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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on or reply to the remarks of 8/23/2024. The instant application has claims 1-10 pending. The system, method and for detecting attack vectors on an AI system and modifying the AI generated output. There a total of 20 claims.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in India on 2/25/2022 . It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the IN 202241010164 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Fig. 1- Fig 4 does contain lables and writing within the boxes, i.e elements needs to labelled and the flow chart must mention the steps within the boxes. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure filed on 8/23/2024 is accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim limitation “blocker module configured to”(claim 1), “ AI module configured to”(Claim 1), “ submodule configured to”(Claim 1), “information gain module configured to”(claim 1), “ blocker notification module configured to”(Claim 1), “a computation module configured to”(Claim 3), “comparator module configured to”(Claim 3), “: invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6, 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)as being anticipated by Review of Artificial Intelligence Adversarial Attack and Defense Technologies to Qiu
Regarding claim 1, Qiu discloses An Al system,(10) comprising at least: an input interface (11) configured to receive input from at least one user; an a blocker module (18) configured to block at least one user(Fig. 3 & testing Stage Capabilities)); an Al module (12) configured to process said input data and generate first output data corresponding to said input; a submodule (14) configured to identify an attack vector from the received input; an information gain module (16) configured to calculate an information gain and send the information gain value to the blocker module (18)(Fig. 9 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 4); a blocker notification module (20) configured to transmit a notification to the owner of said Al system (10) on detecting an attack vector, the blocker notification module (20) further configured to modify a first output generated by an Al module (12)(§3 Adversial attacks modifying the training sets & Fig. 4 & 5 Defense Strategy); and an output interface (22) configured to send an output to said at least one user(§5 Defense Strategy)
Regarding claim 2. (Currently amended) The Al system (10) as claimed in claim 1, where wherein the output sent by the output interface (22) comprises the first output data when the submodule (14) doesn't identify an attack vector from the received input(Fig. 12 & 3. Adversial Attacks).
Regarding claim 6. (Currently amended) A method (300) to prevent capturing of an AI module (12) in an AI system (10), said method comprising the following steps: receiving input data from at least one user through an input interface (11); transmitting input data through a blocker module (18) to an AI module (12) )(Fig. 9 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 4); computing a first output by the AI module (12) based on the input data(Fig. 3 & testing Stage Capabilities); processing input data by a submodule (14) to identify an attack vector from the input data, the identification information of the attack vector is being sent to the information gain module (16) )(§3 Adversial attacks modifying the training sets & Fig. 4 & 5 Defense Strategy); and sending an output by means way of the output interface (22) to prevent capturing of an AI module (12)(§5 Defense Strategy)).
Regarding claim 9. (Currently amended) The method (300) to prevent capturing of an AI module (12) in an AI system (10) as claimed in claim 6, where wherein the output sent by the output interface (22) comprises the first output data when the submodule (14) doesn't identify an attack vector from the received input(3. Adversial Attacks & 2. Adversial Samples and Adversial Attack Strategies).
Regarding claim 10. (Currently amended) The method (300) to prevent capturing of an AI module (12) in an AI system (10) as claimed in claim 6, where wherein the output sent by the output interface (22) is in dependance of the information received from the information gain module (16)(Fig. 12& . Adversial Samples and Adversial Attack Strategies).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 3-5, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Review of Artificial Intelligence Adversarial Attack and Defense Technologies to Qiu in view of US Patent Pub 2022/0166782 to Zoldi.
Regarding claim 3. Qiu does not disclose the frequency domain transformation. However, Zoldi discloses The AI system (10) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the submodule comprises;[[;]] a computation module (141) configured to at least derive an instantaneous Frequency domain transformation signature of the received input; a memory configured to store a set of pre-derived Fourier transform signatures(Par. 007-0010 & Par. 0041-0043); and a comparator module (143) configured to compare the instantaneous Frequency domain transformation signature with the set of pre-derived frequency domain transformation signatures(Abstract & Fig. 6 & Fig. 7 & Fig. 5) .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Qiu invention to incorporate frequency domain transformation for the advantage of providing an easier assessment of fraudulent behavior as taught in Zoldi see Par. 0046 & Par. 0039.
Regarding claim 4. Zoldi discloses The AI system (10) as claimed in claim 1, where wherein the set of pre-derived Frequency domain transformation signatures comprise Frequency domain transformation signatures for known inputs comprising a range of non-attack vectors(Fig. 5& Par. 007-009).
Regarding claim 5. Zoldi discloses A method (200) of training a submodule (14) in an AI system (10), said AI system (10) comprising at least an AI module (12), and a dataset used to train the AI module (12) , said method comprising the following steps: computing Frequency domain transformation on the dataset to derive a set of pre-derived Frequency domain transformation signatures; andstoring the set of pre-derived Frequency domain transformation signatures in a memory of the submodule(Par. 0035-0038 & Par. 0041-0043 & Par. 007).
Regarding claim 8. Zoldi discloses The method (300) to prevent capturing of an AI module (12) in an AI system (10) as claimed in claim 6, where wherein the set of pre-derived Frequency domain transformation signatures comprise Frequency domain transformation signatures for known inputs comprising a range of non-attack vectors(Par. 0035-0038 & Par. 0041-0043 & Fig. 7).
Claims 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Review of Artificial Intelligence Adversarial Attack and Defense Technologies to Qiu in view of US Patent Pub 2022/0166782 to Zoldi and further in view of Advances in Adversarial Attacks and Defenses in Computer Vision: A Survey
Regarding claim 7.Qiu nor Zoldi disclose the comparing of pre-derived signatures. However, Akhtar discloses The method (300) to prevent capturing of an AI module (12) in an AI system (10) as claimed in claim 6, where wherein processing the input data further comprises: computing an instantaneous Frequency domain transformation signature of the received input; comparing the instantaneous Frequency domain transformation signature with a set of pre-derived Frequency domain transformation signatures(Fig. 2 & III. Adversial Attacks: The Formal problem); and identifying an attack vector based on said comparison based a pre-defined threshold for comparison. Recent Attack on Classifiers & IV. First Generation Attacks & VI. Attacks Beyond Classification).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Qiu invention to incorporate comparing of pre-derived signatures for the advantage of providing the attacks to be identified based on known signatures as taught in Akhtar see IV. First Generation Attacks.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Venkat Perungavoor whose telephone number is (571)272-7213. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, Rupal Dharia can be reached on 571-272-3880. 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.
/VENKAT PERUNGAVOOR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2492 Email: venkatanarayan.perungavoor@uspto.gov