Preference-Matched Event Scheduling With Interactive Itineraries

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Scheduling systems often rely on manual inputs or rigid templates that fail to account for individual user preferences and dynamic external factors, leading to inefficient generation of tailored schedules.

Innovation Solution

A system that automatically or manually collects user preference data, compares it against a master schedule using a matching algorithm, and generates a customized itinerary considering both user preferences and logistical constraints, outputting a visually pleasing and interactive schedule.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If manual inputs or rigid templates are used for scheduling, then system complexity is reduced, but scheduling efficiency and personalization are worsened

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvescheduling efficiencyVSAvoidsystem complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The scheduling system automatically gathers preference data from multiple sources (user profiles, event databases, external APIs) and generates personalized schedules without requiring manual user configuration. The system self-adjusts to user preferences and constraints, eliminating the need for manual template customization while maintaining high scheduling efficiency.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system pre-generates multiple possible schedule iterations by comparing preference data against master schedules before user interaction. This preliminary processing allows the system to quickly present optimized schedule options rather than requiring real-time manual adjustments, thereby improving scheduling efficiency without proportionally increasing system complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

2Adaptability or versatility

If rigid templates are used for scheduling, then ease of operation is improved, but adaptability to user preferences is worsened

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvepersonalization capabilityVSAvoiduser intervention required

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The scheduling system dynamically adapts to user preferences by continuously comparing preference data against available events and automatically adjusting schedule recommendations. The system transitions from static templates to dynamic generation, where schedules are customized based on real-time preference matching rather than predefined rigid structures.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes key parameters of schedule generation by incorporating multiple preference criteria (user interests, constraints, priorities) into the scheduling algorithm. Instead of using fixed template parameters, the system dynamically adjusts schedule parameters based on preference data matching, enabling high personalization while maintaining ease of operation through automated parameter optimization.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

3Manufacturing precision

If extensive user intervention is required for scheduling, then scheduling precision is improved, but productivity is worsened

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvescheduling precisionVSAvoidschedule generation speed

Core Design Contradiction:

Manufacturing precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements feedback loops where user preferences and constraints are continuously compared against generated schedules, and the system automatically refines recommendations based on user interactions and preference data. This automated feedback mechanism maintains high scheduling precision by iteratively optimizing schedules against user criteria without requiring extensive manual user intervention.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system replaces manual mechanical scheduling processes with automated algorithmic generation. Preference data is automatically compared against master schedules using computational matching algorithms, substituting human manual adjustment with automated precision scheduling that maintains high accuracy while dramatically improving schedule generation speed and productivity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentUS20250245583A1Systems and methods for generating a schedule based on preferential criteria

Publication Date: 2025.07.31 ELPH AI LLC

AI summary

The present disclosure relates to systems and methods for generating customized schedules based on user preferences and external criteria. The disclosed technology enables automatic or manual collection of user preference data, comparison against an event schedule, and generation of an optimized event itinerary. Applications include, but are not limited to, music festivals, business conventions, and multi-session events. The system utilizes a matching algorithm to compare user preferences with event details, considering factors such as event content, timing, and location constraints. The generated itinerary may be visually presented through a heat map grid, a marked-up digital poster, or other interactive formats. The system also allows for user modifications and iterative refinements based on additional input. Further, the technology may provide related recommendations, such as curated playlists or suggested reading materials, enhancing user engagement. This system improves scheduling efficiency by reducing manual intervention while ensuring schedules are tailored to individual preferences.