Predicting Aggregate Transaction Value via ML Models

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional online systems fail to provide timely and valuable analysis for predicting the performance of systems representing objects, such as potential transactions, leading to inadequate corrective actions that could improve performance during a time interval.

Innovation Solution

An online system utilizing machine learning techniques to predict the total value of potential transactions by generating predictor models based on historical data, which includes feature extraction and dimensionality reduction, and recommending actions to maximize value by determining aggregate scores for potential transactions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If conventional tools are used to analyze system performance, then data storage and basic reporting are provided, but timely prediction and actionable insights are not available

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprediction accuracyVSAvoidtime delay in performance analysis
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary actions by training machine learning models on historical data in advance, enabling these models to immediately predict future performance metrics as new data arrives. This preliminary preparation of predictive capabilities eliminates the time delay inherent in conventional retrospective analysis, allowing the system to provide timely predictions rather than delayed reports.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

Machine learning models serve as intermediaries between raw historical data and actionable performance predictions. These models process and interpret complex patterns in the data, transforming raw information into precise predictive insights. This intermediary layer enables both high measurement precision in predictions and timely delivery, as the models continuously process incoming data without requiring manual analysis.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Measurement precision

If machine learning models are trained on historical data, then prediction accuracy is improved, but computational complexity and data processing requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprediction accuracyVSAvoidmodel training complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The machine learning approach is segmented into distinct phases: historical data collection, model training offline, and continuous prediction online. This segmentation allows the complex training process to occur separately from real-time operations, reducing the perceived complexity during active use. The system divides the computational burden into manageable stages, with pre-trained models handling predictions efficiently.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system optimizes model complexity by adjusting parameters such as selecting appropriate feature sets, choosing suitable model architectures, and tuning hyperparameters based on available computational resources. This parameter optimization enables high prediction accuracy while controlling the complexity of model training and deployment, making the system adaptable to different resource constraints.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Loss of information

If aggregate scores for all potential transactions are calculated, then comprehensive performance analysis is provided, but processing time and computational resources increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecompleteness of performance analysisVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of uniformly processing all potential transactions with the same level of detail, the system applies local quality by prioritizing calculations for high-value or high-probability transactions. The machine learning models identify which transactions require detailed aggregate score calculations versus those that can be processed more simply, allocating computational resources efficiently while maintaining comprehensive coverage of important opportunities.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs partial processing by calculating aggregate scores for the most critical transactions first, providing actionable insights within acceptable timeframes. Rather than waiting to process every single potential transaction completely, the system delivers timely predictions for high-priority items, accepting that not all transactions receive equal processing depth in every time window.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS20230252314A1Predicting aggregate value of objects representing potential transactions based on potential transactions expected to be created
Publication Date: 2023.08.10 SALESFORCE INC
  • US20230252314A1 patent drawing
  • US20230252314A1 patent drawing
  • US20230252314A1 patent drawing

AI summary

An online system stores objects representing potential transactions of an enterprise. The online system uses predictor models to determine an aggregate score based on values of the objects associated with a time interval, for example, a month. Each object is configured to take one of a plurality of states. The online system stores historical data describing activities associated with potential transaction objects and uses the stored data for generating the predictor models. The online system categorizes the objects into bins based on states of the objects. The online system may generate different predictions for each category. The online system may use machine learning based models as predictor models. The online system extracts features describing potential transaction objects and provides these as input to the predictor model.