There is an ever-growing need in the art for improved natural language generation (NLG) technology that harnesses computers to process data sets and automatically generate narrative stories about those data sets. NLG is a subfield of artificial intelligence (AI) concerned with technology that produces language as output on the basis of some input information or structure, in the cases of most interest here, where that input constitutes data about some situation to be analyzed and expressed in natural language. Many NLG systems are known in the art that use template approaches to translate data into text. However, such conventional designs typically suffer from a variety of shortcomings such as constraints on how many data-driven ideas can be communicated per sentence, constraints on variability in word choice, and limited capabilities of analyzing data sets to determine the content that should be presented to a reader.
As technical solutions to these technical problems in the NLG arts, the inventors note that the assignee of the subject patent application has previously developed and commercialized pioneering technology that robustly generates narrative stories from data, of which a commercial embodiment is the QUILL™ narrative generation platform from Narrative Science Inc. of Chicago, Ill. Aspects of this technology are described in the following patents and patent applications: U.S. Pat. Nos. 8,374,848, 8,355,903, 8,630,844, 8,688,434, 8,775,161, 8,843,363, 8,886,520, 8,892,417, 9,208,147, 9,251,134, 9,396,168, 9,576,009, 9,697,198, 9,697,492, 9,720,884, 9,720,899, and 9,977,773; and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/211,444 (entitled “Method and System for Configuring Automatic Generation of Narratives from Data”, filed Mar. 14, 2014), Ser. No. 15/253,385 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Using Narrative Analytics to Automatically Generate Narratives from Visualization Data, filed Aug. 31, 2016), 62/382,063 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Interactively Using Narrative Analytics to Focus and Control Visualizations of Data”, filed Aug. 31, 2016), Ser. No. 15/666,151 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Interactively Using Narrative Analytics to Focus and Control Visualizations of Data”, filed Aug. 1, 2017), Ser. No. 15/666,168 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Evaluating Drivers of Data Presented in Visualizations”, filed Aug. 1, 2017), Ser. No. 15/666,192 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Selective Control over Narrative Generation from Visualizations of Data”, filed Aug. 1, 2017), 62/458,460 (entitled “Interactive and Conversational Data Exploration”, filed Feb. 13, 2017), Ser. No. 15/895,800 (entitled “Interactive and Conversational Data Exploration”, filed Feb. 13, 2018), 62/460,349 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Performing Natural Language Generation (NLG) Using Composable Communication Goals and Ontologies to Generate Narrative Stories”, filed Feb. 17, 2017), Ser. No. 15/897,331 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Performing Natural Language Generation (NLG) Using Composable Communication Goals and Ontologies to Generate Narrative Stories”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), Ser. No. 15/897,350 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Determining and Mapping Data Requirements for Narrative Stories to Support Natural Language Generation (NLG) Using Composable Communication Goals”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), Ser. No. 15/897,359 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Story Outline Formation Using Composable Communication Goals to Support Natural Language Generation (NLG)”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), Ser. No. 15/897,364 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Runtime Computation of Story Outlines to Support Natural Language Generation (NLG)”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), Ser. No. 15/897,373 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Ontology Building to Support Natural Language Generation (NLG) Using Composable Communication Goals”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), Ser. No. 15/897,381 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Interactive Story Editing to Support Natural Language Generation (NLG)”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), 62/539,832 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Based on Analysis Communication Goals”, filed Aug. 1, 2017), Ser. No. 16/047,800 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Based on Analysis Communication Goals”, filed Jul. 27, 2018), Ser. No. 16/047,837 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Based on a Conditional Outcome Framework”, filed Jul. 27, 2018), 62/585,809 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Based on Smart Attributes and Explanation Communication Goals”, filed Nov. 14, 2017), 62/632,017 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Conversational Inferencing and Interactive Natural Language Generation”, filed Feb. 19, 2018), and 62/691,197 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence for Using Natural Language Processing to Train a Natural Language Generation System”, filed Jun. 28, 2018); the entire disclosures of each of which are incorporated herein by reference.
The inventors have further extended on this pioneering work with improvements in AI technology as described herein.
