Data processing: financial – business practice – management – or co – Automated electrical financial or business practice or... – Operations research or analysis
Reexamination Certificate
2005-03-08
2011-12-27
Jeanty, Romain (Department: 3624)
Data processing: financial, business practice, management, or co
Automated electrical financial or business practice or...
Operations research or analysis
C705S007290, C705S007320
Reexamination Certificate
active
08086484
ABSTRACT:
A method and system of assessing the quality of a work through a quality review engine. The quality review system efficiently builds a ranked list of works. Competing and collaborating creators review each other's works through a variable, relative-measurement technique. Subject matter creators rate the quality of individual pieces of material, while concurrently being reviewed themselves to assess the level of expertise of each reviewer, and thus, the degree of weight that should be given to the commentary of each reviewer. Each review may itself be reviewed to assess a usefulness of the review to determine the weight the review should be given in the ranking process. Assigned reviews, monitored control works, and other fraud detection devices assure accurate rankings at a low cost.
REFERENCES:
patent: 4996642 (1991-02-01), Hey
patent: 5862223 (1999-01-01), Walker et al.
patent: 6081788 (2000-06-01), Appleman et al.
patent: 6493688 (2002-12-01), Das et al.
patent: 7433832 (2008-10-01), Bezos et al.
patent: 7519562 (2009-04-01), Vander Mey et al.
patent: 7519595 (2009-04-01), Solaro et al.
patent: 2001/0032156 (2001-10-01), Candura et al.
patent: 2003/0229476 (2003-12-01), Naganarayana et al.
patent: 2004/0236723 (2004-11-01), Reymond
patent: 2004/0268341 (2004-12-01), Kenworthy
patent: 2005/0203786 (2005-09-01), Jessup et al.
patent: 2007/0219995 (2007-09-01), Heumann et al.
patent: 2008/0133417 (2008-06-01), Robinson
“Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials”, by Christopher Maher et al., Physical Therapy; Washington, Aug. 2003. vol. 83, Iss, 8; p. 73.
“Reliability of Editors' Subjective Quality Ratings of Peer Reviews of Manuscripts”, by Michael Callaham, MD et al., The Journal of the American Medical Association; vol. 280 No. 3, Jul. 15, 1998.
“Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials”, by Christopher Maher et al., Physical Therapy; Washington, Aug. 2003.
Reliability of Editors' Subjective Quality Ratings of Peer Reviews of Manuscripts, by Michael L. Callaham; William G. Baxt; Joseph F. Waeckerle; et al., The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 280, No. 3, Jul. 15, 1998.
American Zoetrope, pages from Dec. 30, 2003, archive of American Zoetrope website (www.zoetrope.com), retrieved from archive.org on Apr. 25, 2005, 5 pages, American Zoetrope, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Live Planet, Project Greenlight, pages from Mar. 17, 2004, archive of Project Greenlight website (www.projectgreenlight.com), retrieved from archive.org on Apr. 25, 2005, 31 pages, LivePlanet Inc., Santa Monica, CA, USA.
Bartley Michael A.
Choy Pan
Clock Tower Law Group
Heels Erik J.
Helium, Inc.
LandOfFree
Method for managing collaborative quality review of creative... 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 for managing collaborative quality review of creative..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Method for managing collaborative quality review of creative... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-4312327