The present invention relates generally to diagnostic equipment. More particularly, the present invention relates to implementation of alerts issued within a system upon the identification of a failed component through a diagnostic procedure for different types of diagnosed items, for example, a vehicle.
In many industries, diagnostic systems play an increasingly important role in manufacturing processes, as well as in maintenance and repair throughout the lifetime of the equipment or product. Some diagnostic systems are based on personal computer technology and feature user-friendly, menu-driven diagnostic applications. These systems assist technicians and professionals at all levels in performing system diagnostics on a real-time basis.
A typical diagnostic system includes a display on which instructions for diagnostic procedures are displayed. The system also includes a system interface that allows the operator to view real-time operational feedback and diagnostic information. Thus, the operator may view, for example, vehicle engine speed in revolutions per minute, or battery voltage during start cranking; or a patient's heartbeat rate or blood pressure. With such a system, a relatively inexperienced operator may perform advanced diagnostic procedures and diagnose complex operational or medical problems.
It is desirable to provide a method and apparatus to identify all of the known failures associated with a vehicle component, and for informing interested parties of instances of those failures associated with the component. Further, identification of failed components may lead to identification of a specific problem and can lead to greater accuracy and efficiency in fixing or even avoiding the problem with the component.
The foregoing needs are met, to a great extent, by the present invention, wherein in one aspect, a method and system are provided such that in some embodiments alerts of a component failure are sent to interested parties.
In accordance with one embodiment of the present invention, a method for notifying an interested party of a component failure can involve identifying a failed vehicle component through vehicle diagnostics, creating an alert, in a reporting device, by incorporating an identity information and a failure information for the failed vehicle component, transferring the alert to a routing device, and sending the alert from the routing device via electronic communication to the interested party.
In accordance with yet another embodiment of the present invention, a system for notifying an interested party is provided which can include a portable vehicle diagnostic tool to identify a failed vehicle component and a related failure for the failed vehicle component, a reporting device communicatively connected to the portable vehicle diagnostic tool, to create an alert containing information about the failed vehicle component and the failure identified by the portable vehicle diagnostic tool and to send the alert, a routing device communicatively connected to the reporting device to route the alert to the interested party, a memory communicatively connected to the routing device to store information relating the interested party with information that may exist in the alert, and a communication network communicatively connecting the portable vehicle diagnostic tool, the reporting device, and the routing device.
In accordance with still another embodiment of the present invention, a system for notifying an interested party is provided, which can include a means for identifying a failed vehicle component, a means for creating an alert by incorporating identity information and failure information for the failed vehicle component, a means for sending the alert via electronic communication to the interested party, a means for transferring the alert to the means for sending, and a means for communicatively connecting the other means.
There has thus been outlined, rather broadly, certain embodiments of the invention in order that the detailed description thereof herein may be better understood, and in order that the present contribution to the art may be better appreciated. There are, of course, additional embodiments of the invention that will be described below and which will form the subject matter of the claims appended hereto.
In this respect, before explaining at least one embodiment of the invention in detail, it is to be understood that the invention is not limited in its application to the details of construction and to the arrangements of the components set forth in the following description or illustrated in the drawings. The invention is capable of embodiments in addition to those described and of being practiced and carried out in various ways. Also, it is to be understood that the phraseology and terminology employed herein, as well as the abstract, are for the purpose of description and should not be regarded as limiting.
As such, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the conception upon which this disclosure is based may readily be utilized as a basis for the designing of other structures, methods and systems for carrying out the several purposes of the present invention. It is important, therefore, that the claims be regarded as including such equivalent constructions insofar as they do not depart from the spirit and scope of the present invention.
