DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/09/2022 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
101 Rejection Arguments
Applicant asserts:
Applicant argues, on page 6, that the amended limitation “calculating” is not an abstract idea. More specifically, “the correction value being a value determined for each state variable based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable in an optimization trail process” is an improvement on the prior art by “suppressing the inversion of a state variable as its counted number of inversions increases”.
Examiner response:
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The amended “calculating” limitation is not detailed in a way that it cannot be done mentally. A person could determine a change value using the evaluation function of each state variable and a correction value by counting the number of inversions of the state variable. In addition, as stated in MPEP 2106.05(a), “the judicial exception alone cannot provide the improvement. The improvement can be provided by one or more additional elements.” The claim as a whole does not recite additional elements in combination with the recited judicial exception such that an improvement is provided. The additional elements “a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory” is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. In addition, the suppression of the inversion is not actively claimed and is seen as intended use. Furthermore, the claims and specification does not go into detail regarding how the suppression is performed and if the state variable is referencing a physical bit or simulated bit. Examiner points to paragraphs 0036 and 0081 to gain clarity on how suppression is done, and it seems the suppression is the result of setting the correction value rather than its own step.
102 Rejection Arguments
Applicant asserts:
Applicant argues, on page 9, that the prior art does not teach “the correction value being a value determined for each state variable based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable in an optimization trial process” in independent claims 1, 7, and 8
Examiner response:
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 7, and 8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
In reference to claim 1:
Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, the claim is directed to a machine
Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
“holding each of values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could hold each of values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function.
“performing, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, calculation processing including calculating change value of the evaluation function when a value of the each state variable changes with a probability based on a weight value of the each state variable,” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could perform calculation processing including calculating change values.
“and calculating, based on the calculated change value and a correction value, an evaluation value used to evaluate which state transition to accept among the plurality of state variables, the correction value being a value determined for each state variable based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable in an optimization trial process;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could calculate evaluation values based on calculated change value and correction value.
“and changing one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables, based on the calculated evaluation values.” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could change one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables, based on the calculated evaluation values.
Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
“a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory, the processor being configured to perform processing, the processing including:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
“a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory, the processor being configured to perform processing, the processing including:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
In reference to claim 2:
Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, the claim is directed to a machine
Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
“wherein the performing of the calculation processing includes calculating the change values of the evaluation function in parallel for the plurality of state variables” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a group of persons could calculate the change values of the evaluation function in parallel.
“and calculating the evaluation values in parallel for the plurality of state variables.” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a group of person could calculate the evaluation values in parallel.
Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
No
Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
No
In reference to claim 3:
Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, the claim is directed to a machine
Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
“the processing further comprising: selecting a first state variable included in the plurality of state variables, based on the evaluation values,” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could select a first state variable based on the evaluated values.
“wherein the changing of the one of the held values includes changing one of the values for the first state variable selected by the selecting of the first state variable.” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could change the first state variable that was selected.
Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
No
Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
No
In reference to claim 4:
Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, the claim is directed to a machine
Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
“the processing further comprising: determining, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, the correction value based on a number of times the changing of the each state variable has been made such that the correction value for the each state variable act to suppress inversion of said state variable as the counted number of inversions of the state variable increases.” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine the correction values based on a number of times the changing has been made.
Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
No
Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
No
In reference to claim 5:
Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, the claim is directed to a machine
Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
“The optimization device according to claim 4, wherein the determining of the correction values includes determining, for each group of the plurality of state variables, the correction value of state variables within the each group based on a total number of times the changing of the state variables within the each group has been made such that the correction value for the state variables within the each group acts to suppress inversion of the state variables as the total counted number of inversions of the state variables within the each group increases.” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine the correction values within a group of the plurality of state variables for each group.
Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
No
Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
No
In reference to claim 6:
Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, the claim is directed to a machine
Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
“The optimization device according to claim 4, wherein the determining of the correction values includes determining, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, the correction values based on an average of the change values of the evaluation function when the changing of the each state variable has been made such that the correction value for the each state variable acts to suppress inversion of the each state variable as the average of the change values increases.” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine the correction values based on an average of the change values.
Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
No
Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
No
In reference to claim 7:
Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, the claim is directed to a method
Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
“holding each of values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could hold each of values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function.
