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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-7 are pending and are examined herein.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 USC 101 as being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 1-7 are not rejected under 35 USC 102 or 103.
Information Disclosure Statement
The attached information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the attached information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
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.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 Analysis
Each of the claims fall within one of the four statutory categories (i.e. process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter).
Step 2 Analysis
Claim 1 includes the following recitation of an abstract idea:
creating a plurality of Ising models by creating the Ising models for each of the plurality of training data sets; (This is a recitation of a mathematical concept.)
creating a combined Ising model by combining the plurality of Ising models according to an average and a deviation of coefficients of the plurality of Ising models; (This is a recitation of a mathematical concept.)
searching for a recommended point for the combined Ising model; and (This is practical to perform in the human mind under its broadest reasonable interpretation aside from the recitation of generic computer components. This is a recitation of a mental process. This is also a recitation of a mathematical concept.)
Claim 1 recites the following additional elements which, considered individually and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea:
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing an arithmetic program for causing a computer to repeatedly execute processing comprising: (This is a high level recitation of generic computer components for performing the abstract idea. This does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(f).)
generating a plurality of training data sets from a training data group; (This is a recitation of gathering data of a particular type or source to perform the abstract idea. This is an attempt to limit the abstract idea to a particular field of use or technological environment. See MPEP 2106.05(h).)
…adding the recommended point and an evaluation value of the recommended point to the training data group. (This is insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Moreover, storing or retrieving data is well-understood, routine, conventional as evidenced by the court cases cited at MPEP 2106.05(d), example iii. Electronic recordkeeping and also example iv. Storing and retrieving information.)
Claim 1 does not reflect an improvement to computer technology or any other technology.
Claim 2 recites at least the abstract idea identified above in the claim upon which it depends, and further recites
wherein, when the plurality of Ising models is combined, the Ising models whose accuracy is less than a threshold value are excluded. (This is practical to perform in the human mind under its broadest reasonable interpretation aside from the recitation of generic computer components. This is a recitation of a mental process. This is also a recitation of a mathematical concept.)
Claim 2 does not recite further additional elements which might integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claim 2 does not reflect an improvement to computer technology or any other technology.
Claim 3 recites at least the abstract idea identified above in the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 3 recites the following additional elements which, considered individually and as an ordered combination with the additional elements addressed above, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea:
wherein at least two sets of the plurality of training data sets include training data that overlaps each other. (This is a recitation of using data of a particular type or source to perform the abstract idea. This is an attempt to limit the abstract idea to a particular field of use or technological environment. See MPEP 2106.05(h).)
Claim 3 does not reflect an improvement to computer technology or any other technology.
Claim 4 recites at least the abstract idea identified above in the claim upon which it depends, and further recites
wherein, in a case where the recommended point retrieved in the search is already included in the training data group, the combined Ising model is recreated by changing a degree of reflection of the deviation when the plurality of Ising models used to search for the recommended point is combined, and the recommended point is searched for, for the recreated combined Ising model. (This is a recitation of a mathematical concept.)
Claim 4 does not recite further additional elements which might integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claim 4 does not reflect an improvement to computer technology or any other technology.
Claim 5 recites at least the abstract idea identified above in the claim upon which it depends, and further recites
wherein the coefficients are at least one of coupling coefficients, bias coefficients, or constant terms of the Ising models. (This is a recitation of a mathematical concept.)
Claim 5 does not recite further additional elements which might integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claim 5 does not reflect an improvement to computer technology or any other technology.
Claim 6 recites substantially similar subject matter to claim 1 including substantially the same abstract idea, and further recites
…, the creating of the plurality of Ising models, the creating of the combined Ising model, the searching for the recommended point, …are repeatedly executed (The repeated steps are part of the abstract idea. Iterating an abstract idea is still an abstract idea.)
Claim 6 recites the following additional elements which, considered individually and as an ordered combination with the additional elements addressed with respect to claim 1, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea:
the generating of the plurality of training… and (This is a recitation of gathering data of a particular type or source to perform the abstract idea. This is an attempt to limit the abstract idea to a particular field of use or technological environment. See MPEP 2106.05(h). Iterating the step does not amount to more than performing the data gathering for each iteration.)
the adding of the recommended point and the evaluation value are repeatedly executed (This is insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Moreover, storing or retrieving data is well-understood, routine, conventional as evidenced by the court cases cited at MPEP 2106.05(d), example iii. Electronic recordkeeping and also example iv. Storing and retrieving information. Iterating the step does not amount to more than performing the data storage/recordkeeping for each iteration)
by the computer. (This is a high level recitation of generic computer components for performing the abstract idea. This does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(f).)