An embodiment of the present inventive method and system for notifying interested parties can provide a portable vehicle diagnostic tool to identify a failed vehicle component. The portable vehicle diagnostic tool can perform a combination of functions. Such functions may include diagnostic testing on vehicle components and systems, data analysis, and provide historical data. A portable vehicle diagnostic tool may use its functionality to help a technician determine if there is a vehicle component failure and if so, which component has failed. In other embodiments, the portable vehicle diagnostic tool can itself determine if there is a vehicle component failure and if so, which component has failed. Further, it may be possible for the portable vehicle diagnostic tool to help, or itself, determine the particular failure for the failed vehicle component. Such a failure may be indicated by a failure code or a written description of the failure.
In addition to the portable vehicle diagnostic tool, the method and system may provide a reporting device connected to or as a part of the portable vehicle diagnostic tool. The reporting device creates the alerts by bundling the desired information into a format that can be sent to, received by, and understood by the interested parties. The information may be bundled into a number of different file formats, for example a text file or an XML file. The information included in the alerts created by the reporting device may include what is the failed vehicle component. Other information that could be useful to the interested parties may be included as well, such as diagnostic data or vehicle data associated with the component.
The method and system may further provide a routing device, which may be another component of any of the previous devices or device combinations, or may be a separate device. The routing device may serve to ensure that that the interested parties are sent the proper alerts. That is, the routing device may be able to match the information in the alerts to other information that details what alerts different parties would be interested in receiving. The parties may include the component manufacturer, an auto parts store, a fleet maintenance manager and other parties that are interested in what components fail in a vehicle. Once determining which parties are to receive the alerts, the routing device may push the alerts to the recipients.
Another component of the method and system may be a memory to store information for associating parties with the alerts. The information stored in this memory may be used by the routing device so that it may perform its functions. The memory may store its information in a database or may employ other data structures to relate the information in memory together. Like the routing device, the memory may be a device on its own, or it may be a device in combination with any or all of the previous devices or device combinations.
Alternatively, the routing device and memory may serve to verify requests for information instead of determining where to send the information based on its own determinations. This may occur in a method and system employing a pull protocol, such as Really Simple Syndication (RSS). The routing device could receive requests for information, and if such information exists, check the memory for information allowing the requesting devices access to the desired information. If the request is valid, then the routing device may send the alert to the interested parties.
Optionally, the method and system may provide for a receiving device. This receiving device could remain idle in terms of its interaction with the method and system until a component fails, and an alert is created and the routing device determines the receiving device belongs to an interested party and sends the alert. At that point the receiving device will receive the alert. Alternatively, the receiving device may make requests to the routing device for information.
The invention will now be described with reference to the drawing figures, in which like reference numerals refer to like parts throughout. An embodiment of the present inventive system is illustrated in
The component failure notification system 10 can include a portable vehicle diagnostic tool 20, a reporting device 30, a routing device 40, and an optional receiving device 50. Each of the portable vehicle diagnostic tool 20, the reporting device 30, the routing device 40, and the receiving device 50 can include an input device, a memory, a communication device, a processor, and a display, all of which can be interconnected by a data link. The portable vehicle diagnostic tool 20, the reporting device 30, the routing device 40, and the receiving device 50 can be a general computing device, such as a personal computer (PC), a UNIX workstation, a server, a mainframe computer, a personal digital assistant (PDA), smartphone, cellular phone, or some combination of these. Alternatively, the portable vehicle diagnostic tool 20, the reporting device 30, the routing device 40, and the receiving device 50 can be a specialized computing device, such as a vehicle diagnostic scan tool. The remaining components can include programming code, such as source code, object code or executable code, stored on a computer-readable medium that can be loaded into the memory and processed by the processor in order to perform the desired functions of the component failure notification system 10.