“performing, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, calculation processing including calculating change value of the evaluation function when a value of the each state variable changes with a probability based on a weight value of the each state variables,” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could perform calculation processing including calculating change values.
“and calculating, based on the calculated change value and a correction value, an evaluation value used to evaluate which state transition to accept among the plurality of state variables, the correction value being a value determined for each state variable based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable in an optimization trial process;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could calculate evaluation values based on calculated change value and correction value.
“and changing one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables, based on the calculated evaluation values.” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could change one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables, based on the calculated evaluation values.
Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
“implemented by a computer,” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
“implemented by a computer,” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
In reference to claim 8:
Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, the claim is directed to a manufacture
Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
“holding each of values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could hold each of values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function.
“performing, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, calculation processing including calculating change value of the evaluation function when a value of the each state variable changes with a probability based on a weight value of the each state variable,” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could perform calculation processing including calculating change values.
“and calculating, based on the calculated change value and a correction value, an evaluation value used to evaluate which state transition to accept among the plurality of state variables, the correction value being a value determined for each state variable based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable in an optimization trial process;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could calculate evaluation values based on calculated change value and correction value.
“and changing one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables, based on the calculated evaluation values.” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could change one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables, based on the calculated evaluation values.
Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
“storing an optimization program for causing a computer to perform processing including:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
“storing an optimization program for causing a computer to perform processing including:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 5, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOYAMA; Jumpei et al; “US 20200363848 A1” (hereinafter “Jumpei”) in further view of Aaron et al; US 7587620 B1 (hereinafter “Aaron”).
Regarding claim 1, Jumpei teaches a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory, the processor being configured to perform processing, the processing including: (Jumpei Paragraph 0194; "An optimization device 2a includes a CPU 101, random-access memory (RAM) 102")
holding each of values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function; (Jumpei Paragraph 0043; "The state holding unit 60 holds the values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function.")
performing, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, calculation processing including calculating change value of the evaluation function when a value of the each state variable changes with a probability based on a weight value of the each state variable, (Jumpei Paragraph 0059; “The search units 1a1 to 1aN determine a plurality of energy values for a plurality of combinations of two state variables of a plurality of state variables” Jumpei Paragraph 0060; "one search unit determines changes in the energy values corresponding to a change in the value of a certain state variable with respect to the values of the plurality of state variables, for a plurality of combinations of two state variables of the plurality of state variables, based on the plurality of weight values each indicating the strength of connection between the two state variables and the values of the two state variables… Alternatively, the search unit may substitute the values of the plurality of state variables into a predetermined evaluation function to obtain energy values corresponding to the determined values of the plurality of state variables.” Examiner notes that determining the changes in energy values is calculating the change values of the evaluation function when a value of the each state variable changes (corresponding to a change in the value of a certain state variable) with probability based on a weight value of each of the plurality of state variables/plurality of weight values each indicating the strength of connection between the two state variables; the search units 1a1 to 1aN each will perform calculation for corresponding state variable in the plurality of state variables)
calculating, based on the calculated change value and a correction value, an evaluation value used to evaluate which state transition to accept among the plurality of state variables, (Jumpei Paragraph 0060; "The search unit determines the values of the plurality of state variables by determining which state variable value change to accept, based on the results of comparison between the plurality of evaluation values obtained by adding the noise value corresponding to the temperature to each of the plurality of energy value changes, and the threshold value." Examiner notes that the evaluation values shows which state variable value change to accept, based on the calculated change values (energy value changes) and a correction value (threshold value))
and changing one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables, based on the calculated evaluation values. (Jumpei Paragraph 0045; "The transition control unit 62 performs a probabilistic search by determining the acceptance probability of the state transition of the j-th state variable” Jumpei Paragraph 0046; "The transition control unit 62 outputs a flag f indicating whether a state transition is enabled or disabled, and the number of the state transition indicated by the flag f, based on the above-described acceptance probability of the state transition." Examiner notes that the state transition is changing one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables when flag f is indicating it is enables; the changing is based on the acceptance probability which comes from the evaluation values that accept the changes or not)
Jumpei does not teach the correction value being a value determined for each state variable a counted number of inversions of the state variable in an optimization trial process;
However, Aaron does teach the correction value being a value determined for each state variable a counted number of inversions of the state variable in an optimization trial process; (Aaron Column 4 Line 7; “Generally, a change in a signal/bit is referred to herein as a toggle in the signal/bit. In addition, the number of toggles in a signal/bit is referred to herein as the toggle rate/frequency… For example, a signal of (1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0) has a toggle rate/frequency of three whereas a signal of (1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1) has a toggle rate/frequency of two.” Examiner notes that the correction value (toggle rate/frequency) being a value determined for each state variable (signal/bit) based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable (number of toggles in a signal/bit) in an optimization trial process (as shown in examples))
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine Jumpei and Aaron. Jumpei teaches an optimization machine that performs various calculations to get change values, evaluation values, and correction values. Aaron teaches a method to optimize the power used in an integrated circuit. One of ordinary skill would have motivation to combine Jumpei and Aaron to reduce the power consumption “The mechanisms and techniques of the present invention include circuit transformations that can reduce the power consumed by various circuit components.” (Column 3 Line 63).
