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. Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: ‘Information Processing Apparatus and Method for Generating Conditional Probability Tables of a Bayesian Network using Node Weights’ . The disclosure is objected to because it contains an embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code (see ¶6 of specification) . Applicant is required to delete the embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code; references to websites should be limited to the top-level domain name without any prefix such as http:// or other browser-executable code. See MPEP § 608.01. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In ¶ 24 … ”a node X 2 Smoker” should be ”a node X 2 of Smoker” Appropriate correction is required. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: input unit and generations unit in claims 1-4. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Both input unit and generation unit appear to be defined as functional units without further structural details (see pages 8 and 9 of specification) , thus they will be interpreted as software, hardware, or any combination thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Using Ranked Nodes to Model Qualitative Judgments in Bayesian Networks to Fenton et al. (hereinafter Fenton) . Per claim 1, Fenton discloses An information processing device configured to design a Bayesian network ( Abstract… a commercial software tool (AgenaRisk) that runs on a computer , e.g., an information processing device , to design and build Bayesian networks , “ We describe a simple approach to defining NPTs for a large class of commonly occurring nodes (called ranked nodes). The approach is based on the doubly truncated Normal distribution with a central tendency that is invariably a type of weighted function of the parent nodes … The approach has been fully automated in a commercial tool, called AgenaRisk... its application makes the difference between being able to build realistic BN models and not ” ) , the information processing device comprising: an input unit, implemented using one or more processors, configured to input, as elements of a Bayesian network, information regarding a plurality of nodes ( Section 7… a software user interface , e.g., an input unit operated via the computer's processor , to input the elements of the network, including multiple variables , e.g., nodes , “ Constructing the necessary NPT requires experts only to go through the following simple steps... access the Dialog by a simple right mouse click as shown in Figure 10 ”; Fig. 1…shows inputting a plurality of nodes X1, X2 and Y ) , an edge indicating a causal relation between a master node and a slave node in the plurality of nodes ( Section 1… inputting relationships between parent (master) and child (slave) nodes via directed arcs (edges) that indicate causal relationships , “ ...directed acyclic graph, with nodes representing random variables and directed arcs representing causal or influential relationships between variables" ; Section 4 … "ranked nodes' causal structure... with a set of causes... as parents of Y ” ) , and a weight indicating the degree of influence of a definition content of the master node on a probability distribution of the slave node ( Section 4… an input unit taking a "credibility weight" w i that defines how much a parent (master) node X i contributes to or influences the distribution of the child (slave) node Y , “ We use a simple weighted sum model to measure the contribution of each X i to explaining Y as a “ credibility weight ” , w i … The higher the credibility index the greater the correlation between X i and Y" ; Section 7 … "using a slider bar to define the weight values ” ) ; and a generation unit, implemented using the one or more processors, configured to generate a Bayesian network using the input information (Section 4 … the software tool automatically computing and generating the Bayesian network model utilizing the inputted information , “ The resulting distribution, and BN model is shown in Figure 2" ; Section 7 … "Provides instant visual feedback to check that the NPT is working as expected ” ) . Per claim 2, Fenton discloses claim 1, further disclosing wherein the generation unit is configured to generate a conditional probability table of slave nodes based on the weight ( Section 1… generating Node Probability Tables (NPTs), which are discrete conditional probability tables for child (slave) nodes, explicitly based on the input weights , "If the variables are discrete, the CPDs can be represented as Node Probability Tables (NPTs)..." and the "child node's probability is defined as a weighted function of the parent node values" ) . Per claim 3 , Fenton discloses claim 2 , further disclosing wherein the generation unit is configured to calculate an average value of a probability distribution in accordance with a range of probability values which the slave node is able to take based on the weight ( Section 4… calculating a weighted expected mean , E(Y) , using the weights and parent values, mapped and normalized within an underlying [0, 1] scale interval (the allowable range of probability values) , “ Given that Y lies within [0, 1] we must normali z e the regression equation, E(Y) = ∑ i=1 n w i X i by dividing with ∑ i=1 n w i " ) , and generate a conditional probability table of the slave node based on a probability distribution of the slave node that has the average value ( Section 4… populating the final conditional table (NPT) using a Doubly Truncated Normal distribution centered exactly on this calculated average value (mean) as its base parameter , demonstrated NPT generation equation p(Y|X) = TNormal[…] ) . Per claim 4 , Fenton discloses claim 3 , further disclosing wherein the generation unit is configured to vary the average value of the probability distribution in accordance with the range of probability values which the slave node is able to take in accordance with the weight and the probability of the master node ( Section 3… the calculated average μ dynamically varies within the strict [0, 1] unit bounds based on the values of the master nodes X i and the assigned weights w i , where X i operating within continuous [0, 1] unit interval corresponds to the "probability" of the master node , “ When X 1 and X 2 are both “ very high ” the distribution of Y is heavily skewed toward “ very high ” ... When X 1 is “ very low ” and X 2 is “ very high ” the distribution of Y is centered below “ medium ””) , and adjust a bias of the probability distribution of the slave node based on the varied average value ( Section 4… varying the mathematical target center/mean μ inside the truncated boundaries physically shapes and skews , e.g., adjusts the bias , of the slave node's resulting distribution , “ This enables us to model a variety of shapes including a uniform distribution... and highly skewed distributions, achieved when σ 2 -> 0 ” ) . Claims 5 and 6 are substantially similar in scope and spirit to claim 1. Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 is applied accordingly. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Patents and/or related publications are cited in the Notice of References Cited (Form PTO-892) attached to this action to further show the state of the art with respect to automating design of Bayesian networks by dynamically generating conditional probability tables. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ALAN CHEN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-4143 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 10-7 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Kamran Afshar can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-7796 . 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. /ALAN CHEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2125