For example, the inventors disclose an improvement in narrative generation where an analysis service that executes data analysis logic that supports story generation is segregated from an authoring service that executes authoring logic for story generation through an interface. Accordingly, when the authoring service needs analysis from the analysis service, it can invoke the analysis service through the interface. By exposing the analysis service to the authoring service through the shared interface, the details of the logic underlying the analysis service are shielded from the authoring service (and vice versa where the details of the authoring service are shielded from the analysis service). Through parameterization of operating variables, the analysis service can thus be designed as a generalized data analysis service that can operate in a number of different content verticals with respect to a variety of different story types. This provides practitioners with more flexibility in building out new analytics as well as enabling dynamic, user-defined content.
The inventors further disclose that the analysis service can also be designed to further segregate generalized data analytics from higher level aspects of analysis via another interface. A plurality of analysis applications can be deployed by the analysis service, where the analysis applications are configured to selectively organize and invoke the execution of the lower level analytics. These analysis applications can be selected and instantiated as a function of a parameter in an analysis request from the authoring service and/or at least a portion of the structured data about which a narrative story is to be generated. The lower level analytics are then selectively parameterized and invoked by the selected analysis application. In this way, the lower level analytics can be further shielded from the particulars of a given story request and the higher level analysis applications can be tailored as a function of such particulars. This allows for further flexibility in using and re-using analytics across a variety of different use cases. For example, a practitioner can bundle different combinations analytics together for different story contexts, and the analysis applications can be the component that ties the analytics bundles to different story contexts.
For example, in an example embodiment where a narrative generation system is used to generate narrative stories about structured data from visualizations (e.g., chart data), a practitioner may want different types of narrative stories to be generated for different types of charts. As part of this, a practitioner might decide that, say, Analytics 1, 3, and 5 are useful when generating a narrative story from a line chart, that Analytics 1, 2, and 3 are useful when generating a narrative story from a bar chart, and that Analytics 2, 4, and 5 are useful when generating a narrative story from a histogram. The practitioner can tie different analysis applications to the different chart types (Analysis Application 1 for line charts, Analysis Application 2 for bar charts, and Analysis Application 3 for histograms). When the analysis service is invoked via an analysis request from the authoring service, the analysis service can instantiate and execute a particular analysis application based on the content of the analysis request (e.g., instantiating and executing Analysis Application 1 if the analysis request concerns analysis of line chart data). Analysis Application 1 will then organize and invoke, via the another interface, the analytics that are linked to Analysis Application 1. Parameters and data that are needed by the linked analytics can be passed to the linked analytics via the another interface.
The inventors further note that the lower level analytics can be grouped into different analysis libraries, and these analysis libraries can then be linked to the analysis applications as noted above. These libraries can then further insulate the low level analytics from the higher level applications and thus simplify the design of the analysis applications.
The inventors further disclose that the analysis service can process the structured data to be analyzed to generate new views of that structured data. The analytics within the analysis service can then operate on these new views to improve ability of the system to analyze and call out different perspectives in the resulting narrative while still performing the analysis operations in an efficient manner. For example, aggregation views, filter views, and/or pivot views of the structured data may be helpful to improve the breadth and depth of perspectives revealed in a narrative story as a result of the analysis operations performed by the analytics.
Through these and other features, example embodiments of the invention provide significant technical advances in the NLG arts by separating the logic for narrative story generation from the analysis operations that support such narrative story generation. By structuring coordination between an authoring service and an analysis service via an interface, the modularization of the authoring service and the analysis service allows improvements to be made to one (or both) of these services without adversely affecting the other. Similarly, the use of analysis libraries within the analysis service also allows for specific implementations of individual analytics to be modified and improved without needing to update the interface as a whole.
These and other features and advantages of example embodiments will be discussed in greater detail below.
The client 140 can provide a story request 142 to the narrative generation computer system 100 to trigger the generation of a narrative story about a data set such as a set of structured data. The story request 142 can include the structured data. It should also be understood that the structured data need not be included in the story request 142. For example, the story request 142 could alternatively identify a location where the narrative generation computer system 100 can access the structured data. The story request 142 can also include metadata about the structured data that will aid the narrative generation computer system 100 with respect to the type of narrative story that is to be generated. For example, if the structured data is chart data, the story request 142 can include metadata that identifies a chart type for the chart data (e.g., a line chart, bar chart, etc.).
