Predictive Schedule Optimization for Real-Time Modification Requests

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing schedule optimization systems face challenges in efficiently managing and optimizing scheduling modifications and requests, particularly in integrating real-time data and user interactions to improve scheduling accuracy and efficiency.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method and system that utilizes a scheduling optimization model, such as a machine learning model, to generate predictive candidate entity datasets and initiate prediction-based actions, including message transmission and document updates based on user interactions and real-time data, such as location and availability data, to optimize scheduling processes.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If traditional schedule optimization systems are used, then system simplicity is maintained, but scheduling efficiency and real-time responsiveness deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvescheduling efficiencyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the scheduling optimization process into distinct functional modules: a machine learning model generation module that creates predictive models, a predictive model execution module that runs predictions, and a schedule modification module that implements changes. This segmentation allows each module to specialize in specific tasks, improving overall scheduling efficiency while managing system complexity through modular architecture.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary actions by generating predictive candidate entity datasets and identifying optimal schedule modifications before actual scheduling decisions are made. The machine learning model predicts potential schedule adjustments in advance, allowing the system to evaluate multiple scenarios and select the best optimization before implementation, thereby improving scheduling efficiency proactively.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If real-time data processing is implemented, then scheduling accuracy is improved, but data processing time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvescheduling accuracyVSAvoiddata processing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary data processing by generating predictive candidate entity datasets and training machine learning models in advance. This allows the system to have pre-computed predictions ready when scheduling decisions are needed, reducing real-time processing time while maintaining high scheduling accuracy through the use of pre-trained models and pre-generated candidate datasets.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The machine learning model serves itself by automatically learning from historical scheduling data and improving its predictions over time without requiring extensive manual intervention. The system autonomously processes data, generates predictions, and refines its models, reducing the time burden on human operators while maintaining or improving scheduling accuracy through continuous self-optimization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Manufacturing precision

If machine learning models are used for predictive analysis, then scheduling precision is improved, but computational complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvescheduling precisionVSAvoidcomputational complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The computational workload is segmented into distinct phases: data preparation, model training, model execution, and result implementation. Each phase handles specific computational tasks independently, allowing the system to achieve high scheduling precision through specialized processing while managing overall computational complexity through structured division of labor across different computational stages.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system generates a predictive candidate entity dataset that includes multiple candidate schedule modifications, evaluating more options than strictly necessary. This partial excess action ensures that the most optimal schedule adjustments are identified with high precision, while the system can then select from this comprehensive set of candidates, balancing computational investment against scheduling precision requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS20260057349A1Schedule optimization framework
Publication Date: 2026.02.26 PIECHOCZEK JULIANNA
  • US20260057349A1 patent drawing
  • US20260057349A1 patent drawing
  • US20260057349A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Various embodiments provide systems, apparatuses, methods, and computer program products for schedule optimization. In an example embodiment, a computer-implemented method comprises receiving an indication of a schedule modification request associated with a client entity, identifying a client document comprising a plurality of linked entity identifiers, generating, using a scheduling optimization model, a predictive candidate entity dataset based on the client document and input dataset corresponding to the client document, wherein the predictive candidate entity dataset comprises one or more ranked candidate linked entity identifiers from the plurality of linked entity identifiers and corresponding ranking, and initiating performance of one or more prediction-based actions based on the predictive candidate entity dataset.