Consolidated Error Fields for Search Index Quality Assessment

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Computerized search systems face inefficiencies in handling incomplete or erroneous indexing processes, leading to potential missed documents during searches, and conventional error handling methods are resource-intensive and cumbersome.

Innovation Solution

Implementing consolidated error fields to track and store the most severe error conditions and metadata errors, allowing for quality assessment of search indices and improved search functionality.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If dedicated error fields are provided for each error condition, then error tracking capability is improved, but device complexity and resource overhead increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror tracking capabilityVSAvoidnumber of error fields
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent consolidates multiple dedicated error fields into a single consolidated error field that stores a concatenated error message containing information about all error conditions. This merging approach maintains comprehensive error tracking capability while significantly reducing the number of separate fields needed, thereby lowering device complexity and resource overhead.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The consolidated error field serves multiple functions: it tracks various types of error conditions (text conversion errors, metadata errors, indexing errors), stores error messages, and enables quality assessment of the search index. This multi-functional approach replaces the need for multiple specialized error fields.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Loss of information

If multiple dedicated error fields are used to track different error conditions, then error information completeness is improved, but storage overhead and resource cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror information completenessVSAvoidstorage overhead
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

Multiple error information elements are merged into a single consolidated error field through concatenation. The error message includes the type of error, a descriptive message, and optionally the object identifier, all stored in one field rather than requiring separate fields for each error attribute.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent extracts only the essential error information (error type, error message, and optional object identifier) and stores it in the consolidated error field, eliminating the need for multiple dedicated fields while maintaining the completeness of error tracking.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

3Reliability

If the indexing process stops when an error occurs, then data quality is improved, but productivity decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata qualityVSAvoidindexing throughput
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of stopping the indexing process completely when an error occurs (all-or-nothing approach), the patent applies partial action by continuing to index objects even when errors are encountered. Error conditions are tracked and recorded in the consolidated error field, allowing the indexing process to proceed with reduced but acceptable data quality for affected objects while maintaining overall productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The consolidated error field provides feedback about error conditions encountered during indexing, allowing the system to monitor and assess index quality without halting the indexing process. This feedback mechanism enables continuous indexing while maintaining awareness of data quality issues.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Measurement precision

If users must check multiple dedicated error fields to assess index quality, then error detection accuracy is improved, but ease of operation deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror detection accuracyVSAvoiduser effort to assess quality
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges all error information into a single consolidated error field that can be queried and assessed in one operation. Users can evaluate the quality of the search index by examining this single field rather than checking multiple dedicated error fields, significantly improving ease of operation while maintaining comprehensive error detection capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Data Source

PatentUS9367581B2System and method of quality assessment of a search index
Publication Date: 2016.06.14 OPEN TEXT SA ULC
  • US9367581B2 patent drawing
  • US9367581B2 patent drawing
  • US9367581B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems, methods, and computer program products for enabling assessment of the quality of a search index. In one embodiment, objects are processed to produce corresponding text that is stored and indexed. The objects are also processed to identify and store corresponding metadata values for indexing. Error conditions that are detected during the processing of objects to generate corresponding text are tracked and compared to determine the most severe of the error conditions. An indication of the most severe error condition is stored in a first consolidated error field. Errors that are encountered in the identification and storage of metadata values are counted and this count is stored in a second consolidated error field. Both of the consolidated error fields are indexed in the same manner as the text and metadata for the objects, so that the stored error information can be used in queries of the search index.