In various embodiments, the portable vehicle diagnostic tool 20, the reporting device 30, the routing device 40, and the receiving device 50 can be coupled to a communication network 60, which can include any viable combination of devices and systems capable of linking computer-based systems, such as the Internet; an intranet or extranet; a local area network (LAN); a wide area network (WAN); a direct cable connection; a private network; a public network; an Ethernet-based system; a token ring; a value-added network; a telephony-based system, including, for example, T1 or E1 devices; an Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) network; a wired system; a wireless system; an optical system; cellular system; satellite system; a combination of any number of distributed processing networks or systems or the like. The communication network 60 allows for communication between the portable vehicle diagnostic tool 20, the reporting device 30, the routing device 40, and the receiving device 50.
The portable vehicle diagnostic tool 20, the reporting device 30, the routing device 40, and the receiving device 50 can be coupled to the communication network 60 by way of the communication device, which in various embodiments can incorporate any combination of devices—as well as any associated software or firmware-configured to couple processor-based systems, such as modems, network interface cards, serial buses, parallel buses, LAN or WAN interfaces, wireless or optical interfaces and the like, along with any associated transmission protocols, as may be desired or required by the design.
Additionally, an embodiment of the component failure notification system 10 can communicate information to the user through the display and request user input through the input device, by way of an interactive, menu-driven, visual display-based user interface, or graphical user interface (GUI). Alternatively, the communication can be text based only, or a combination of text and graphics. The user interface can be executed, for example, on a personal computer (PC) with a mouse and keyboard, with which the user may interactively input information using direct manipulation of the GUI. Direct manipulation can include the use of a pointing device, such as a mouse or a stylus, to select from a variety of selectable fields, including selectable menus, drop-down menus, tabs, buttons, bullets, checkboxes, text boxes, and the like. Nevertheless, various embodiments of the invention may incorporate any number of additional functional user interface schemes in place of this interface scheme, with or without the use of a mouse or buttons or keys, including for example, a trackball, a scroll wheel, a touch screen or a voice-activated system.
Some applications of the component failure notification system 10 may not require that all of the elements of the system be separate pieces. Having the portable vehicle diagnostic tool 20, the reporting device 30 and the routing device 40 as separate devices within the component failure notification system 10 provides certain flexibilities. For example, in a nationwide implementation, the routing device 40 may be a centralized device hosted by an entity in a remote location. Then individual service shops, for example, may each have a reporting device 30 that forwards alerts to the routing device 40 to disseminate the alerts to the interested individuals. Further, large service shops may have multiple portable vehicle diagnostic tools 20 to provide information to the reporting device. However, this type of implementation may have greater costs associated with it because of all the separate pieces. Therefore, the component failure notification system 10 encompasses multiple embodiments.
Referring now to
Another alternative embodiment is depicted in the
A memory may exist in all of the embodiments of the component failure notification system 10. It may exist separately or as a component of any of the portable vehicle diagnostic tool 20, the reporting device 30, and the routing device 40, or any combination thereof. This memory may contain information such that the routing device 40 may determine which alerts are pertinent to which of the parties. Such information would allow the routing device 40 to compare the information from the alert to the preferences of any of the parties to determine if the alert is of interest to the parties. Once the determination is made that the alert should be sent to the parties, then the routing device 40 may send the alert.
An alternative, but related, use for the memory is to store authorization information for interested parties. Such information would be useful if the component failure notification system 10 were to function on a pull rather than push protocol. Therefore, in a situation where interested parties make requests to the routing device 40, the routing device 40 would compare the identity of the requesting parties to ensure that the parties have permission to receive an alert. It is also possible to control the sending of alerts in response to requests by the subject matter of the alert by comparing it to subject matter authorized parties can receive.
In all of the embodiments of the memory, the information relating interested parties to the alerts they can receive may be stored in a database. Alternatively, the memory may be organized such that any data structure relating the stored information may be used.
A further element of the component failure notification system is the alert. The alert may be a grouping of information formatted in a number of different ways, for example, in a text file or an XML file. Any alert to notify interested parties of a component failure must include at least the component which failed. Further information may be included in the alert, such as the specific failure of the component, vehicle identification information for the vehicle related to the failed vehicle component, diagnostic test information of the failed vehicle component, and symptom information related to the failed vehicle component. The alert may also contain environmental information and information such as where the alert originated. It may further be possible to customize the alerts such that only information desired by the recipient or the sender is included.
