Personalized Autocomplete Scoring With Session-Aware Cluster Ranking

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing autocomplete systems lack the ability to provide personalized and accurate suggestions based on user-specific data, leading to inefficient search operations and increased operational load on search platforms.

Innovation Solution

Utilizing a combination of general and individual curated search corpora, along with machine learning models like per-cluster matching and cross-cluster ranking, to generate session-agnostic and session-aware autocomplete scores, resulting in hybrid scores for personalized predictions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If traditional autocomplete systems are used, then the system is simple to operate, but the search accuracy and personalization capability are poor

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesearch accuracyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The autocomplete system is segmented into multiple independent scoring components: session-agnostic scoring (using edit distance and frequency) and session-aware scoring (using cluster matching and cross-cluster ranking). Each component handles specific aspects of prediction accuracy, allowing the system to achieve high precision without monolithic complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adapts its scoring mechanism based on session context. It transitions from static frequency-based scoring to dynamic cluster-based matching when session data is available, enabling the system to adjust its complexity and personalization level according to real-time user behavior patterns.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Ease of operation

If personalized autocomplete predictions are implemented, then the user experience is improved, but the computational load and operational complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveuser experienceVSAvoidoperational efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies personalized processing selectively rather than universally. It uses session-aware cluster matching only when relevant session data exists, while falling back to simpler frequency-based methods when personalization data is unavailable, thus avoiding unnecessary computational overhead while maintaining personalized experience where beneficial.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes its operational parameters dynamically based on data availability. It adjusts the weight and application of different scoring mechanisms (edit distance, frequency scores, cluster matching) depending on the presence and quality of session data, optimizing the balance between personalization and computational efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Measurement precision

If multiple scoring mechanisms are used, then the prediction accuracy is enhanced, but the processing time and system complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprediction accuracyVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system pre-computes and stores search result clusters and their associations with query prefixes during offline processing. This preliminary action allows the online prediction phase to quickly retrieve and score relevant clusters without performing complex computations in real-time, significantly reducing processing time while maintaining high accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

Search result clusters serve as intermediary structures that bridge the gap between raw search data and prediction scoring. These pre-organized clusters enable efficient matching and ranking by providing a structured intermediate representation that simplifies the comparison between query prefixes and candidate completions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS20260030298A1Machine learning techniques for generating personalized autocomplete prediction
Publication Date: 2026.01.29 OPTUM INC
  • US20260030298A1 patent drawing
  • US20260030298A1 patent drawing
  • US20260030298A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Various embodiments of the present invention provide methods, apparatus, systems, computing devices, computing entities, and/or the like for performing personalized autocomplete predictions. Certain embodiments of the present invention utilize systems, methods, and computer program products that perform personalized autocomplete predictions using a general search corpus and/or individual curated search corpus.