learning mechanism automatically scores these submissions based on the matching patterns and the scores that are associated with those patterns.