Referring now to
Once the determination has been made as to which component has failed, and potentially as to why it failed, the information is then used in creating an alert (step 120). The information that is to be a part of the alert may be entered into the component failure notification system manually by a user, or it may automatically transfer from the portable vehicle diagnostic tool to the reporting device. Once the information is in the component failure notification system, the reporting device may use the information to format it into an alert. The reporting device can incorporate any information that is available about the failed component. The reporting device should at least incorporate identity information (such as part name and number) for the failed vehicle component (step 122) and potentially the failure that occurred (step 124).
The reporting device may also incorporate vehicle identification information for a vehicle related to the failed vehicle component (step 126). Incorporating diagnostic test information related to the failed vehicle component (step 128) and incorporating symptom information related to the failed vehicle component (step 130) could also be executed by the reporting device. Any of the information to be incorporated into an alert may be customized by either the sender or the recipient. In this way, the information sent can be tailored to the needs of the parties using the system. Such customization may reduce the traffic on the system by only sending the desired information and not superfluous information.
After generating the alert, the alert is transferred to the routing device from the reporting device (step 140). Depending on the structure of the component failure notification system, i.e. whether or not the routing devices are separate or integrated with the other components, the alert is transferred either over the communications network 60 or the internal data link.
Once received by the routing device, the alert is sent to the interested parties (step 150). In sending the alert (step 150), the routing device must first identify the interested parties (step 152). One such method includes identifying the interested parties from a data structure, stored on a memory, containing information relating the interested parties with information that may exist in the alert. When the interested parties have been identified, the routing device may push the alert to the interested parties (step 154). Pushing the alert may be accomplished through different technologies, such as email and instant message.
Alternatively, the reporting device may receive a request for the alert from the interested parties (step 156). When a request for an alert is received, then the routing device may identify the interested parties (step 152) by identifying the interested parties from a data structure, stored on a memory, containing information associating the interested parties with the alert. Once the parties who have solicited a request for information have been identified, then the routing device may respond to the request by sending the alert from the routing device to the interested parties which sent the request (step 158). An example of this type of pull protocol that might be implemented is RSS.
Finally, it may be part of the method to receive the alert (step 160) on a receiving device belonging to interested parties.
In this regard,
An embodiment of the present invention can also include one or more input devices, such as a mouse, keyboard, and the like. A display can be provided for viewing text and graphical data, as well as a user interface to allow a user to request specific operations. Furthermore, an embodiment of the present invention may be connected to one or more remote computers via a communication device. The connection may be over a communication network 60, such as a local area network (LAN) wide area network (WAN), and can include all of the necessary circuitry for such a connection.
Typically, computer program instructions, such as portions of the method for notifying interested parties 100, may be loaded onto the computer or other general purpose programmable machine to produce a specialized machine, such that the instructions that execute on the computer or other programmable machine create means for implementing the functions specified in the flowchart. Such computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable medium that when loaded into a computer or other programmable machine can direct the machine to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable medium produce an article of manufacture including instruction means that implement the function specified in the flowchart.
In addition, the computer program instructions may be loaded into a computer or other programmable machine to cause a series of operational steps to be performed by the computer or other programmable machine to produce a computer-implemented process, such that the instructions that execute on the computer or other programmable machine provide steps for implementing the functions specified in the flowchart steps.
Accordingly, steps of the flowchart support combinations of means for performing the specified functions, combinations of steps for performing the specified functions and program instruction means for performing the specified functions. It will also be understood that each step of the flowchart, as well as combinations of steps, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-based computer systems, or combinations of special purpose hardware and computer instructions, that perform the specified functions or steps.
