Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
The 101 rejection is withdrawn.
With respect to the 103 rejection, Applicant's arguments are moot in light of the new art necessitated by amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 10, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20080300053A1 to Muller and Hello, It’s GPT-2- How Can I Help You? Towards the Use of Pretrained Language Models for Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems by Budzianowski et al.
Muller teaches claims 10, 12 and 13. (Currently Amended) A method comprising:
receiving, by an electronic device, explanation text for a game scene of a computer game,
wherein the explanation text is natural language data that is associated with an identifier for the game scene; (Muller abs “Input from a text editor containing lines of text of a script is received, commands to control objects in a simulation are identified in the lines of text in the editor, a state of the simulation is updated in accordance with the input and the commands…” The state of the simulation is the scene identifier, spec. 76 says scene IDs are numbers. Muller para 6 says that it’s states are scenes “the state of the simulation is updated to a state associated with a start time of the second script…” The start time in Muller teaches the ID number in the spec.)
generating, by the electronic device (Muller abs “Input from a text editor containing lines of text of a script is received, commands to control objects in a simulation are identified in the lines of text in the editor, a state of the simulation is updated in accordance with the input and the commands…” The commands are the inferred control data.)
wherein the inferred control data comprises a control of a game character and a background motion within the game scene of the computer game, (Muller abs “Input from a text editor containing lines of text of a script is received, commands to control objects in a simulation are identified in the lines of text in the editor, a state of the simulation is updated in accordance with the input and the commands…” The commands are the inferred control data. Fig. 5 shows that the background motion is something like a “jump”. This sort of background motion is taught by transitioning camera views that come from the inferred commands in Muller para 5 “The object is a camera, and applying the command includes changing a point of view from which the display of the simulation is rendered”, and fig 1e path 116 where a camera moves the background to simulate movement. Muller para 63 teaches the character control inferred from text inputs, “When such a command is given, the cognitive control queries the environment model 202 (FIG. 4) for a suitable path. The behavioral controller 402 c handles reactive actions, such as avoiding collisions while traveling the path. The kinematic controller 402 d governs how a moving model 404 moves. In some examples, the geometric controller 402 e controls a choice of stock animation sequences 406 to animate how a character or other model moves when it implements the movement dictated by the kinematic controller 402 d.”)
executing, by the electronic device, the computer game based on the inferred control data and the identifier for the game scene, (Muller para 63 “When such a command is given, the cognitive control queries the environment model 202 (FIG. 4) for a suitable path. The behavioral controller 402 c handles reactive actions, such as avoiding collisions while traveling the path. The kinematic controller 402 d governs how a moving model 404 moves. In some examples, the geometric controller 402 e controls a choice of stock animation sequences 406 to animate how a character or other model moves when it implements the movement dictated by the kinematic controller 402 d.” Muller fig. 6 shows that the commands are queued up with the state to execute the computer game based on the input text and control/command data.)
wherein the inferred control data is used to control the computer game within the game scene during execution of the computer game. (Muller fig. 6 and para 64 shows what executions looks like “At run-time, the update cycle 124 directs each agent to update its state, resulting in a single row 504 of the chart 502 for each time step (with timeline 512 indicating the progression of time steps).”)
Muller doesn’t teach a trained NLP engine.
However, Budzianowski teaches using a trained model… wherein the trained model is generated by causing a pre-trained natural language model to learn processed script text, (Budzianowski sec. 4 “To evaluate the ability of transferring the GPT generation capability to constrained/focused dialogue tasks and domains, we rely on the multi-domain MultiWOZ dataset…” The dialogue training data is processed script text.) and wherein the pre-trained natural language model has learned in advance a plurality of grammatical structures and a plurality of text-to-text relationships concerning natural language text… (Budzianowski sec. 2 “we rely on the stan dard language modeling (LM) pretraining, where the task is to predict the next word given the pre ceding word sequence…”)
Muller, Budzianowski and the claims are all directed to processing text. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, because using a pretrained GPT on task specific NLP is “widely portable and easily adaptable to a large number of domains…” Budzianowski sec. 1 p. 2.)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Austin Hicks whose telephone number is (571)270-3377. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8-4 PST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mariela Reyes can be reached at (571) 270-1006. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AUSTIN HICKS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2142