The computer system 100 can execute the authoring service 104 to control the generation of narrative story 144 in response to the story request 142. The authoring service 104 can employ techniques such as those described in the above-referenced and incorporated patents and patent applications to generate narrative stories from data. In these examples, the narrative generation computer system 100 can employ one or more story configurations that specify a narrative structure for desired narrative stories while also specifying parameters that address how the content for such narrative stories is determined.
To support narrative generation in this fashion, the narrative generation computer system 100 will have a need for processing the structured data to generate metadata about the structured data, where such metadata provides the system with further insights about the structured data. As examples, the above-referenced and incorporated patents and patent applications describe various embodiments wherein elements such as derived features, angles, and data characterizations are generated from structured data to support intelligent story generation. For example, if the structured data is a line chart of product sales by month over time, some items of metadata that may be desired to support narrative generation may include (1) the average of product sales per month, (2) the peak value of monthly product sales, (3) an indication as to the direction of product sales over the time period in question (e.g., steadily rising, steadily declining, relatively consistent, highly volatile, etc.) This information serves as metadata about the structured data, and the narrative generation computer system 100 can employ the analysis service 106 to generate such metadata.
Interface 120 serves to modularize the analysis service 106 relative to the authoring service 104, which provides a benefit of shielding the details of the analysis service from the authoring service and vice versa. The authoring service 104 can invoke the analysis service by sending an analysis request 130 to the analysis service 106 via interface 120. This analysis request 130 can be a structured message that includes parameters used to focus and control the analysis operations that are to be performed on the structured data by the analysis service 106. The analysis service 106 then processes the structured data based on parameters in the analysis request 130 to generate desired metadata about the structured data. This metadata can then be returned to the authoring service 104 through interface 120 as analysis results 132.
The authoring service 104 can the use the metadata within the analysis results 132 to support narrative generation in a manner such that the narrative story 144 includes one or more insights about the structured data based on the metadata from the analysis service 106.
The analysis service 106 can also be a multi-layered service where a plurality of analysis applications can selectively invoke any of a plurality of analytics 110 via interface 122. Interface 122 serves to modularize the analytics 110 relative to analysis applications 108, which provides a benefit of shielding the details of the analysis applications from the analytics and vice versa. For example, the analysis applications 108 that are selected and executed with respect to a given analysis request 130 can be context-dependent on the nature of the structured data. By contrast, the analytics 110 can be parameterized so that the logic for the analytics is independent of any specific context with respect to the structured data.
Thus, in an example embodiment, a practitioner may want a first set of analytics 110 to be performed when the structured data is of a first type (e.g., if the structured data corresponds to a line chart) and also want a second set of analytics 110 to be performed when the structured data is of a second type (e.g., if the structured data corresponds to a bar chart). The analysis applications 108 can shield the analytics from such context. With reference to the example of
Furthermore, if desired by a practitioner, analytics 110 can be linked to analysis applications indirectly via analysis libraries 200 as shown in
At step 502, the analysis service 106 selects and instantiates an analysis application 108 based on one or more parameters and/or one or more items of structured data in the processed request 130. For example, the analysis service 106 may map a parameter of the request 130 (such as chart type) to a particular analysis application 108. In doing so, the analysis service can build and resolve an analytic configuration based on parameters in the request 130 and any defaults defined by the relevant analysis application 108. This analytic configuration can specify which analytics are to be run and which parameters are to be used in the running of those analytics. In the context of
The analytic configuration 600 can also include specific parameters and/or thresholds to consider for the different specified analytics. For example, to control the trendline analytic bucket, the trendline configuration 604b can include a parameter 606 that specifies how many prediction periods are to be used in the trendline analysis. The value for this parameter can be passed through via analysis request 130 or it can be defined as a default setting by the analysis service. Thus, it should be understood that user or author preferences for thresholds and the like can be included in the analysis request 130 and applied directly by the analysis service 106 to each of the underlying analytic buckets via a mapping of parameters. This means that when a user or author selects, for example, an inclusion threshold of 0.4 for the segments analysis, any streaks or peaks (which are specific analytics that can be performed as part of segments analytic bucket) that do not exceed a 40% change will be disregarded and not returned in the analysis results 132.
By separating the underlying analytics from the user-driven and/or author-driven configuration in this way, significant flexibility is provided to practitioners for building out new analytics as well as enabling a dynamic and user-defined and/or author-defined content. Engineers can easily prototype as well as selectively enable/disable analytics by updating how analytic buckets are mapped to specific analytics without disrupting user workflows or modifying extensions.