Regarding claim 2, Jumpei teaches The optimization device according to claim 1, wherein the performing of the calculation processing includes calculating the change values of the evaluation function in parallel for the plurality of state variables, and calculating the evaluation values in parallel for the plurality of state variables. (Jumpei Paragraph 0091; "The number of repetitions of the processing of one search executed in parallel by the search units 10a1 to 10aN is referred to as an iteration count." Examiner notes that the calculations are performed within search units which are executed in parallel)
Regarding claim 3, Jumpei teaches The optimization device according to claim 2, the processing further comprising: selecting a first state variable included in the plurality of state variables, based on the evaluation values, wherein the changing of the one of the held values includes changing one of the values for the first state variable selected by the selecting of the first state variable. (Jumpei Paragraph 0043; "the state holding unit 60 updates states s; that are the values of the plurality of state variables (the above-described values of variable vectors), based on a flag f indicating whether state transition is enabled or disabled" Jumpei Paragraph 0109; "The selector unit 13c receives a flag indicating whether the transition is enabled or disabled output from each of the state transition determination circuits 13b1 to 13bn. When there are flags indicating that the transition is enabled among the flags output from the state transition determination circuits 13b1 to 13bn, the selector unit 13c selects one of the flags indicating that the transition is enabled…The selector unit 13c outputs to the state holding unit 11a an update signal (update) including the flag indicating whether the transition is enabled or disabled and the index=j indicating the spin bit corresponding to the selected flag." Examiner notes that the selector unit selects a first state variable/flag corresponding to first state variable included in the plurality of state variables, based on the evaluation values/flags indicating that the transition is enabled; wherein the changing one of the held values includes changing one of the values for the first state variable selected occurs in the state holding unit to update the state)
Regarding claim 4, Jumpei does not teach The optimization device according to claim 1, the processing further comprising: determining, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, the correction value based on a number of times the changing of the each state variable has been made
such that the correction value for the each state variable act to suppress inversion of said state variable as the counted number of inversions of the state variable increases.
However, Aaron does teach The optimization device according to claim 1, the processing further comprising: determining, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, the correction value based on a number of times the changing of the each state variable has been made (Aaron Column 4 Line 7; “Generally, a change in a signal/bit is referred to herein as a toggle in the signal/bit. In addition, the number of toggles in a signal/bit is referred to herein as the toggle rate/frequency… For example, a signal of (1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0) has a toggle rate/frequency of three whereas a signal of (1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1) has a toggle rate/frequency of two.” Examiner notes that the correction value (toggle rate/frequency) is determined based on a number of times the changing of the each state variable has been made (number of toggles in a signal/bit))
such that the correction value for the each state variable act to suppress inversion of said state variable as the counted number of inversions of the state variable increases. (Aaron Column 4 Line 2; “the circuit-level transformation/permutation assigns signals that toggle frequently to lower power multiplier inputs and/or minimizes the number of times a signal changes value;” Examiner notes that the correction value (toggle frequency) for each state variable (signal) act to suppress inversions of said state variable (minimizes the number of times a signal changes value) as the counted number of inversions of the state variable increases (signals that toggle frequently))
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine Jumpei and Aaron. Jumpei teaches an optimization machine that performs various calculations to get change values, evaluation values, and correction values. Aaron teaches a method to optimize the power used in an integrated circuit. One of ordinary skill would have motivation to combine Jumpei and Aaron to reduce the power consumption “The mechanisms and techniques of the present invention include circuit transformations that can reduce the power consumed by various circuit components.” (Column 3 Line 63).
