Trainable Algorithm for Automated UI Feature Resolution

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The traditional method of creating user interfaces (UIs) is inefficient and costly, requiring extensive designer input, multiple iterations, and poor communication between technical and non-technical contributors, leading to increased development time and costs, while lacking the ability to learn from user feedback.

Innovation Solution

A method using a trainable algorithm that receives user input, resolves UI features, and incorporates feedback to improve the design process, allowing for automated generation of high-quality UI mock-ups and streamlined workflows by leveraging user engagement, quality assurance, and practicality parameters.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If traditional manual UI design methods are used, then design quality can be maintained through expert judgment, but development time and costs increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:

ImproveUI design qualityVSAvoiddevelopment time

Core Design Contradiction:

Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables automated UI feature resolution where the algorithm independently analyzes user input, resolves features using trained models, and generates UI mockups without requiring manual designer intervention for each feature, thereby reducing development time while maintaining quality through iterative learning

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates feedback mechanisms where user interactions, selections, and corrections are captured and used to retrain the algorithm, improving its accuracy over time in resolving UI features automatically, thus reducing the need for manual review while maintaining high design quality

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

2Manufacturing precision

If traditional manual UI design methods are used, then design quality can be maintained through expert judgment, but costs increase due to extensive designer input

Engineering Contradiction:

ImproveUI design qualityVSAvoiddesign cost

Core Design Contradiction:

Manufacturing precisionVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs automated UI feature resolution and mockup generation without requiring expensive designer input for routine tasks, reducing costs while maintaining quality through the algorithm's ability to learn from feedback and improve autonomously

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses trained algorithms to replicate expert designer judgment in resolving UI features, creating automated copies of design decision-making processes that reduce reliance on expensive human designers while maintaining consistent quality standards

Inventive Principle:

Principle #26Copying

3Loss of time

If automated algorithms are used to resolve UI features, then development time is reduced, but the system lacks the ability to learn from user feedback

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedevelopment timeVSAvoidlearning capability

Core Design Contradiction:

Loss of timeVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system incorporates comprehensive feedback collection from user interactions, selections, and corrections, using this data to retrain and improve the algorithm's performance over time, enabling continuous learning while maintaining rapid automated processing

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system transitions from static automated resolution to dynamic learning by continuously updating its trained models based on new feedback data, allowing the algorithm to adapt and improve its UI feature resolution capabilities over time while maintaining fast processing speeds

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

4Ease of operation

If traditional UI creation processes are used, then communication between contributors can be maintained through direct interaction, but efficiency decreases due to poor communication channels

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecommunication effectivenessVSAvoiddevelopment efficiency

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system introduces an automated intermediary layer that translates and coordinates between different contributors (project initiators, designers, developers), standardizing communication channels and improving efficiency while maintaining effective collaboration through structured interaction protocols

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS11604641B2Methods and systems for resolving user interface features, and related applications

Publication Date: 2023.03.14 ADEVI IP HLDG CO PTY LTD

AI summary

A method including the following steps: receiving user input; resolving a feature of the input using a trainable algorithm, the trainable algorithm being trainable to resolve a feature by application of the algorithm to a dataset including a plurality of labelled dataset entries, the label of each labelled dataset entry describing a feature; wherein the trainable algorithm resolves the features in user input by identifying in the user input a dataset entry labelled with said feature; forming a UI that incorporates the resolved feature; presenting the formed UI; obtaining feedback in relation to the presented UI or a feature thereof; applying the feedback to train the trainable algorithm to resolve features of a UI, wherein feedback for training the trainable algorithm derives from any one or more of, or a combination of: user selection/validation/customisation of features presented to the user and/or user observation.