Returning to
Each of the analysis application classes can inherit from a base class and thus share a significant amount of logic, particularly with respect to ingestion and high level aspects of the workflow. An area where the analysis application classes may differ is with respect to transform logic as well as in the decisions around which analysis libraries 200 they call out to with which subsets of the structured data.
Which analysis library 200 gets chosen at step 510 can depend on the types of structured data to be analyzed as well as the analytics specified by analytic configuration 600. Some analytics do not lend themselves to analyzing data that does not meet certain criteria. For example, continuity criteria can play a role in deciding whether a peaks analytic should be performed. If the subject data is organized along some form of a continuity basis (e.g., by time), then it may make sense to look for peaks in the data. However, if the data is completely unordered, then the peaks may be deemed arbitrary since the order in the data is arbitrary. Also, some data types and visualizations may have an assumed intent that indicates whether a given analytic would be helpful. An example of this would be where the act of making a line chart implies there is a desire to look at or see trends in the data; hence it makes sense to call out to a time series analysis library if the structured data to be analyzed includes a line chart. Continuing with the examples of
In the case of multi-dimensional structured data, the analysis application 108 can also decide how to split up the multi-dimensional data into new organizations of data which are more amenable to analysis by the specified analytics. These new organizations of the data can help the system find and express more relevant information in a narrative in an efficient manner. By breaking up source multi-dimensional data and analyzing the various pieces independently, the system has a greater ability to efficiently compare and contrast the results to develop a richer and more nuanced story.
For example, the specified analytics may operate to provide more relevant information in a narrative in an efficient manner if they are provided with an aggregated view (or aggregated views) of multi-dimensional chart data.
As another example, the specified analytics may operate to provide more relevant information in a narrative in an efficient manner if they are provided with a filtered view (or filtered views) of multi-dimensional chart data. This filtered view can also be referred to as a drilldown view.
It should also be understood that the process flows of
As yet another example, the specified analytics may operate to provide more relevant information in a narrative in an efficient manner if they are provided with a pivoted view (or pivoted views) of multi-dimensional chart data.
Returning to
At step 520, an invoked analysis library 200 instantiates the one or more analytics within the subject library 200 based on a configuration passed to the library 200 through interface 122. Through the interface 122, the invoked analysis library 200 can receive a data structure (such as a Pandas dataframe) that includes the structured data to be analyzed as well as configuration data for the subject analytics. At step 522, the structured data is processed using the one or more analytics that were instantiated at step 520 to generate analytics-based metadata about the structured data. This metadata is then returned to the analysis application (step 524).
While, for ease of illustration,
With reference to the example of
A cohort analysis library 200 can be configured to process unordered data. A practitioner may find it useful to bundle statistical analysis tools in a cohort analysis library (such as analytics that find the skew, mean, etc. with respect to unordered data). Also, analytics that find outliers and clusters of values in a data set may be useful to include in a cohort analysis library.
A regression analysis library 200 enables the performance of regressions on data to create and characterize models. As such, a regression analysis library can unify various stages or steps of regression analysis, including data transformation, model fitting, model evaluation, outlier detection, and prediction. A practitioner might find it useful to permit one or more of these stages to be selectively enabled and disabled via configuration settings passed through interface 122.
Analysis libraries 200 can also specify a workflow of underlying analytics that are to be performed. This allows a number of underlying analytics to be considered as a single atomic unit from a developer's perspective by combining several operations together according to a workflow. Such workflows can take what are typically iterative processes and turns them into a linear operation. For example, the 4 operations outlined below (model fitting/sampling, diagnostic testing, model evaluation, and prediction) are conventionally performed by data scientists until the resulting model (which can take the form of a mathematical expression of relationships associated with certain weights) is sufficient. With an example embodiment, the system can perform this series of steps once in that order, obtaining metadata about how the processed proceeded (e.g., which diagnostic tests were performed, how valid the model is, etc.). The results of these workflows can then expose information about what steps were taken and provide additional information that can contribute to describing the output. For example, the information and the resulting model itself can then be used to report on the results of the process in the narrative (an example of which can be seen in the customer service narrative paragraph below). At each of the 4 operations, the system can accumulate metadata about the process for that operation as well as the results of the operation itself. For diagnostic testing, the system can know which tests were performed for that particular analysis as well as the results of those tests. In such an example, and with reference to the customer service narrative paragraph below, the “there may be other factors contributing the Trip Advisor Score” comment may arise from the fact that one of the diagnostic tests indicated as such, and the statement about “evidence of a very strong relationship” can arise from the model evaluation step. By doing a single pass through the 4 operations described below and reporting out data that indicates how well the models worked out, the system can speed up the analysis processed and lower the bar for performing more advanced analysis without having to understand every underlying detail.
