Pairwise Feature Score Evaluation for Third-Party Seller Risk

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

E-commerce platforms face challenges in identifying and mitigating risks associated with third-party sellers, as their applications may be falsified, and it is difficult to distinguish between high-risk and low-risk suppliers based on provided information.

Innovation Solution

A system that evaluates potential third-party participants by calculating pairwise feature scores from a set of features using a trained model, classifying them into predetermined categories to assess their risk and suitability for the platform.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If third-party sellers are allowed to use the platform with minimal verification, then the platform's productivity and seller onboarding speed improve, but the risk of falsified applications and bad experiences increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveseller onboarding speedVSAvoidapplication authenticity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary background checks, identity verification, and risk assessments on third-party sellers before allowing them to use the platform. This includes verifying business licenses, conducting criminal background checks, and assessing financial stability in advance, so that only verified sellers are onboarded, maintaining both speed and reliability

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The platform introduces an intermediary verification system that acts as a mediator between sellers and the platform. This includes using third-party verification services, automated identity verification systems, and intermediary reviewers who validate seller applications, ensuring authenticity without slowing down the onboarding process

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If detailed verification processes are implemented for all third-party sellers, then the reliability and risk assessment improve, but the complexity and time required for evaluation increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverisk assessment accuracyVSAvoidevaluation system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The verification system is segmented into multiple independent modules: identity verification module, background check module, financial assessment module, and risk scoring module. Each module handles specific verification tasks independently, making the complex evaluation process manageable and maintainable while improving reliability through comprehensive checking

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different verification depths are applied to different sellers based on their risk profiles. Low-risk sellers undergo streamlined verification, while high-risk sellers receive more detailed scrutiny. This local quality approach ensures reliable risk assessment without uniformly applying complex procedures to all sellers

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Measurement precision

If comprehensive background checks are conducted on all third-party sellers, then the measurement precision of risk identification improves, but the loss of time and processing duration increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverisk identification accuracyVSAvoidevaluation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

Sellers complete comprehensive background checks and provide verification documents in advance during the application process. Automated systems pre-process and validate information before human reviewers need to assess it, ensuring high measurement precision while reducing the time sellers spend waiting for verification

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The verification process operates continuously with automated systems working in parallel to check multiple aspects of seller profiles simultaneously. Background checks, identity verification, and risk assessments are conducted concurrently rather than sequentially, maintaining high precision while minimizing total processing time

Inventive Principle:
Principle #20Continuity of useful action

Data Source

PatentUS11195217B2Evaluation using similarity score for pairwise feature sets
Publication Date: 2021.12.07 WALMART APOLLO LLC
  • US11195217B2 patent drawing
  • US11195217B2 patent drawing
  • US11195217B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems and methods of evaluating a third-party participant for inclusion in a networked environment are disclosed. A plurality of features representative of a third-party participant are received and at least one pairwise feature score is calculated for a first feature and a second feature selected from the plurality of features. The third-party participant is classified into one of a plurality of predetermined categories by a trained model based on the at least one pairwise feature score.