As an example, provided for purposes of illustration only, a data input software tool of a search engine application can be a representative means for receiving a query including one or more search terms. Similar software tools of applications, or implementations of embodiments of the present invention, can be means for performing the specified functions. For example, an embodiment of the present invention may include computer software for interfacing a processing element with a user-controlled input device, such as a mouse, keyboard, touch screen display, scanner, or the like. Similarly, an output of an embodiment of the present invention may include, for example, a combination of display software, video card hardware, and display hardware. A processing element may include, for example, a controller or microprocessor, such as a central processing unit (CPU), arithmetic logic unit (ALU), or control unit.
The many features and advantages of the invention are apparent from the detailed specification, and thus, it is intended by the appended claims to cover all such features and advantages of the invention which fall within the true spirit and scope of the invention. Further, since numerous modifications and variations will readily occur to those skilled in the art, it is not desired to limit the invention to the exact construction and operation illustrated and described, and accordingly, all suitable modifications and equivalents may be resorted to, falling within the scope of the invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4404639 | McGuire et al. | Sep 1983 | A |
4757463 | Ballou et al. | Jul 1988 | A |
4796206 | Boscove et al. | Jan 1989 | A |
4817092 | Denny | Mar 1989 | A |
4866635 | Kahn et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
4873687 | Breu | Oct 1989 | A |
4881230 | Clark et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
4943919 | Aslin et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
4954964 | Singh | Sep 1990 | A |
4964125 | Kim | Oct 1990 | A |
4985857 | Bajpai et al. | Jan 1991 | A |
5010487 | Stonehocker | Apr 1991 | A |
5023791 | Herzberg et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5025392 | Singh | Jun 1991 | A |
5036479 | Prednis et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5099436 | McCown et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5109380 | Ogino | Apr 1992 | A |
5111402 | Brooks et al. | May 1992 | A |
5127005 | Oda et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5161158 | Chakravarty et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5184312 | Ellis | Feb 1993 | A |
5214577 | Sztipanovits et al. | May 1993 | A |
5270920 | Pearse et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5293323 | Doskocil et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5396422 | Forchert et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5442549 | Larson | Aug 1995 | A |
5491631 | Shirane et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5524078 | Kolb et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5541840 | Gurne et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5561762 | Smith et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5572424 | Kellogg et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5586252 | Barnard et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5617039 | Kuck et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5631831 | Bird et al. | May 1997 | A |
5670939 | Rodewald et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5671141 | Smith et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5696676 | Takaba | Dec 1997 | A |
5729452 | Smith et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5742500 | Irvin | Apr 1998 | A |
5778381 | Sandifer | Jul 1998 | A |
5835871 | Smith et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5838261 | Lauta et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5852789 | Trsar et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5883586 | Tran et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5916286 | Seashore et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5964811 | Ishii et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5964813 | Ishii et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5987443 | Nichols et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6003021 | Zadik et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6003808 | Nguyen et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6006146 | Usui et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6012152 | Douik et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6032088 | Feldmann et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6041287 | Dister et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6055468 | Kaman et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6064998 | Zabloudil et al. | May 2000 | A |
6067537 | O'Connor et al. | May 2000 | A |
6067538 | Zorba et al. | May 2000 | A |
6073127 | Lannert et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6085184 | Bertrand et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6119074 | Sarangapani | Sep 2000 | A |
6122575 | Schmidt et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6134488 | Sasaki et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6141608 | Rother | Oct 2000 | A |
6167352 | Kanevsky et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6175787 | Breed | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6192302 | Giles et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6205465 | Schoening et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6226627 | Polak | May 2001 | B1 |