As examples, the times series analysis library and the region analysis library may expose a workflow of underlying analytics to developers as a single atomic unit. For example, a trendline analytic in the time series analysis library and a single/multivariate regression analytic in the regression analysis library can bundle a host of checks and statistics by following a process such as (1) model fitting and sampling, (2) diagnostic testing, (3) model evaluation, and (4) prediction (which may include confidence indicators). Information from each step can be expressed in the analysis results 132, which enables the authoring service 104 to produce a narrative story that expresses insights such as the following:
As another example, a periodicity analytic in the time series analysis library, which can be used to find and describe any cyclical behaviors in the structured data, can bundle a series of steps by following a process such as (1) data detrending, (2) periodogram, and (3) white noise bootstrapping (to determine a confidence level). Because the periodicity analytic wants to understand the cyclic nature of values, the bundled steps can help the system understand how often the subject values vary as a function of how often they occur (their frequency). A periodogram, which essentially operates as a histogram here, provides the system with this information by looking at all the values and performing a Fourier Transform on them. The resulting periodogram is then inspected to see at what frequencies the values change the most. As an example, consider a data set that describes ridership of public transportation over time. The frequency information in this would then be to what degree the ridership changes daily, monthly, yearly, etc. The maximum of the transformed data gives the frequency for which the ridership changed the most. The system can then report on those frequencies in the story (saying, for example that the ridership shows cyclicity, adjusting at regular weekly and monthly intervals).
Also, a practitioner may find it useful to include various design patterns and data models within analytics as aids to the story writing process.
For example, rankings are a type of analytic that can be included as part of analysis library, and a ranking analytic can be configured to find the most interesting or important of previously computed analytics. An example process flow for a ranking analytic is shown by
For example, the “as_series” parameter describes how to format that ranking's result. If the “as_series” parameter is set to true, it will link to the entire measure that the peak is associated with (which is what this example wants—the series with the largest positive peak). In other cases, the ranking may want a single value (such as if one wanted to know just the information of the largest positive streak). In that case, the “as_series” parameter would be set to false.
The “filter_attribute” and “filter_value” parameters allow the rankings analytic to have greater control for searching through the various analytic results. The filter attribute and value can restrict the search for all analytic results to those that match the specified criteria. As such, rather than having the ranking analytic look at all the various peaks across all series, it will only rank the ones whose “sign” value is equal to “Positive” as specified by the filter attribute and filter value parameters.
The source data under analysis can be tabular data, where the columns are either dimensions or measures. The series in this data can refer to the various measures in the source tabular data. For example, a source chart may be a line chart that plots sales and revenue over time. The source tabular data in this example includes a time dimension, a sales measure, and a revenue measure. Thus, the sales and revenue values over time can be series data for analysis.
As another example, interactions are another type of analytic that can be included as part of analysis library, and an interactions analytic can be configured to find intersections between data sets. However, it should be understood that the interactions analytic can do more than just find intersections. The interactions analytic can operate on multiple measures, which in practice may include operations such as calculating correlations, finding the intersections between the measure values for continuous data sets, and performing calculations on the series themselves (for example, subtracting one series from another to find the difference). An example process flow for an interactions analytic is shown by
The inputs for the interactions analytic can be an analysis results container object and a list of groups of measure objects (e.g., pairwise measures A-B, B-C, A-C). As shown by
Some examples of underlying analytics 110 that can be included as part of the analysis service include peaks analytics, jumps analytics, runs analytics, and streaks analytics.
