DETAILED ACTION
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 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claims 1, 7 and 13 recites obtaining an attention matrix for use in a transformer based model comprising inputting dimensional piece of data, factorizing each of the lengths of the input into a formula, reshaping the representation of the input to form a first generation quadtree representation of the input as a formula selecting a first set of k consecutive spatial axes of the quadtree representation to form a first attention window and computing an attention matrix over the first attention window with remaining spatial axes of the quadtree representation being a batch size.
The claims recite mathematical calculations that are used to compute an attention matrix over the first attention window. Thus, the claims recite a mathematical concept. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification encompasses a mathematical calculation, then it falls within the “Mathematical Concepts” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because claim recites a mathematical formula or equation as well as a mathematical calculation, both of which fall within the mathematical concepts grouping of abstract ideas. Claims additional elements like “inputting” and “selecting” are Mere instructions to apply to an exception. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because elements represent mere instructions to implement an abstract idea, using formulas to compute an attention matrix.
Claims 2, 8 and 14 are dependent on claims 1, 7 and 13 and includes all the limitations of claims 1, 7 and 13. Therefore, claims 2, 8 and 14 recites the same abstract idea of claims 1, 7 and 13. The claim recites the additional limitation of “selecting any number of additional sets of k consecutive spatial axes on the quadtree representation to form additional attention windows different from the first attention window, applying an attentional mechanism at least once over the second attention window to form at least one second attention matrix, concatenating the first attention matrix with the at least one second attention matrix to form a concatenated attention matrix, normalising across rows of the concatenated attention matrix”, which is merely elaborating on the abstract idea, by further specifying an additional mathematical calculation, therefore, does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claims 3, 9 and 15 are dependent on claims 1, 7 and 13 and includes all the limitations of claims 1, 7 and 13. Therefore, claims 3, 9 and 15 recites the same abstract idea of claims 1, 7 and 13. The claim recites the additional limitation of “attentional mechanism is applied over all possible sets of k consecutive spatial axes, resulting in m-k+1 attention matrices”, which is merely elaborating on the abstract idea, by further specifying an additional mathematical calculation, therefore, does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claims 4, 10 and 16 are dependent on claims 1, 7 and 13 and includes all the limitations of claims 1, 7 and 13. Therefore, claims 4, 10 and 16 recites the same abstract idea of claims 1, 7 and 13. The claim recites the additional limitation of “linearly projecting the rightmost spatial axis of the quadtree representation with the feature vector F to obtain a second generation feature vector F’ for a second generation quadtree representation, wherein the second generation quadtree representation has one less spatial axis than the first generation quadtree representation”, which is merely elaborating on the abstract idea, by further specifying an additional mathematical calculation, therefore, does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claims 5, 11 and 17 are dependent on claims 1, 7 and 13 and includes all the limitations of claims 1, 7 and 13. Therefore, claims 5, 11 and 17 recites the same abstract idea of claims 1, 7 and 13. The claim recites the additional limitation of “wherein the transformer-based model is for either image classification or regression given a two-dimensional input representing an image”, which is merely elaborating on the abstract idea, by further specifying an additional mathematical calculation, therefore, does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claims 6, 12 and 18 are dependent on claims 1, 7 and 13 and includes all the limitations of claims 1, 7 and 13. Therefore, claims 6, 12 and 18 recites the same abstract idea of claims 1, 7 and 13. The claim recites the additional limitation of “wherein the transformer-based model is for either video classification or regression given a three-dimensional input representing a video”, which is merely elaborating on the abstract idea, by further specifying an additional mathematical calculation, therefore, does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chen et al. (US 2022/0374676 A1): paragraph [0053] shows dimensions of a query matrix (Q) are n×d. In some embodiments, dimensions of the factorized matrix H generated by the ICF layer L4 are n×p, and p<<n. In which, p is a parameter corresponding to an iteration count in the incomplete Cholesky factorization. The factorized matrix H and the transpose H.sup.T of the factorized matrix are utilized by the transformer model 200 to replace the shared-QK attention matrix while calculating the output matrix M.sub.OUT.
Guo et al. (US 2014/0376634 A1): in paragraphs [0071]-[0072] a video frame or picture may be partitioned into one or more slices. A slice includes a number of consecutive CTUs in coding or scanning order. Each CTU may be split into coding units (CUs) according to a quadtree. Each node of the quadtree data structure may provide syntax data for the corresponding CU. For example, a node in the quadtree may include a split flag, indicating whether the CU corresponding to the node is split into sub-CUs.
Kang et al. (US 2024/0397057 A1): shows in paragraphs [0022], [0041]-[0043], [0132] and [0156] self-attention of a matrix, second sublayer of the decoder computes an attention score matrix by using the output of the first self-attention layer as a Q matrix and using the K matrix and V matrix from the last layer of the encoder. The second sublayer of the decoder is called encoder-decoder attention. Using quadtree for nodes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IRIANA CRUZ whose telephone number is (571)270-3246. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6.
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, Akwasi M. Sarpong can be reached at (571) 270-3438. 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.
/IRIANA CRUZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681