Claim 6 does not reflect an improvement to computer technology or any other technology.
Claim 7 recites substantially similar subject matter to claim 1 including substantially the same abstract idea.
Claim 7 recites the following additional elements which, considered individually and as an ordered combination with the additional elements addressed with respect to claim 1, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea:
An information processing apparatus comprising: a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory, the processor being configured to perform repeatedly processing including: (This is a high level recitation of generic computer components for performing the abstract idea. This does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(f).)
Claim 7 does not reflect an improvement to computer technology or any other technology.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 are not rejected under 35 USC 102 or 103; however, they are rejected on other grounds.
Regarding claim 1, Wilson (Machine learning framework for quantum sampling of highly constrained, continuous optimization problems) teaches
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing an arithmetic program for causing a computer to repeatedly execute processing comprising: (B.1, B.2, C.1 last paragraph)
generating a plurality of training data sets from a training data group; (page 2 right-hand column third paragraph lines 17-19, Fig. 1, wherein a data set from the training group is generated at each iteration (see red arrows in Fig. 1), page 3 right-hand column lines 1-7)
creating a plurality of Ising models by creating the Ising models for each of the plurality of training data sets; (page 2 right-hand column third paragraph "Step #2", Fig. 1, wherein Ising models are created for each data set produced in one iteration (see red arrows in Fig. 1 and "Step #2"), page 3 left-hand column lines 1-7, page 3 right-hand column lines 1-7)
searching for a recommended point for the … Ising model; and (page 2 right-hand column last paragraph lines 3-8, Fig. 1: "Step #3" and page 3 left-hand column second paragraph "Step #3", Appendix E, page 3 left-hand column third paragraph lines 1-6)
adding the recommended point and an evaluation value of the recommended point to the training data group. (page 3 left-hand column third paragraph lines 6-9, Fig. 1: see feedback red arrow from "Step #3" to "Step#2".)
However, Wilson does not appear to teach
creating a combined Ising model by combining the plurality of Ising models according to an average and a deviation of coefficients of the plurality of Ising models;
Regarding claim 1, Matsumori (Application of QUBO solver using black-box optimization to structural design for resonance avoidance) teaches
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing an arithmetic program for causing a computer to repeatedly execute processing comprising: (section 4.3, Algorithm 1)
generating a plurality of training data sets from a training data group; (section 2.2 first paragraph, Fig. 1, Algorithm 1 (while loop))
creating a plurality of Ising models by creating the Ising models for each of the plurality of training data sets; (section 4.1, section 2.2 first paragraph, Algorithm 1)
…searching for a recommended point for the … Ising model; and (section 2.2, Algorithm 1, Fig. 1, section 4.3)
adding the recommended point and an evaluation value of the recommended point to the training data group. (section 2.2, Algorithm 1)
However, Matsumori does not appear to teach
creating a combined Ising model by combining the plurality of Ising models according to an average and a deviation of coefficients of the plurality of Ising models;
Regarding claim 1, Ru (US 2024/0311651 A1) teaches at [0007] that models may be combined to determine an ensemble model by determining an average of their output values and that doing so may improve test and calibration precision. However, the instant claim recites
creating a combined Ising model by combining the plurality of Ising models according to an average and a deviation of coefficients of the plurality of Ising models;
This limitation requires combining Ising models based on an average and deviation of coefficients of the Ising models, a limitation which is not fairly taught or suggested by the prior art.
Consequently, the prior art does not fairly teach or suggest independent claim 1 as a whole. Claims 2-5 are not fairly taught or suggested by the prior art by virtue of their dependence on claim 1. Claims 6-7 recite substantially similar subject matter to claim 1 and are not fairly taught or suggested by the prior art for substantially the same reasons.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Markus A Vasquez whose telephone number is (303)297-4432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM to 4PM PT.
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, Li Zhen can be reached on (571) 272-3768. 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.
/MARKUS A. VASQUEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2121
Prosecution Insights