Automated Similar Category Identification System

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In electronic commerce systems, identifying mutually similar categories among a large number of classified products is time-consuming and labor-intensive, as the similarity between product categories is often determined manually.

Innovation Solution

An information processing system that includes comparison target deducing means to identify objects for comparison based on user operations and similar category determination means to automatically determine similar categories based on the frequency of object comparisons, reducing the need for manual categorization.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If manual checking of category names and objects is performed to identify similar categories, then identification accuracy is improved, but time consumption and labor cost increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveidentification accuracyVSAvoidtime consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces the manual mechanical checking process with an automated information processing system that uses computer algorithms to analyze category data, extract features, and determine similarity automatically, thereby eliminating the need for human manual inspection while maintaining or improving accuracy

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The system enables categories to be automatically evaluated and compared against each other using predefined criteria and algorithms, allowing the categorization system to self-assess and identify similar categories without external human intervention, thus reducing both time and labor requirements

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Adaptability or versatility

If the number of categories is increased to accommodate more products, then product classification capability is improved, but the complexity of identifying similar categories increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproduct classification capabilityVSAvoidcategory identification complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts key features and attributes from category definitions and product data, separating the essential similarity-determining characteristics from the complete category information. This extraction process simplifies the comparison task by focusing only on the most relevant features, making the identification process manageable even as the number of categories grows

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The system transforms the complex categorical data into standardized parameters and metrics that can be systematically compared. By changing the representation of category information into comparable parameters, the system can efficiently handle increased numbers of categories without proportionally increasing identification complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Manufacturing precision

If manual category classification is used to ensure accurate product categorization, then categorization precision is improved, but productivity decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecategorization precisionVSAvoidcategorization efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual categorization operations with automated information processing that uses computer algorithms to perform classification tasks, thereby maintaining precision through systematic analysis while dramatically improving productivity by eliminating manual labor constraints

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates feedback mechanisms where categorization results are continuously evaluated and refined based on comparison data and similarity metrics. This feedback loop ensures that automated categorization maintains high precision by learning from and adjusting to the characteristics of the data being processed

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS10210237B2Information processing system, similar category identification method, program, and computer readable information storage medium
Publication Date: 2019.02.19 RAKUTEN GROUP INC
  • US10210237B2 patent drawing
  • US10210237B2 patent drawing
  • US10210237B2 patent drawing

AI summary

To reduce time and labor in identifying a similar category among a plurality of categories into which objects are classified. Based on a predetermined operation performed by a user with respect to two objects among a plurality of objects classified into some of a plurality of predetermined categories, the information processing system deduces the two objects as comparison targets. Then, based on the number of times at which the two objects are deduced as comparison targets, the information processing system determines two categories into which the two objects are respectively classified as similar categories.