Vendor Selection System Using Probability Ranking

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current systems for selecting and presenting sales outlets to consumers are inadequate as they do not effectively account for user and vendor characteristics, leading to inefficient matching of consumer needs with vendor resources, resulting in suboptimal sales outcomes.

Innovation Solution

The development of systems and methods that utilize statistical modeling to rank vendors based on the probability of sale by considering user and vendor attributes, such as price, inventory, and geographic proximity, to optimize the matching of consumers with vendors, thereby increasing the likelihood of successful transactions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Quantity of substance

If all possible vendors are listed to consumers, then the completeness of vendor information is improved, but the complexity of the search process and information overload increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenumber of vendors presentedVSAvoidsearch process complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Quantity of substanceVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts and highlights only the most relevant vendor characteristics based on consumer preferences and purchase history, rather than presenting all vendor information. This selective extraction reduces information overload while maintaining completeness of relevant data.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces an intermediary filtering mechanism that processes the relationship between consumers and vendors by automatically ranking and selecting vendors based on multiple criteria including consumer preferences, vendor performance metrics, and compatibility factors, thereby simplifying the search process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Ease of operation

If vendor filtering is based on basic attributes only, then the simplicity of the filtering process is improved, but the accuracy of vendor-consumer matching deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefiltering process simplicityVSAvoidmatching accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts filtering parameters by incorporating multiple dimensions including consumer preferences, vendor performance metrics, historical transaction data, and compatibility factors. This multi-parameter approach enhances matching accuracy while maintaining user-friendly interface design.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The filtering mechanism is designed to be dynamic, automatically adapting to consumer behavior patterns and vendor performance changes over time. The system learns from purchase history and interaction data to refine matching criteria, improving accuracy without requiring manual reconfiguration by users.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Measurement precision

If statistical modeling is used to rank vendors, then the precision of vendor selection is improved, but the complexity of the system increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevendor selection precisionVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses statistical models to create virtual representations of vendor performance and consumer preferences, allowing complex calculations to be performed on simplified data structures. This enables precise vendor ranking while managing computational complexity through efficient data representation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The statistical modeling component acts as an intermediary layer between raw data and vendor rankings, processing complex relationships through structured algorithms. This intermediary processing enhances selection precision by systematically analyzing multiple factors while keeping the overall system architecture manageable.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Reliability

If multiple vendor characteristics are considered, then the quality of matching is improved, but the difficulty of detecting and measuring relevant factors increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvematching qualityVSAvoidcharacteristic evaluation difficulty
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDifficulty of detecting and measuring

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments vendor characteristics into distinct categories such as performance metrics, compatibility factors, and consumer preference alignments. This segmentation allows for systematic evaluation of multiple characteristics by breaking down complex assessment into manageable components with defined measurement criteria.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS20200005381A1Method and system for selection, filtering or presentation of available sales outlets
Publication Date: 2020.01.02 TRUECAR INC
  • US20200005381A1 patent drawing
  • US20200005381A1 patent drawing
  • US20200005381A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Embodiments disclosed herein provide systems and methods for the filtering, selection and presentation of vendors accounting for both user characteristics and vendor characteristics, such that the systems and methods may be used by both customer and vendor alike to better match customer needs with the resource-constrained vendors with whom a successful sale has a higher probability of occurring. Embodiments may include filtering, selecting and/or presenting vendors to a user sorted by the probability that the particular vendor will possess the characteristics that appeal to a particular customer and therefore result in a large probability of sale and suppress presentation of those vendors that are unlikely to be selected by the customer since their characteristics are less consistent with those needed by the customer and, therefore, are unlikely to result in a sale.