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 .
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: claims 1-20 are directed to either a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
With respect to claim 11, 1:
2A Prong 1:
uses a cost function to measure how model outputs deviate from target outputs (mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation);
updates the parameters iteratively, wherein in each iteration the computer program: (Abstract idea of analyzing data. Mental process. A human- mind with pen and paper can update data);
calculates the cost function using current values of the parameters(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation);
for each of the parameters, makes at least two small variations to the current value of the parameter and recalculates the cost function to calculate an estimate of first-order derivative of the cost function relative to the parameter and an estimate of unmixed second-order derivative of the cost function relative to the parameter (mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation);
calculates a first derivative estimate of the parameter using one or multiple estimates of the first-order derivative of the cost function relative to the parameter (mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation);
calculates a second derivative estimate of the parameter using one or multiple estimates of the unmixed second-order derivative of the cost function relative to the parameter(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation);
calculates an adjusted learning rate of the parameter using a rate adjustment function which is a function of an input learning rate and the second derivative estimate of the parameter(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation);
uses the adjusted learning rate of the parameter and the first derivative estimate of the parameter to update the value of the parameter(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation).
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
machine learning model (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f));
claim 11 Computer (computer component is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component; the mere recitation of a generic computer cannot transform a patent-ineligible abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention." Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2358);
Claim 11 computer memory for storing programs (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
machine learning model (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f));
claim 11 Computer (computer component is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component; the mere recitation of a generic computer cannot transform a patent-ineligible abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention." Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2358);
Claim 11 computer memory for storing programs (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The claims are not patent eligible.
12, 2. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the first derivative estimate of the parameter is an exponentially weighted average of a multitude of estimates of the first-order derivative of the cost function relative to the parameter in current and past iterations(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation).
13, 3. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the first derivative estimate of the parameter is the estimate of the first-order derivative of the cost function relative to the parameter in the current iteration(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation).
14, 4. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the second derivative estimate of the parameter is an exponentially weighted average of a multitude of estimates of the unmixed second-order derivative of the cost function relative to the parameter in current and past iterations(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation).
15, 5. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the second derivative estimate of the parameter is the estimate of the unmixed second-order derivative of the cost function relative to the parameter in the current iteration(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation).
16, 6. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the rate adjustment function is generally negatively correlated to the second derivative estimate of the parameter when the input learning rate is large(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation).
17, 7. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the rate adjustment function is a minimum of the input learning rate and a fraction of an inverse of the second derivative estimate of the parameter(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation).
18, 8. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the rate adjustment function is proportional to an arctangent of a multiplication of the input learning rate and the second derivative estimate of the parameter(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation).
19, 9. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the input learning rate is a constant and the rate adjustment function is a function of the second derivative estimate of the parameter(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation).
20, 10. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the two small variations to the current value of the parameter are a small number h and its negative -h, and the estimate of the unmixed second-order derivative of the cost function relative to the parameter is (C(Pi + h) – 2C(Pi) + C(Pi – h)) / h2, where C is the cost function and Pi is the current value of the parameter(mental process – user can manually perform raw thinking in their head as a first stage and then using paper and pen to perform mathematical operation).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zafar (US 2021/0209507) teaches using first and second order derivatives in training (0069-0071).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID R VINCENT whose telephone number is (571)272-3080. The examiner can normally be reached ~Mon-Fri 12-8:30.
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, Alexey Shmatov can be reached at 5712703428. 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.
/DAVID R VINCENT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2123