Regarding claim 5, Jumpei does not teach The optimization device according to claim 4, wherein the determining of the correction values includes determining, for each group of the plurality of state variables, the correction value of state variables within the each group based on a total number of times the changing of the state variables within the each group has been made.
such that the correction value for the state variables within the each group acts to suppress inversion of the state variables as the total counted number of inversions of the state variables within the each group increases.
However, Aaron does teach the optimization device according to claim 4, wherein the determining of the correction values includes determining, for each group of the plurality of state variables, the correction value of state variables within the each group based on a total number of times the changing of the state variables within the each group has been made. (Aaron Column 4 Line 7; “Generally, a change in a signal/bit is referred to herein as a toggle in the signal/bit. In addition, the number of toggles in a signal/bit is referred to herein as the toggle rate/frequency… For example, a signal of (1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0) has a toggle rate/frequency of three whereas a signal of (1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1) has a toggle rate/frequency of two.” Examiner notes that the correction value (toggle rate/frequency) is determined based on a number of times the changing of the each state variable has been made (number of toggles in a signal/bit); each group can contain 1 signal)
such that the correction value for the state variables within the each group acts to suppress inversion of the state variables as the total counted number of inversions of the state variables within the each group increases. (Aaron Column 4 Line 2; “the circuit-level transformation/permutation assigns signals that toggle frequently to lower power multiplier inputs and/or minimizes the number of times a signal changes value;” Examiner notes that the correction value (toggle frequency) for each state variable (signal) within the each group acts to suppress inversions of said state variable (minimizes the number of times a signal changes value) as the counted number of inversions of the state variable increases (signals that toggle frequently))
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine Jumpei and Aaron. Jumpei teaches an optimization machine that performs various calculations to get change values, evaluation values, and correction values. Aaron teaches a method to optimize the power used in an integrated circuit. One of ordinary skill would have motivation to combine Jumpei and Aaron to reduce the power consumption “The mechanisms and techniques of the present invention include circuit transformations that can reduce the power consumed by various circuit components.” (Column 3 Line 63).
Regarding claim 7, Jumpei teaches An optimization method implemented by a computer, the optimization method comprising: (Jumpei Paragraph 0194; "An optimization device 2a includes a CPU 101, random-access memory (RAM) 102")
holding each of values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function; (Jumpei Paragraph 0043; "The state holding unit 60 holds the values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function.")
performing, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, calculation processing including calculating change value of the evaluation function when a value of the each state variable changes with a probability based on a weight value of the each state variables, (Jumpei Paragraph 0059; “The search units 1a1 to 1aN determine a plurality of energy values for a plurality of combinations of two state variables of a plurality of state variables” Jumpei Paragraph 0060; "one search unit determines changes in the energy values corresponding to a change in the value of a certain state variable with respect to the values of the plurality of state variables, for a plurality of combinations of two state variables of the plurality of state variables, based on the plurality of weight values each indicating the strength of connection between the two state variables and the values of the two state variables… Alternatively, the search unit may substitute the values of the plurality of state variables into a predetermined evaluation function to obtain energy values corresponding to the determined values of the plurality of state variables.” Examiner notes that determining the changes in energy values is calculating the change values of the evaluation function when a value of the each state variable changes (corresponding to a change in the value of a certain state variable) with probability based on a weight value of each of the plurality of state variables/plurality of weight values each indicating the strength of connection between the two state variables; the search units 1a1 to 1aN each will perform calculation for corresponding state variable in the plurality of state variables)
and calculating, based on the calculated change value and a correction value, an evaluation value used to evaluate which state transition to accept among the plurality of state variables (Jumpei Paragraph 0060; "The search unit determines the values of the plurality of state variables by determining which state variable value change to accept, based on the results of comparison between the plurality of evaluation values obtained by adding the noise value corresponding to the temperature to each of the plurality of energy value changes, and the threshold value." Examiner notes that the evaluation values shows which state variable value change to accept, based on the calculated change values (energy value changes) and a correction value (threshold value))
and changing one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables, based on the calculated evaluation values. (Jumpei Paragraph 0045; "The transition control unit 62 performs a probabilistic search by determining the acceptance probability of the state transition of the j-th state variable” Jumpei Paragraph 0046; "The transition control unit 62 outputs a flag f indicating whether a state transition is enabled or disabled, and the number of the state transition indicated by the flag f, based on the above-described acceptance probability of the state transition." Examiner notes that the state transition is changing one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables when flag f is indicating it is enables; the changing is based on the acceptance probability which comes from the evaluation values that accept the changes or not)
Jumpei does not teach the correction value being a value determined for each state variable based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable in an optimization trial process;