A peaks analytic can be configured to find peaks and troughs within a data set. An example process flow for a peaks analytic is shown by
The inputs for the peaks analytic can be the measure values that are to be analyzed to find peaks and the configuration data for the peaks analytic. As shown by
Jumps are similar to peaks except that instead of returning to the baseline at the start of the peak, the series settles at a new baseline. A jump is a region where the value changes relatively quickly to a new value and then (unlike a peak) stays near the new value for a while. An example process flow for a jumps analytic is shown by
The inputs for the jumps analytic can be the measure values that are to be analyzed to find jumps and the configuration data for the jumps analytic. As shown by
Thereafter, the process attempts to find jumps for each window size. It can identify start/end indices of the center (increasing/decreasing) portion of the candidate jump. This can be done by creating a cuts series by applying a rolling function to the values which (1) splits the values into three portions, (2) compares the average of the first third to the average of the second third, and (3) if the difference between those averages is greater than the threshold percent, mark this region as containing a candidate jump. This step can also find the absolute starts/ends of these regions by noting where the cuts difference between one value and the next is not zero.
The process then adds information to each candidate jump result object. Such information can include (1) a window size, (2) a direction, (3) region information for each of the first/middle/last (i) start/end index, (ii) start/end value, (iii) standard deviation, (iv) mean, and (v) volatility, (4) absolute start/end index (start of first region, end of last region), (5) score (which can be computed via a function used to give a numeric value to the size of the jump, where the value gets larger for larger absolute/percentage changes and jump derivative), and (6) retain length (which can be number of contiguous data points that fall into the retain band, counting from the end of the last region).
Thereafter, the process flow merges jumps across windows. It can look through each jump and build up to larger and larger jumps by combining the jump information if the locations of the starts and ends overlap. Next, the analytic can filter out jumps according to the configured stay time (retain percent). From there, the remaining jumps can be returned as jump objects according to scores.
A runs analytic can be configured to find a sub-array within a series (single region) whose summed values gives the largest amount. A positive/negative run can be defined as a contiguous subarray of numbers whose forward differences sum to a global positive/negative maximum. Such a sub-array can be referred to as the maximum value sub-array, and this type of analysis can be useful for describing regions which impacted net growth/decline. For example, for the array [2, 1, 2, 4, 3, 5, 4, 3, 4], the maximum net positive run is [1, 2, 4, 3, 5], and the maximum net negative run is [5, 4, 3] (where the run length is greater than or equal to 2). An example of a narrative story that can express an insight derived from a runs analytic can be:
A streaks analytic can be configured to find streaks within a data set, where streaks can be defined as consecutively increasing/decreasing/unchanging regions of the data set. For example, given the series [3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 2, −1], there are three streaks present—[3, 3, 3] which is a flat streak, [3, 4, 5] which is a positive streak, and [5, 2, −1] which is a negative streak (where the streak length is greater than or equal to 2). Similar to peaks, a streaks analytic can identify (1) the start/end locations for streaks, (2) absolute and percentage change for start to finish for each streak, (3) the direction of movement for each streak, and (4) the length for each streak. Unlike runs, streaks are consistently increasing/decreasing/unchanging with respect to defined thresholds. Streaks can be thought of in a sports context as being, for example, when a basketball player has made all of his shots taken in a quarter. Runs, on the other hand, would be used to describe the period where the winning team pulled ahead the most.
As an operational step, the analytic finds the streak ends/starts using the measure values. This can include (1) creating an array of values corresponding to the difference between consecutive measure values (deriv), (2) finding the regions where the difference is positive (pos_deriv), (3) finding the regions where the difference is zero (flat_deriv), and (4) identifying the starts of the regions by comparing the positive/flat derivative to shifted values (so 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, =>True, False, False, True, False).
As a next operational step, the analytic determines streak direction for each streak by taking the difference of the start and end value for each of the streaks (diff>0=>positive, etc.).
As another operational step, the analytic creates streak result objects. These objects can get populated with information such as start/end index, start/end value, direction, and length. Thereafter, the analytic can filter out invalid streaks based on the streak configuration data. For remaining streaks, the analytic can add additional information to the streak objects such as absolute/percent difference information, and then return all streak objects, as sorted according to the sort configuration.
