Remote Operation Permission Control for Information Processing Apparatus

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing information processing systems restrict remote operations unconditionally when direct operations are in progress, leading to inefficient utilization of the apparatus even when the operations do not interfere with each other.

Innovation Solution

An information processing apparatus that inquires the second user if they want to allow the execution of a job requested by a first user via remote operation, when a direct operation is being performed by the second user.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If remote operation is unconditionally restricted when direct operation is performed, then interference between direct operation and remote operation is prevented, but efficient utilization of the information processing apparatus is compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinterference preventionVSAvoidapparatus utilization efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The restriction policy for remote operation is made dynamic rather than static. The system automatically adjusts the restriction state based on real-time detection of direct operation activities. When direct operation is detected, the system dynamically applies restriction; when direct operation ends, the restriction is automatically lifted, enabling flexible and efficient resource utilization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements a feedback mechanism where the detection unit continuously monitors direct operation status and feeds this information back to the restriction control unit. This feedback loop enables the system to automatically adjust remote operation restrictions based on current operational conditions, preventing interference only when necessary while allowing efficient utilization during appropriate times.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Object-affected harmful factors

If remote operation is restricted during direct operation, then potential interference is suppressed, but legitimate non-interfering remote operations are blocked

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepotential interferenceVSAvoidremote operation availability
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The detection unit performs preliminary detection of direct operation status before allowing or blocking remote operations. By detecting the operational state in advance, the system can make informed decisions about whether to restrict remote operations, preventing potential interference only when direct operations are actually present, rather than blocking all remote operations preemptively.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the operational parameters of remote operation access based on the detected direct operation status. When direct operation is detected, the system modifies the access parameters to restrict remote operations; when direct operation is not detected, the parameters allow remote operations. This parameter-based control enables precise management of interference prevention versus operation availability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS20250021277A1Information processing system and non-transitory computer readable program
Publication Date: 2025.01.16 FUJIFILM BUSINESS INNOVATION CORP
  • US20250021277A1 patent drawing
  • US20250021277A1 patent drawing
  • US20250021277A1 patent drawing

AI summary

An information processing apparatus includes one or more processors configured to: when a request for execution of a job is made to the information processing apparatus by a remote operation from a remote terminal of a first user, in a case where a direct operation is being performed by a second user with respect to the information processing apparatus, inquire of the second user whether to permit the execution of the job; and cause the job to be executed in a case where the execution of the job is permitted as a response to the inquiry.