Process Receiving Portion Segmentation for Error Reduction

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing image processing and forming apparatuses lack the ability to create process receiving portions that can execute operations based on user purpose, often resulting in erroneous executions due to limited operational choices and lack of control over process arrangement.

Innovation Solution

A processing apparatus with a display unit and creation unit that allows for the creation of two types of process receiving portions, where the first executes processes upon initial instruction and the second executes without re-instruction, with specific permissions and restrictions based on process type, resource usage, and user authority, to enhance user control and reduce errors.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Device complexity

If a single type of process receiving portion is provided, then device complexity is reduced, but user control and operational flexibility deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvestructure of process receiving portionVSAvoiduser control of process execution

Core Design Contradiction:

Device complexityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides the process receiving portion into two distinct types: a first process receiving portion that executes processes immediately upon receiving an instruction, and a second process receiving portion that executes processes only after receiving a confirmation instruction. This segmentation allows the system to provide different execution behaviors for different processes, enhancing user control without requiring a completely complex unified structure.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different execution control characteristics are assigned to different process receiving portions based on their specific needs. The first process receiving portion is designed for processes that should execute immediately, while the second is designed for processes requiring user confirmation. This local differentiation of quality allows each portion to be optimized for its specific function.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

2Productivity

If processes can be executed without confirmation, then productivity is improved, but reliability deteriorates due to erroneous executions

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveprocess execution speedVSAvoidaccuracy of process execution

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments process execution into two modes: immediate execution for processes that do not require confirmation, and confirmation-based execution for processes that may be erroneously executed. This allows high-productivity immediate execution for safe processes while maintaining reliability through confirmation for critical processes.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different execution control characteristics are assigned to different processes based on their risk profile. Processes deemed safe and routine execute immediately without confirmation, while processes with higher risk of error require user confirmation. This local differentiation of execution control optimizes both productivity and reliability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

3Reliability

If all processes require confirmation before execution, then reliability is improved, but productivity deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveaccuracy of process executionVSAvoidprocess execution speed

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides processes into two categories: those that execute immediately without confirmation and those that require confirmation. This segmentation eliminates the need for universal confirmation, maintaining reliability for critical processes while improving productivity for routine processes.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

4Ease of operation

If users can freely arrange process receiving portions, then ease of operation is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveuser arrangement of process receiving portionsVSAvoidcontrol system for arrangement

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides the display area into two distinct regions: a first region where first process receiving portions can be freely arranged, and a second region where second process receiving portions can be freely arranged. This segmentation simplifies the control system by providing clear spatial boundaries for different process types while maintaining user freedom within each region.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS10911617B2Processing apparatus and program product for attaching mark to displayed process receiving portion to simulate a hardware button

Publication Date: 2021.02.02 FUJIFILM BUSINESS INNOVATION CORP

AI summary

A processing apparatus includes: a processing unit that performs plural predetermined processes; a display unit; a creation unit that creates a first process receiving portion and a second process receiving portion, each of which receives an instruction to any one of the plural predetermined processes on the display unit; and an execution portion that executes the process, in a case where the instruction is received by the first process receiving portion, after receiving the instruction again, whereas, in a case where the instruction is received by the second process receiving portion, the execution portion executing the process without receiving the instruction again.