The authoring service can then process the story configuration to determine that analytics are needed to compute additional data needed for the story generation process, and a call can be made to analysis service 106 via interface 120 for this purpose (step 904). As discussed above, the authoring service can communicate, via interface 120, an analysis request 130 to the analysis service 106, where such an analysis request 130 can includes configuration information for the analysis operations. At step 906, the authoring service receives the analysis results 132 from the analysis service 106 via interface 120. These analysis results are ingested into the story configuration at step 908, and a determination is made as to whether more analysis is needed (step 910). If more analysis is needed, the process flow returns to step 904. Otherwise, the process flow proceeds to step 912. At step 912, a narrative story 144 about the structured data is generated based on the story configuration, and this narrative story 144 can express insights about the structured data that results from the analysis results returned by the analysis service 106. For example, the narrative story might identify the values of the largest peaks in a data set. The above-referenced patents and patent applications describe how narrative stories can be generated from story configurations in this fashion. Lastly, at step 914, the authoring service returns the narrative story 144 to the client 140 in response to the request. This step may involve encoding the narrative story as an HTML document or the like to facilitate presentation via a web page.
Returning to
While the invention has been described above in relation to its example embodiments, various modifications may be made thereto that still fall within the invention's scope. Such modifications to the invention will be recognizable upon review of the teachings herein.
This patent application claims priority to U.S. provisional patent application Ser. No. 62/618,249, filed Jan. 17, 2018, and entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Using an Invocable Analysis Service”, the entire disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. This patent application is also related to (1) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/235,594, filed this same day, and entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Using an Invocable Analysis Service”, (2) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/235,636, filed this same day, and entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Using an Invocable Analysis Service with Analysis Libraries”, and (3) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/235,705, filed this same day, and entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Using an Invocable Analysis Service and Configuration-Driven Analytics”, the entire disclosures of each of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4992939 | Tyler | Feb 1991 | A |
5619631 | Schott | Apr 1997 | A |
5734916 | Greenfield et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5794050 | Dahlgren et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5802495 | Goltra | Sep 1998 | A |
6006175 | Holzrichter | Dec 1999 | A |
6144938 | Surace et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6278967 | Akers et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6289363 | Consolatti et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6665666 | Brown et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6757362 | Cooper et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6771290 | Hoyle | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6917936 | Cancedda | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6968316 | Hamilton | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6976031 | Toupal et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
7027974 | Busch et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7246315 | Andrieu et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7324936 | Saldanha et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7333967 | Bringsjord et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7496621 | Pan et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7577634 | Ryan et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7610279 | Budzik et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7617199 | Budzik et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7617200 | Budzik et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7627565 | Budzik et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7644072 | Budzik et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7657518 | Budzik et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7716116 | Schiller | May 2010 | B2 |
7778895 | Baxter et al. | Aug 2010 | B1 |
7825929 | Kincaid | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7836010 | Hammond et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7840448 | Musgrove et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7856390 | Schiller | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7865496 | Schiller | Jan 2011 | B1 |
7930169 | Billerey-Mosier | Apr 2011 | B2 |
8046226 | Soble et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8311863 | Kemp | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8355903 | Birnbaum et al. | Jan 2013 | B1 |
8374848 | Birnbaum et al. | Feb 2013 | B1 |
8442940 | Faletti et al. | May 2013 | B1 |
8447604 | Chang | May 2013 | B1 |
8463695 | Schiller | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8468244 | Redlich | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8494944 | Schiller | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8515737 | Allen | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8612208 | Cooper et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8630844 | Nichols et al. | Jan 2014 | B1 |
8630912 | Seki et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8630919 | Baran et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8676691 | Schiller | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8688434 | Birnbaum et al. | Apr 2014 | B1 |
8752134 | Ma et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8762133 | Reiter | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8762134 | Reiter | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8762285 | Davis | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8775161 | Nichols et al. | Jul 2014 | B1 |
8812311 | Weber | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8843363 | Birnbaum et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8886520 | Nichols et al. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
8892417 | Nichols et al. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
8892419 | Lundberg et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8903711 | Lundberg et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
8977953 | Pierre et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
9135244 | Reiter | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9164982 | Kaeser | Oct 2015 | B1 |
9208147 | Nichols et al. | Dec 2015 | B1 |
9244894 | Dale et al. | Jan 2016 | B1 |
9251134 | Birnbaum et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9323743 | Reiter | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9336193 | Logan et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9348815 | Estes et al. | May 2016 | B1 |