6236917 | Liebl et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6249755 | Yemini et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6263268 | Nathanson | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6263322 | Kirkevold et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6282469 | Rogers et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6301531 | Pierro et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6314375 | Sasaki et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6330499 | Chou et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6338148 | Gillenwater et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6363304 | Ramsey | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6434455 | Snow et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6477453 | Oi et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6493615 | Johnston | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6505106 | Lawrence et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6512968 | de Bellefeuille et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6522987 | Flink et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6526340 | Reul et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6526361 | Jones et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6538472 | McGee | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6557115 | Gillenwater et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6560516 | Baird et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6574537 | Kipersztok et al. | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6591182 | Cece et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6609051 | Fiechter et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6611740 | Lowrey et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6615120 | Rother | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6636790 | Lightner et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6640166 | Liebl et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6643607 | Chamberlain et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6652169 | Parry | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6662087 | Liebl et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6694235 | Akiyama | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6708092 | Starks et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6711134 | Wichelman et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6714846 | Trsar et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6738697 | Breed | May 2004 | B2 |
6748304 | Felke et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6751536 | Kipersztok et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6768935 | Morgan et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6795778 | Dodge et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6807469 | Funkhouser et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6819988 | Dietz et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6836708 | Tripathi | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6845307 | Rother | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6845468 | James | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6868319 | Kipersztok et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6874680 | Klaus et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6928349 | Namaky et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6941203 | Chen | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6950829 | Schlabach et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6993421 | Pillar et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7010460 | Trsar et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7013411 | Kallela et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7050894 | Halm et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7062622 | Peinado | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7073120 | Torii et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7082359 | Breed | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7103610 | Johnson et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7103679 | Bonn | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7120559 | Williams et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7120890 | Urata et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7124058 | Namaky et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7142960 | Grier et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7162741 | Eskin et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7165216 | Chidlovskii et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7171372 | Daniel et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7203881 | Williams et al. | Apr 2007 | B1 |
7209815 | Grier et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7209817 | Abdel-Malek et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7209860 | Trsar et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7216052 | Fountain et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7251535 | Farchmin et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7272475 | Gawlik et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7272756 | Brink et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7286047 | Oesterling et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7373225 | Grier et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
7376497 | Chen | May 2008 | B2 |
7379846 | Williams et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
