Transaction Blocking Scheme Management via Performance Visualization

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for detecting and blocking fraudulent transactions in the payment landscape are often manual, complex, and prone to errors, leading to over-blocking of legitimate transactions and gaps in fraud prevention, resulting in financial exposure for merchants and issuers.

Innovation Solution

A computerized method and system for managing transaction blocking schemes, which allows users to define and visualize transaction blocking rules through a user interface, apply these rules to historical and current transaction data, and iteratively test and activate schemes to improve fraud detection and prevention accuracy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual fraud detection and blocking processes are used, then fraud detection capability is provided, but complexity and error rates increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvefraud detection accuracyVSAvoidprocess complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual mechanical fraud detection processes with an automated computerized system that applies predefined blocking rules to transaction data. The system automatically evaluates transactions against multiple criteria and executes blocking decisions without human intervention, eliminating manual errors while maintaining detection capability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The system enables self-service fraud detection by allowing the computerized system to autonomously evaluate transactions, apply rules, and make blocking decisions based on predefined criteria. The system serves itself by automatically generating performance data and enabling users to iteratively refine rules without requiring manual analysis of each transaction.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

2Reliability

If aggressive transaction blocking rules are applied, then fraud prevention is improved, but legitimate transactions are incorrectly blocked

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvefraud prevention effectivenessVSAvoidfalse positive blocking

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies multiple transaction blocking rules with different specificity levels. Some rules are more aggressive and may block potentially fraudulent transactions, while other rules are more selective and preserve legitimate transactions. The system evaluates transactions against multiple rules and only blocks when sufficient criteria are met, reducing false positives while maintaining fraud prevention.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system generates performance data that provides feedback on blocking effectiveness and false positive rates. Users can review this feedback and iteratively refine blocking rules to improve accuracy. The feedback loop allows continuous optimization of rule sensitivity to balance fraud prevention with legitimate transaction flow.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

3Reliability

If comprehensive transaction blocking schemes are implemented, then fraud detection coverage is improved, but system complexity and activation time increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvefraud detection coverageVSAvoidscheme complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides the fraud detection system into separate, manageable blocking rules that can be independently configured and evaluated. Each rule addresses specific fraud patterns or risk factors. This segmentation allows users to build comprehensive coverage by combining multiple simple rules rather than managing one complex rule set, reducing overall system complexity while maintaining detection coverage.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

4Productivity

If transaction blocking rules are applied without testing, then rapid deployment is achieved, but detection accuracy and reliability decrease

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedeployment speedVSAvoiddetection accuracy

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system generates performance data by applying blocking rules to historical or sample transaction data before activation. This preliminary testing allows users to evaluate rule effectiveness and accuracy before deploying to production. The pre-execution analysis ensures detection accuracy is validated while maintaining rapid deployment capability through automated testing.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS11676153B2Managing transaction blocking schemes based on performance data via a user interface

Publication Date: 2023.06.13 MASTERCARD INT INC

AI summary

The disclosure herein describes management of transaction blocking schemes via a user interface. A transaction blocking scheme is receiving via the user interface from a user, including transaction blocking rules. The transaction blocking rules are applied to transaction data associated with the user. Transaction blocking scheme performance data is generated based on the application of the transaction blocking rules to the transaction data, including a quantity of transactions of the transaction data that are blocked by the transaction blocking rules. A visualization of the transaction blocking scheme performance data is displayed via the user interface and the user is prompted to provide a response based on the displayed visualization. Based on the response to the prompt, the transaction blocking scheme is activated for application to incoming transactions, whereby the transaction blocking rules are applied to incoming transactions to determine whether to block the incoming transactions.