Question-Answering System Feedback Loop for Billing Code Accuracy

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Human operators face challenges in accurately and efficiently generating billing codes from a corpus of documents, as existing computer-based support systems often provide unreliable automatic answers, requiring tedious manual review.

Innovation Solution

A computer-based system that identifies regions in a data set relevant to answering questions, generates answers, and incorporates user feedback to improve accuracy and disable automatic answering when discrepancies occur, thereby reducing cognitive load and increasing efficiency.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If the system provides automatic answers to questions, then productivity is improved, but reliability deteriorates due to unreliable automatic answers requiring tedious manual review

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvequestion-answering efficiencyVSAvoidanswer accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements feedback by having users review and correct automatic answers. The feedback loop allows the system to learn from user corrections and improve future automatic answering accuracy, resolving the contradiction between productivity and reliability by making the automatic system progressively more trustworthy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces an intermediary layer where user feedback acts as a mediator between the automatic answer generation and the final output. This intermediary mechanism allows the system to maintain high productivity through automation while ensuring reliability through user-in-the-loop verification and continuous learning.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If the system guides users through a decision network, then reliability is improved, but loss of time increases due to the tedious process of answering multiple questions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebilling code accuracyVSAvoidcoding time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary action by automatically generating answer candidates before the user needs to make a decision. This allows the user to review pre-prepared options rather than building answers from scratch through the decision network, reducing time loss while maintaining reliability through user verification.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies partial action by providing automatic answers only for questions where the confidence threshold is met, while leaving other questions for user input through the decision network. This hybrid approach reduces overall time loss while maintaining reliability for critical decisions that require human judgment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Reliability

If the system requires manual review of automatic answers, then reliability is improved, but productivity deteriorates due to the additional time required for verification

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveanswer correctnessVSAvoidworkflow speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system requires manual review only partially - specifically for answers that fall below the confidence threshold or are marked for review. High-confidence answers are accepted automatically without manual review, maintaining productivity while ensuring reliability for uncertain cases through selective verification.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the parameter of review intensity dynamically based on answer confidence levels. High-confidence answers receive minimal or no review, while low-confidence answers receive more thorough verification. This parameter-based approach balances reliability requirements with productivity constraints.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS9704099B2Providing computable guidance to relevant evidence in question-answering systems
Publication Date: 2017.07.11 SOLVENTUM INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES CO
  • US9704099B2 patent drawing
  • US9704099B2 patent drawing
  • US9704099B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A computer-based system includes a computer-processable definition of a region in a data set. The system identifies a region of the data set based on the definition of the region. The system provides output to a user representing a question and the identified region of the data set. The system may also automatically generate an answer to the question based on the question and the data set, and provide output to the user representing the answer. The system may generate the answer based on a subset of the data set, and provide output to the user representing the subset of the data set. The user may provide feedback on the first answer to the system, which the system may use to improve subsequent answers to the same and other questions, and to disable the system's automatic question-answering function in response to disagreement between the user and the system.