7400954 | Sumcad et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7409317 | Cousin et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7428663 | Morton et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7430535 | Dougherty et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7444216 | Rogers et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7483774 | Grichnik et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7555376 | Beronja | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7565333 | Grichnik et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7610127 | D'Silva et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7636622 | Underdal et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7643912 | Heffington | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7643916 | Underdal et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7647349 | Hubert et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7715961 | Kargupta | May 2010 | B1 |
7739007 | Logsdon | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7751955 | Chinnadurai et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7752224 | Davis et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7761591 | Graham | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7765040 | Underdal et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7778746 | McLeod et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7788096 | Chelba et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7809482 | Bertosa et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7853435 | Dodge et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7860620 | Kojitani et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7865278 | Underdal et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7882394 | Hosek et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7925397 | Underdal et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
8019501 | Breed | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8024083 | Chenn | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8055907 | Deem et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8239094 | Underdal et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
20020007237 | Phung et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020059075 | Schick et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020091736 | Wall | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020112072 | Jain | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020116669 | Jain | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020173885 | Lowrey et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030177414 | Pillutla et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20040001106 | Deutscher et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040039493 | Kaufman | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040181688 | Wittkotter | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050043868 | Mitcham | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050065678 | Smith et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050071143 | Tran et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050137762 | Rother | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050144183 | McQuown et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050177352 | Gravel | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050222718 | Lazarz et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060030981 | Robb et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060074824 | Li | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060095230 | Grier et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060129906 | Wall | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060136104 | Brozovich et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060142907 | Cancilla et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060142910 | Grier et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060149434 | Bertosa et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060210141 | Kojitani et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060229777 | Hudson et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070100520 | Shah et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070124282 | Wittkotter | May 2007 | A1 |
20070226540 | Konieczny | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070250228 | Reddy et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070293998 | Underdal et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070294001 | Underdal et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20090216584 | Fountain et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090271066 | Underdal et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100082197 | Kolbet et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100262431 | Gilbert | Oct 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1527934 | Sep 2004 | CN |
10233503 | Feb 2004 | DE |
10332203 | Feb 2005 | DE |
1674958 | Feb 2008 | EP |
2329943 | Apr 1999 | GB |
H03-087671 | Apr 1991 | JP |
06-265596 | Sep 1994 | JP |
H08-043265 | Feb 1996 | JP |
H10-253504 | Sep 1998 | JP |
2001-202125 | Jul 2001 | JP |
2001-229299 | Aug 2001 | JP |
2002-183334 | Jun 2002 | JP |
2004-299587 | Oct 2004 | JP |
2007-326425 | Dec 2007 | JP |
Entry |
---|
European Search Report for Appl. No. 07252442.4, dated Sep. 11, 2007. |
European Search Report for Appl. No. 07252441, dated Jun. 20, 2008. |
L.J. Aartman, et al., “An Independent Verification Tool for Multi-Vendor Mode S Airborne Transponder Conformance Testing,” 21st Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 2002, pp. 12.E.5-1—12.E.5-11. vol. 2. |
“Annex A Test Bit Sequence,” Methodology for Jitter and Signal Quality; Specification-MJSQ Technical Report REV 10.0, pp. 117-132, Mar. 10, 2003. |
Tariq Assaf, et al. “Automatic Generation of Diagnostic Expert Systems from Fault Trees,” 2003 Proceedings Annual Reliability & Maintainability Symposium, pp. 143-147. |
