Natural-Language Computing Action Search with Schema Validation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Computing systems face challenges in efficiently and reliably searching for and performing computing actions due to the large number of possible actions, leading to delays, resource wastage, and inaccuracies, particularly in environments like human capital management systems.

Innovation Solution

A system utilizing a machine learning model with a predefined list of actions and metadata validation to accurately detect user intent, reducing hallucinations and improving reliability by embedding account identifiers into prompts and validating model outputs.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If a machine learning model is used to detect user intent, then the system can handle natural language queries more flexibly, but the model may produce hallucinations and inaccurate action recommendations

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenatural language query handlingVSAvoidaction recommendation accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an intermediary validation layer between the machine learning model and the final action recommendation. This validation layer checks model outputs against the predefined action schema, ensuring that only valid actions are recommended. The schema acts as a mediator that filters out hallucinated or inaccurate recommendations while preserving the flexibility of natural language processing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary action by defining a complete schema of valid actions before the machine learning model generates recommendations. This predefined schema includes all permissible actions, their parameters, and validation rules. The model's outputs are then checked against this pre-established framework, ensuring reliability while maintaining adaptability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If the system searches through a large number of possible computing actions, then it can find the desired action, but it introduces delays and consumes excessive computing resources

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaction search completenessVSAvoidaction search delay
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the large set of computing actions into a structured schema with defined categories, parameters, and relationships. This segmentation allows the system to efficiently navigate and search through actions by leveraging the hierarchical structure and metadata, rather than performing brute-force searches through all possible actions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the parameter representation of actions by using a standardized schema with defined parameters and metadata. This parameterization enables efficient filtering, sorting, and matching of actions based on query requirements, significantly reducing search time and computational resources compared to unstructured action searching.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Productivity

If the system processes instructions to perform computing actions, then it can execute tasks, but it may select or perform incorrect actions leading to resource wastage

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetask execution capabilityVSAvoidcomputing resource wastage
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements feedback mechanisms where the system validates selected actions against the predefined schema before execution. The validation process provides feedback on whether the selected action and its parameters are correct and appropriate for the given query. This feedback loop prevents incorrect actions from being executed, avoiding resource wastage while maintaining productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS20250315791A1Computing action search using natural language processing
Publication Date: 2025.10.09 ADP INC
  • US20250315791A1 patent drawing
  • US20250315791A1 patent drawing
  • US20250315791A1 patent drawing

AI summary

The technical solutions described herein present a computing action search using natural language processing. A system can identify a request containing an executable action associated with a first account identifier of a client system and select a prompt that corresponds to the action, is structured as text including fields, and identifies compatible actions corresponding to the client system or the first account identifier. The system can embed content, including text or metadata, of the first account identifier into the fields of the prompt. The system can provide the prompt to a model and obtain a response from the model indicating a recommended action and a second account identifier associated with the recommended action. The system can validate that the recommended action corresponds to the compatible actions, and the second account identifier corresponds to the first account identifier and execute, responsive to validation, the recommended action for the first account identifier.