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 . Claims 1-20 have been submitted for examination.
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 1-2, 7-9 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sonntag et al (hereinafter Sonntag) US Publication No 20210334299 in view of Chawla et al (hereinafter Chawla) US Publication No 20200192927.
As per claim 1, Sonntag teaches:
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing an accuracy estimation program for causing a computer to execute processing comprising:
acquiring, in a processor circuit of the computer, a plurality of datasets, each of which includes a plurality of pieces of data in which each data value is associated with a label, the data values having properties different for each dataset;
(Paragraphs [0010], [0026], [0038] and [0052])
calculating, in the processor circuit of the computer, an index that indicates a degree of a difference between a first dataset included in the plurality of datasets and a second dataset included in the plurality of datasets by using a data value included in the second dataset;
(Paragraphs [0010], [0026], [0038] and [0052])
calculating, in the processor circuit of the computer, accuracy of a prediction result for the second dataset, predicted by a prediction model trained by using the first dataset;
(Paragraphs [0010], [0026], [0038] and [0052])
in response to obtaining the calculated index and the calculated accuracy, specifying, in the processor circuit of the computer, a relationship between the index and the accuracy of the prediction result by the prediction model, based on the index and the accuracy calculated for each of a plurality of combinations of the first dataset and the second dataset;
(Paragraphs [0010], [0026], [0038] and [0052])
Sonntag do not explicitly teach and in response to the specifying of the relationship, estimating, in the processor circuit of the computer, accuracy of the prediction result by the prediction model for a third dataset that includes a plurality of data values that are not associated with labels based on the index between the first dataset and the third dataset and the specified relationship, however in analogous art data classification, Chawla teaches:
and in response to the specifying of the relationship, estimating, in the processor circuit of the computer, accuracy of the prediction result by the prediction model for a third dataset that includes a plurality of data values that are not associated with labels based on the index between the first dataset and the third dataset and the specified relationship.
(Paragraphs [0015], [0045]-[0046] and [0052])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Sonntag and Chawla by incorporating the teaching of Chawla into the method of Sonntag. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Chawla into the system of Sonntag for the purpose of improving data classification.
As per claim 2, Sonntag and Chawla teach:
The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium according to claim 1, wherein the index is calculated by using the prediction result by the prediction model, for the data value included in the second dataset.
(Paragraphs [0010], [0026], [0038] and [0052]) (Sonntag) and (paragraph [0029])(Chawla)
As per claim 7, Sonntag and Chawla teach:
The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium according to claim 1, wherein a new dataset is generated by combining two or more datasets included in the plurality of datasets.
(Paragraphs [0043])
Claims 8-9 and 14 are apparatus claims respectively corresponding to non-transitory computer-readable recording medium claims 1-2 and 7 and they are rejected under the same rational as claims 1-2 and 7.
Claims 15-16 are method claims respectively corresponding to non-transitory computer-readable recording medium claims 1-2 and they are rejected under the same rational as claims 1-2.
Claims 3, 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sonntag and Chawla in view of Huseyin Ozkan (hereinafter Ozkan) US Patent No 10262274.
As per claim 3, Sonntag and Chawla teach:
The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of classifiers that has at least different parameters is generated as a classifier in a case where the prediction model is divided into a feature extractor that extracts a feature from data and the classifier that predicts which label is associated with the data by classifying the feature extracted by the feature extractor, (Paragraphs [0046])(Chawla)
Sonntag and Chawla do not explicitly teach and a classification error that is a difference between respective prediction results of the plurality of classifiers for the second dataset or the third dataset is calculated as the index, however in analogous art of data classification, Ozkan teaches:
and a classification error that is a difference between respective prediction results of the plurality of classifiers for the second dataset or the third dataset is calculated as the index.
(Column 3, lines 1-24 and lines 51-67 and column 4, lines 39-53)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Sonntag and Chawla and Ozkan by incorporating the teaching of Ozkan into the method of Sonntag and Chawla. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Ozkan into the system of Sonntag and Chawla for the purpose of improving data classification.
Claim 10 is an apparatus claim corresponding to non-transitory computer-readable recording medium claim 3 and it is rejected under the same rational as claim 3.
Claim 17 is a method claim corresponding to non-transitory computer-readable recording medium claim 3 and it is rejected under the same rational as claim 3.
Claims 4-5, 11-12 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sonntag and Chawla in view of Sakemi et al (hereinafter Sakemi) US Publication No 20220101092.
As per claim 4, Sonntag and Chawla do not explicitly teach wherein as the index used when the relationship is specified, a value is calculated that is obtained by maximizing the classification error for the second dataset while minimizing an error of the prediction result by the prediction model for the first dataset, however Sakemi teaches:
wherein as the index used when the relationship is specified, a value is calculated that is obtained by maximizing the classification error for the second dataset while minimizing an error of the prediction result by the prediction model for the first dataset.
(Paragraphs [0082] and [0165])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Sonntag and Chawla and Sakemi by incorporating the teaching of Sakemi into the method of Sonntag and Chawla. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Sakemi into the system of Sonntag and Chawla for the purpose of improving data labeling prediction.
As per claim 5, Sonntag and Chawla and Sakemi teach:
The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium according to claim 4, wherein the number of iterations when the value obtained by maximizing the classification error is calculated by an iterative algorithm is set to a predetermined number of times so that the values obtained by maximizing the classification errors for the different second datasets are values different from each other by a predetermined value or more.
(Paragraphs [0082] and [0165])(Sakemi)
Claims 11-12 are apparatus claims respectively corresponding to non-transitory computer-readable recording medium claims 4-5 and they are rejected under the same rational as claims 4-5.
Claims 18-19 are method claims respectively corresponding to non-transitory computer-readable recording medium claims 4-5 and they are rejected under the same rational as claims 4-5.
Claims 6, 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sonntag and Chawla in view of Kisamori et al (hereinafter Kisamori) US Patent No 12086697.
As per claim 6, Sonntag and Chawla do explicitly teach wherein, as the relationship, a regression curve that indicates a relationship between the accuracy and the index calculated for each of the plurality of combinations of the first dataset and the second dataset is specified, Kisamori teaches:
wherein, as the relationship, a regression curve that indicates a relationship between the accuracy and the index calculated for each of the plurality of combinations of the first dataset and the second dataset is specified.
(Abstract and column 2, lines 20-61 and column 12, lines 60-67, column 13, lines 1-2 and column 18, lines 4-14)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Sonntag and Chawla and Kisamori by incorporating the teaching of Kisamori into the method of Sonntag and Chawla. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Kisamori into the system of Sonntag and Chawla for the purpose of improving prediction accuracy.
Claim 13 is an apparatus claim corresponding to non-transitory computer-readable recording medium claim 6 and it is rejected under the same rational as claim 6.
Claim 20 is a method claim corresponding to non-transitory computer-readable recording medium claim 6 and it is rejected under the same rational as claim 6.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tarek Chbouki whose telephone number is 571-2703154. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00 am to 6:00 pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aleksandr Kerzhner can be reached at 571-2701760. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TAREK CHBOUKI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2165 9/23/2025