Data processing: financial – business practice – management – or co – Automated electrical financial or business practice or... – Operations research or analysis
Reexamination Certificate
2005-02-01
2005-02-01
Kazimi, Hani M. (Department: 3624)
Data processing: financial, business practice, management, or co
Automated electrical financial or business practice or...
Operations research or analysis
Reexamination Certificate
active
06850891
ABSTRACT:
The subject invention comprises methods for developing a decision hierarchy and including data as well as judgments in the evaluation of alternatives. Using a preferred embodiment of the subject invention, data for alternatives with respect to covering objectives in a decision hierarchy can be mapped into ratio scale preferences using linear increasing or decreasing functions, non-linear concave or convex increasing or decreasing functions, in conjunction with either-or interval step function scales, verbal intensity rating scales, or directly applied value scores. Upper and lower bounds can also be specified over which these functions are defined. Qualitative data, such as ratings or step scale intervals, can be mapped into a preference scale by making pair-wise comparisons to assess the ratings' intensities. Data can also applied in two other contexts: (1) as a screen to eliminate alternatives that do not satisfy one or more conditions which are defined as musts by the user; and (2) to assign and derive value scores for their corresponding covering objectives. User priorities that were captured by delivering comparisons between objectives are brought together with the data by synthesizing it with respect to all covering objectives and their representative value scores for each alternative. The final result is either a set of alternatives ranked by their total value score, which can be used for allocations or optimizations, or a single top scoring alternative if the goal is to select the best alternative—the remainder of the alternatives are ranked with respect to their difference from the top performer.
REFERENCES:
patent: 4613946 (1986-09-01), Forman
patent: 5090734 (1992-02-01), Dyer et al.
patent: 5227874 (1993-07-01), Von Kohorn
patent: 5312114 (1994-05-01), Lipson
patent: 5321833 (1994-06-01), Chang et al.
patent: 5325533 (1994-06-01), McInerney et al.
patent: 5432887 (1995-07-01), Khaw
patent: 5559945 (1996-09-01), Beaudet et al.
patent: 5566291 (1996-10-01), Boulton et al.
patent: 5621905 (1997-04-01), Jewson et al.
patent: 5625781 (1997-04-01), Cline et al.
patent: 5630120 (1997-05-01), Vachey
patent: 5644736 (1997-07-01), Healy et al.
patent: 5644740 (1997-07-01), Kiuchi
patent: 5657437 (1997-08-01), Bishop et al.
patent: 5710833 (1998-01-01), Moghaddam et al.
patent: 5754738 (1998-05-01), Saucedo et al.
patent: 5758026 (1998-05-01), Lobley et al.
patent: 5774121 (1998-06-01), Stiegler
patent: 5784539 (1998-07-01), Lenz
patent: 5787411 (1998-07-01), Groff et al.
patent: 5799298 (1998-08-01), Bingham et al.
patent: 5832212 (1998-11-01), Cragun et al.
patent: 5835902 (1998-11-01), Jannarone
patent: 5844817 (1998-12-01), Lobley et al.
patent: 5847708 (1998-12-01), Wolff
patent: 5912696 (1999-06-01), Buehl
patent: 5913211 (1999-06-01), Nitta
patent: 5933145 (1999-08-01), Meek
patent: 5995728 (1999-11-01), Forman
patent: 6151565 (2000-11-01), Lobley et al.
patent: 406251098 (1994-09-01), None
Thomas L. Saaty, Decision Marking for Leaders, “The Analytical Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World”, University of Pittsburg, pp. 74-121, 1988.*
Julian W. Vincze, Software Review. “Expert Choice”, School of Business at Rollins College, pp. 10-12, Mar. 1990.*
Michael W. Herman et al., “A Monte Carlo study of pairwise comparison”, Elsevier Science B.V., Information Processing Letters 57 (1996) pp. 25-29.
Chia-Hui Chang et al., “Customizable multi-engine search tool with clustering”, Elsevier Science B.V., Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 29 (1997) pp. 1217-1223.
Björn T. Jònsson et al., “Interaction of Query Evaluation and Buffer Management for Information Retrieval”, SIGMOD 98, vol. 27, Issue 2, Jun. 1998, pp. 118-129.
H. Taira et al., “A Method of Constructing pairwise Comparison Matrix in Decision Making”, 1996 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, vol. 4 of 4, Oct. 14-17, 1996, pp. 2511-2516.
Pedro P. Sanchez et al., “Information concepts and Pairwise comparison matrices”, Elsevier Sciences B.V., Information Processing Letters 68 (1998) pp. 185-188.
Chia-Hui Chang et al., “Enabling Concept-Based Relevance Feedback for Information Retrieval on the WWW”, 1999 IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 11, No. 4, Jul./Aug. 1999 pp. 595-605.
K. Voigt, “SKIPPER: A Tool that Lets Browsers Adapt to Changes in Document Relevance to Its User”, 1996 IEEE Sixth International Workshop on Research Issues in Data Engineering, pp. 61-68.
Joakim Eriksson et al., “SICS MarketSpace—An Agent-Based Market Infrastructure”, Agent Mediated Electronic Commerce, May 10, 1998, pp. 41-53.
Thomas L. Saaty, “A Scaling Method for Proiorities in Hierarchical Structures”, J. Math Psychology, vol. 15, No. 3, Jun. 1977, pp 234-281.
Patrick T. Harker, “The Theory of Ratio Scale Estimation: Saaty's Analytic Hierarchy Process”, Management Science, vol. 33, No. 14, Nov. 1987, pp. 1383-1403.
T.L. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, McGraw-Hill, 1980, Table of Contents & Preface.
P.T.Harker, “Alternative Modes of Questioning in the Analytic Hierarchy Process”, Math Modeling, vol. 9, No. 3-5, 1987, pp. 353-360.
E. H. Forman et al., “Team Expert Choice Advanced Group Decision Support Software User Manual,” Introduction to Modeling, pp. 353-394, 1998.
Thomas L. Saaty, “Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process”, vol. 6; pp. 224-335, 2000.
Thomas L. Saaty, Decision Making For Leaders, The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World pp. 1-51 and 119-151, 1999-2000.
Grossman David G.
Kazimi Hani M.
LandOfFree
Method and system of converting data and judgements to... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Method and system of converting data and judgements to..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Method and system of converting data and judgements to... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3487294