R. Belhassine-Cherif, et al., “Multiple Fault Diagnostics for Communicating Nondeterministic Finite State Machines,” 6th IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications, Jul. 3-5, 2001, pp. 661-666. |
M. Ben-Bassat, et al., “A1-Test: A Real Life Expert System for Electronic Troubleshooting (A Description and a Case Study),” 4th Conference on Artificial Intelligence Applications, 1988. pp. 2-10. |
F. Brajou, et al., “The Airbus A380—An AFDX-Based Flight Test Computer Concept,” 2004 IEEE AUTOTESTCON, pp. 460-463. |
Cantone, et al., “IN-ATE: Fault Diagnosis as Expert System Guided Search,” Computer Expert Systems, L. Bolc & M.J. Coombs (eds.), Springer-Verlag, New York 1986, pp. 298348. |
“Computerized Diagnostic Tester at Hand,” Electrical World, Aug. 1, 1975, pp. 36-38. |
T.A. Cross, “A Digital Electronic System for Automobile Testing and Diagnosis,” IEE Conference Jul. 6-9, 1976, London, England, pp. 152-159. |
eHow Contributor, “How to Organize Computer Files,” printed Mar. 31, 2011 from http://www.ehow.com/print/how—138482—organize-computer-files.html. |
F. Esposito, et al., “Machine Learning Methods for Automatically Processing Historical Documents: from Paper Acquisition to XML Transformation,” 1st Int'l Workshop on Document Image Analysis for Libraries. Jan. 23-24. 2004, pp. 328-335. |
H. Garcia-Molina, et al., “dSCAM: Finding Document Copies Across Multiple Databases,” 4th Int'l Conference on Parallel and Distributed Information Systems, Dec. 18-20, 1996, pp. 68-79. |
I. Ghosh, et al., “Automatic Test Pattern Generation for Functional Register-Transfer Level Circuits Using Assignment Decision Diagrams,” IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, vol. 20, Issue 3, Mar. 2001. pp. 402-415. |
B. Ives et al., “After the Sale: Leveraging Maintenance with Information Technology,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 12, No. 1, Mar. 1988, pp. 7-21. |
M. Koppel, et al., “Automatically Classifying Documents by Ideological and Organizational Affiliation,” IEEE Int'l Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics, Jun. 8-11, 2009, pp. 176-178. |
J.C. Lin, et al., “Using Genetic Algorithms for Test Case Generation in Path Testing,” 9th Asian Test Symposium, Dec. 4-6, 2000, pp. 241-246. |
W. Linzhang, et al., “Generating Test Cases from UML Activity Diagram Based on Gray-Box Method,” 11th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, Nov. 30-Dec. 3, 2004, pp. 1-8. |
B.D. Liu, et al., “Efficient Global Strategy for Designing and Testing Scanned Sequential Circuits,” IEE Proceedings on Computers and Digital Techniques, vol. 142, No. 2, Mar. 1995, pp. 170-176. |
M. Mayer, “The Computerized Diagnostic Rhyme Test as a Design Tool for Armored Vehicle Intercommunications Systems,” Military Communications Conference, 1985, pp. 166-170. |
Microsoft at Work, “File Organization tips: 9 ideas for managing files and folders,” printed Mar. 30, 2011 from http://www.microsoft.com/atwork/productivity/files.aspx. |
S.M. Namburu, et al., “Systematic Data-Driven Approach to Real-Time Fault Detection and Diagnosis in Automotive Engines,” 2006 IEEE AUTOTESTCON, pp. 59-65. |
“Names files and folders—How to—Web Team—University of Canterbury, New Zealand,” printed on Mar. 31, 2011 from http://www.canterbury.ac.nz/web/how/filename.shtml. |
D. Niggemeyer, et al., “Automatic Generation of Diagnostic Mar. Tests,” 19th IEEE Proceedings on VLSI Test Symposium, 2001, pp. 299-304. |
Yiannis Papadopoulos, et al., “Automating the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis of Safety Critical Systems,” Proceedings of the Eighth IEEE Int'l Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering (HASE '04), 2004. |
F.C. Pembe, et al., “Heading-Based Sectional Hierarchy Identification for HTML Documents,” 22nd Int'l Symposium on Computer and Information Sciences, Nov. 7-9, 2007, pp. 1-6. |
F. Pipitone, “The FIS Electronics Troubleshooting System Guided Search,” Computer Expert Systems, vol. 19, No. 7, 1986, pp. 68-76. |
G. Qin, et al., “On-Board Fault Diagnosis of Automated Manual Transmission Control System,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 12, No. 4, Jul. 2004, pp. 564-568. |
H.M.T. Saarikoski, “2T: Two-Term Indexing of Documents Using Syntactic and Semantic Constraints,” 16th Int'l Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, Aug. 22-26, 2005, pp. 1025-1028. |
P. Samuel, et al., “UML Sequencing Diagram Based Testing Using Slicing,” An Int'l Conference of IEEE India Council, Dec. 11-13, 2005, pp. 176-178. |
F.Y. Shih, et al., “A Document Segmentation, Classification and Recognition System,” 2nd Int'l Conference on Systems Integration, 1992, pp. 258-267. |
H. Trier, “Further Development of the Periodical Vehicle Test by Using Diagnostic Interface,” IEE Colloquium on Vehicle Diagnostics in Europe, 1994, pp. 4/1-4/2. |
J. van Beers, et al., “Test Features of a Core-Based Co-Processor Array for Video Applications,” Int'l Test Conference, 1999, pp. 638-647. |
“Volkswagon-Audi Vehicle Communication Software Manual,” Snap-On, published Mar. 31, 2006, http://www.w124performance.com/docs/general/Snap-On/manuals/VCS—Manual—VW—Audi.pdf, XP007920392. |
J.R. Wagner, “Failure Mode Testing Tool Set for Automotive Electronic Controllers,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 43, Issue 1, Feb. 1994, pp. 156-163. |
Reuben Wright, et al., “How Can Ontologies Help Repair Your Car?” XTECH 2005: XML, the Web and beyond; May 27, 2005, Amsterdam; http://ww.idealliance.org/proceedings/xtech05/papers/02-07-02/. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100321175 A1 | Dec 2010 | US |