However, Aaron does teach the correction value being a value determined for each state variable based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable in an optimization trial process; (Aaron Column 4 Line 7; “Generally, a change in a signal/bit is referred to herein as a toggle in the signal/bit. In addition, the number of toggles in a signal/bit is referred to herein as the toggle rate/frequency… For example, a signal of (1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0) has a toggle rate/frequency of three whereas a signal of (1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1) has a toggle rate/frequency of two.” Examiner notes that the correction value (toggle rate/frequency) being a value determined for each state variable (signal/bit) based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable (number of toggles in a signal/bit) in an optimization trial process (as shown in examples))
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine Jumpei and Aaron. Jumpei teaches an optimization machine that performs various calculations to get change values, evaluation values, and correction values. Aaron teaches a method to optimize the power used in an integrated circuit. One of ordinary skill would have motivation to combine Jumpei and Aaron to reduce the power consumption “The mechanisms and techniques of the present invention include circuit transformations that can reduce the power consumed by various circuit components.” (Column 3 Line 63).
Regarding claim 8, Jumpei teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing an optimization program for causing a computer to perform processing including: (Jumpei Paragraph 0194; "An optimization device 2a includes a CPU 101, random-access memory (RAM) 102")
holding each of values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function; (Jumpei Paragraph 0043; "The state holding unit 60 holds the values of a plurality of state variables included in an evaluation function.")
performing, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, calculation processing including calculating change value of the evaluation function when a value of the each state variable changes with a probability based on a weight value of the each state variable, (Jumpei Paragraph 0059; “The search units 1a1 to 1aN determine a plurality of energy values for a plurality of combinations of two state variables of a plurality of state variables” Jumpei Paragraph 0060; "one search unit determines changes in the energy values corresponding to a change in the value of a certain state variable with respect to the values of the plurality of state variables, for a plurality of combinations of two state variables of the plurality of state variables, based on the plurality of weight values each indicating the strength of connection between the two state variables and the values of the two state variables… Alternatively, the search unit may substitute the values of the plurality of state variables into a predetermined evaluation function to obtain energy values corresponding to the determined values of the plurality of state variables.” Examiner notes that determining the changes in energy values is calculating the change values of the evaluation function when a value of the each state variable changes (corresponding to a change in the value of a certain state variable) with probability based on a weight value of each of the plurality of state variables/plurality of weight values each indicating the strength of connection between the two state variables; the search units 1a1 to 1aN each will perform calculation for corresponding state variable in the plurality of state variables)
and calculating, based on the calculated change value and a correction value, an evaluation value used to evaluate which state transition to accept among the plurality of state variables (Jumpei Paragraph 0060; "The search unit determines the values of the plurality of state variables by determining which state variable value change to accept, based on the results of comparison between the plurality of evaluation values obtained by adding the noise value corresponding to the temperature to each of the plurality of energy value changes, and the threshold value." Examiner notes that the evaluation values shows which state variable value change to accept, based on the calculated change values (energy value changes) and a correction value (threshold value))
and changing one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables, based on the calculated evaluation values. (Jumpei Paragraph 0045; "The transition control unit 62 performs a probabilistic search by determining the acceptance probability of the state transition of the j-th state variable” Jumpei Paragraph 0046; "The transition control unit 62 outputs a flag f indicating whether a state transition is enabled or disabled, and the number of the state transition indicated by the flag f, based on the above-described acceptance probability of the state transition." Examiner notes that the state transition is changing one of the held values of any one of the state variables among the plurality of state variables when flag f is indicating it is enables; the changing is based on the acceptance probability which comes from the evaluation values that accept the changes or not)
Jumpei does not teach the correction value being a value determined for each state variable based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable in an optimization trial process;
However, Aaron does teach the correction value being a value determined for each state variable based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable in an optimization trial process; (Aaron Column 4 Line 7; “Generally, a change in a signal/bit is referred to herein as a toggle in the signal/bit. In addition, the number of toggles in a signal/bit is referred to herein as the toggle rate/frequency… For example, a signal of (1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0) has a toggle rate/frequency of three whereas a signal of (1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1) has a toggle rate/frequency of two.” Examiner notes that the correction value (toggle rate/frequency) being a value determined for each state variable (signal/bit) based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable (number of toggles in a signal/bit) in an optimization trial process (as shown in examples))
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine Jumpei and Aaron. Jumpei teaches an optimization machine that performs various calculations to get change values, evaluation values, and correction values. Aaron teaches a method to optimize the power used in an integrated circuit. One of ordinary skill would have motivation to combine Jumpei and Aaron to reduce the power consumption “The mechanisms and techniques of the present invention include circuit transformations that can reduce the power consumed by various circuit components.” (Column 3 Line 63).
