ML Response Analysis for Communication Device Compatibility

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Certain user devices are not compatible with the hardware or software requirements of specific communication networks, leading to communication failures and service interruptions due to the lack of integration of necessary technologies, causing dropped communication operations.

Innovation Solution

A system and method utilizing artificial intelligence (AI) commands optimized by machine learning (ML) algorithms to dynamically analyze responses from original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to evaluate the compatibility of communication devices, generating an architecture roadmap for operational tasks to ensure compatibility before connecting to the network, thereby preventing resource waste and increasing processing speed.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If manual evaluation processes are used to assess device compatibility, then comprehensive analysis can be performed, but processing time increases and resource efficiency decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice compatibility assessment accuracyVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary analysis by extracting device information and capabilities before the formal evaluation process. ML models pre-assess compatibility requirements and generate initial evaluation reports, allowing reviewers to focus on critical decisions rather than basic analysis, thus reducing overall processing time while maintaining assessment accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual mechanical evaluation processes with automated ML-based assessment systems. The ML models automatically analyze device specifications, compare them against network requirements, and generate compatibility assessments, substituting human reviewers for routine tasks while preserving human judgment for complex cases, thereby reducing time loss without compromising measurement precision.

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

2Measurement precision

If comprehensive device information is collected and analyzed, then compatibility assessment accuracy improves, but computational resources and processing complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecompatibility assessment accuracyVSAvoidsystem processing complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The evaluation system is segmented into multiple specialized ML models, each handling specific aspects of device compatibility (hardware capabilities, software requirements, network protocols). This modular architecture divides the complex comprehensive analysis task into manageable segments that can be processed independently and then integrated, maintaining high assessment accuracy while reducing overall system complexity through division of labor.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces intermediary components including standardized data extraction modules and information normalization layers that mediate between raw device information and the ML assessment models. These intermediaries preprocess and standardize incoming data, making it easier for the core evaluation algorithms to process comprehensive information without being overwhelmed by raw data complexity, thus bridging the gap between thorough information collection and manageable processing complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Productivity

If automated ML-based analysis is implemented, then processing speed increases, but initial system setup and training requirements increase complexity

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocessing speedVSAvoidsystem setup complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The ML-based evaluation system implements self-service capabilities through automated model training and adaptation. The system automatically trains on historical device compatibility data, continuously improves its assessment accuracy, and adapts to new device types without requiring manual reconfiguration. This self-service approach hides the underlying complexity of ML model management from users, delivering high processing speed while minimizing the perceived setup complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent utilizes parameter changes in the ML models to adapt to different evaluation scenarios without fundamentally changing the system architecture. By adjusting model parameters, training data sets, and evaluation thresholds rather than restructuring the core system, the patent achieves high processing speed across diverse compatibility assessment tasks while keeping the underlying system complexity manageable through parameter tuning rather than structural changes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS20250383939A1Dynamic analysis of responses to information requests
Publication Date: 2025.12.18 BOOST SUBSCRIBERCO LLC
  • US20250383939A1 patent drawing
  • US20250383939A1 patent drawing
  • US20250383939A1 patent drawing

AI summary

An apparatus comprises a memory and a processor communicatively coupled to one another. The processor is configured to, in response to receiving an order to generate a request, execute a machine learning algorithm to evaluate one or more input fields associated with a response in accordance with one or more machine learning models and determine one or more evaluation domains based on the input fields. The processor is configured to determine a first priority order relating to first operational tasks, determine a second priority order relating to second operational tasks, generate an architecture roadmap comprising the first operational tasks and the second operational tasks, and transmit the architecture roadmap to one or more reviewing entities. The first priority order is greater than the second priority order. The architecture roadmap is a plan to perform the first operational tasks and the second operational tasks over a time period.