Search Result Display Adaptation for Query Quality

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional search engines often overwhelm users with irrelevant information, especially when search queries are broad, contain spelling mistakes, or are imprecise, leading to inefficient information retrieval.

Innovation Solution

A system that analyzes relevancy metrics to categorize search queries, adjusting the display of search results and providing feedback or suggestions to improve query quality, such as adjusting the number of results shown or running a spell check, based on determined categories.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If a fixed number of search results (e.g., top 100) are displayed regardless of query quality, then the system is simple to operate, but users waste time reading irrelevant information and may miss relevant results

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinformation retrieval efficiencyVSAvoidsearch result display system
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The search result display system dynamically adjusts the number of results shown based on the quality assessment of the search query. Instead of displaying a fixed number of results, the system modifies display parameters in real-time according to query characteristics, making the system adaptive rather than static.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system provides feedback to users about the quality of their search queries by analyzing relevancy metrics and communicating this information back to users. This feedback loop enables users to understand why certain numbers of results are displayed and how to improve their queries for better results.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Loss of information

If relevancy metrics are displayed to help users interpret result quality, then users can make informed decisions about their searches, but users may still fail to understand or use this information effectively

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesearch quality understandingVSAvoiduser interaction with search system
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system changes the parameter of information presentation by not just displaying raw relevancy metrics but by translating these metrics into actionable insights and suggestions. The system modifies how quality information is communicated, transforming abstract metrics into concrete guidance for users.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system acts as an intermediary between the complex relevancy metrics and the user by providing interpreted information and suggestions. Rather than exposing users directly to raw metrics, the system mediates this information through user-friendly explanations and actionable recommendations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Reliability

If the system provides detailed feedback and suggestions for query improvement, then users can learn to conduct better searches, but the system becomes more complex and requires more processing

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesearch result qualityVSAvoidsearch analysis and feedback system
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies partial action by providing feedback and suggestions only when the search query quality falls below certain thresholds. Rather than analyzing and providing feedback on every single query, the system selectively intervenes when improvement is needed, reducing unnecessary processing while maintaining reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The feedback system is segmented into multiple components that analyze different aspects of query quality independently. By dividing the analysis into separate modules (e.g., spelling check, relevance analysis, completeness assessment), the system manages complexity through modular design while providing comprehensive feedback.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS7680772B2Search quality detection
Publication Date: 2010.03.16 INTUIT INC
  • US7680772B2 patent drawing
  • US7680772B2 patent drawing
  • US7680772B2 patent drawing

AI summary

In various embodiments, the present invention provides methods and systems for categorizing the quality of a search by analyzing the relevancy numbers associated with the search results. The relevancy numbers are compared to established patterns to categorize the quality of the search query. Based on this categorization, the system alters the display parameters of the results, such as the number of results to display, the message to display to the user, or in some embodiments, a subsequent action the system executes.