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOYAMA; Jumpei et al; “US 20200363848 A1” (hereinafter “Jumpei”) in view of Aaron et al; US 7587620 B1 (hereinafter “Aaron”) in further view of Keivan Dabiri; “Replica Exchange MCMC Hardware with Automatic Temperature Selection and Parallel Trail” (hereinafter “Keivan”).
Regarding claim 6, Jumpei does not teach The optimization device according to claim 4, wherein the determining of the correction values includes determining, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, the correction values based on an average of the change values of the evaluation function when the changing of the each state variable has been made.
as the average of the change values increases
However, Keivan does teach The optimization device according to claim 4, wherein the determining of the correction values includes determining, for each state variable of the plurality of state variables, the correction values based on an average of the change values of the evaluation function when the changing of the each state variable has been made. (Keivan Section 3 Paragraph 5; "Average SAP between Ti and Ti+1 (SAPi) can be calculated after each Nadjust number of attempted swaps by (Number of accepted swaps/Nadjust)." Examiner notes average SAP is correction values based on an average of the change values of the evaluation function/(Number of accepted swaps/Nadjust) when the changing of the each state variable has been made")
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine Jumpei and Keivan. Jumpei teaches an optimization machine that performs various calculations to get change values, evaluation values, and correction values. Keivan teaches how and why to calculate the average SAP (Swap Acceptance probability). One of ordinary skill would have motivation to combine Jumpei and Keivan to make appropriate adjustments for minimal resource usage and execution times “Our goal is to develop an automatic scheme so that, given an input temperature range and target SAP, the system is able to adjust the temperatures itself to achieve and maintain a uniform SAP. The uniform SAP is set to a specified target, during the execution. Providing the target SAP is to minimize the resource usage and the execution time, by using the minimum number of replicas possible.” (Keivan Section 3 Paragraph 1).
Jumpei in view of Keivan does not teach such that the correction value for the each state variable acts to suppress inversion of the each state variable as the average of the change values increases.
However, Aaron does teach such that the correction value for the each state variable acts to suppress inversion of the each state variable as the average of the change values increases. (Aaron Column 4 Line 7; “Generally, a change in a signal/bit is referred to herein as a toggle in the signal/bit. In addition, the number of toggles in a signal/bit is referred to herein as the toggle rate/frequency… For example, a signal of (1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0) has a toggle rate/frequency of three whereas a signal of (1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1) has a toggle rate/frequency of two.” Examiner notes that the correction value (toggle rate/frequency) being a value determined for each state variable (signal/bit) based on a counted number of inversions of the state variable (number of toggles in a signal/bit) as the average of the change value increases
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine Jumpei, and Keivan and Aaron. Jumpei teaches an optimization machine that performs various calculations to get change values, evaluation values, and correction values. Keivan teaches how and why to calculate the average SAP (Swap Acceptance probability). Aaron teaches a method to optimize the power used in an integrated circuit. One of ordinary skill would have motivation to combine Jumpei, and Keivan and Aaron to reduce the power consumption “The mechanisms and techniques of the present invention include circuit transformations that can reduce the power consumed by various circuit components.” (Column 3 Line 63).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DANIEL DUC TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6870. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 EST.
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, Viker Lamardo can be reached at (571) 270-5871. 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.
/D.D.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2147
/VIKER A LAMARDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2147