9355093 | Reiter | May 2016 | B2 |
9396168 | Birnbaum et al. | Jul 2016 | B2 |
9396181 | Sripada et al. | Jul 2016 | B1 |
9396758 | Oz et al. | Jul 2016 | B2 |
9405448 | Reiter | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9424254 | Howald et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9430557 | Bhat et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9460075 | Mungi et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9529795 | Kondadadi et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9535902 | Michalak et al. | Jan 2017 | B1 |
9576009 | Hammond et al. | Feb 2017 | B1 |
9665259 | Lee et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9697178 | Nichols et al. | Jul 2017 | B1 |
9697192 | Estes et al. | Jul 2017 | B1 |
9697197 | Birnbaum et al. | Jul 2017 | B1 |
9697492 | Birnbaum et al. | Jul 2017 | B1 |
9720884 | Birnbaum et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9720899 | Birnbaum et al. | Aug 2017 | B1 |
9741151 | Breedvelt-Schouten et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9767145 | Prophete et al. | Sep 2017 | B2 |
9870362 | Lee et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
9870629 | Cardno et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
9946711 | Reiter | Apr 2018 | B2 |
9971967 | Bufe, III et al. | May 2018 | B2 |
9977773 | Birnbaum et al. | May 2018 | B1 |
9990337 | Birnbaum et al. | Jun 2018 | B2 |
10019512 | Boyle et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
10037377 | Boyle et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
10049152 | Ajmera et al. | Aug 2018 | B2 |
10073861 | Shamir et al. | Sep 2018 | B2 |
10101889 | Prophete et al. | Oct 2018 | B2 |
10115108 | Gendelev et al. | Oct 2018 | B1 |
10162900 | Chatterjee | Dec 2018 | B1 |
10185477 | Paley et al. | Jan 2019 | B1 |
10332297 | Vadodaria | Jun 2019 | B1 |
10387970 | Wang et al. | Aug 2019 | B1 |
10489488 | Birnbaum et al. | Nov 2019 | B2 |
10565308 | Reiter | Feb 2020 | B2 |
10621183 | Chatterjee | Apr 2020 | B1 |
10679011 | Galitsky | Jun 2020 | B2 |
10699079 | Paley et al. | Jun 2020 | B1 |
10706236 | Platt et al. | Jul 2020 | B1 |
10747823 | Birnbaum et al. | Aug 2020 | B1 |
10853583 | Platt et al. | Dec 2020 | B1 |
20020046018 | Marcu et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020083025 | Robarts et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020107721 | Darwent et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20030004706 | Yale et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030061029 | Shaket | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030182102 | Corston-Oliver et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030216905 | Chelba et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040015342 | Garst | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040034520 | Langkilde-Geary et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040138899 | Birnbaum et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040174397 | Cereghini et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040225651 | Musgrove et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040255232 | Hammond et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050027704 | Hammond et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050028156 | Hammond et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050033582 | Gadd et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050049852 | Chao | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050125213 | Chen et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050137854 | Cancedda et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050273362 | Harris et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060031182 | Ryan et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060101335 | Pisciottano | May 2006 | A1 |
20060181531 | Goldschmidt | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060212446 | Hammond et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060218485 | Blumenthal | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060224570 | Quiroga et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060271535 | Hammond et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060277168 | Hammond et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070132767 | Wright et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070136657 | Blumenthal et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070185846 | Budzik et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070185847 | Budzik et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070185861 | Budzik et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070185862 | Budzik et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070185863 | Budzik et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070185864 | Budzik et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070185865 | Budzik et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070250479 | Lunt et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070250826 | O'Brien | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080005677 | Thompson | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080140696 | Mathuria | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080198156 | Jou et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080250070 | Abdulla et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080256066 | Zuckerman et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080304808 | Newell et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080306882 | Schiller | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080313130 | Hammond et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090019013 | Tareen et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090030899 | Tareen et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090049041 | Tareen et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090083288 | LeDain et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090119584 | Herbst | May 2009 | A1 |
20090144608 | Oisel et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090144609 | Liang et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090175545 | Cancedda et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090248399 | Au | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090254572 | Redlich | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100146393 | Land et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100161541 | Covannon et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100185984 | Wright et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100241620 | Manister et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100250497 | Redlich | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100325107 | Kenton et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110022941 | Osborne et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110044447 | Morris et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110077958 | Breitenstein et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110078105 | Wallace | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110087486 | Schiller | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110099184 | Symington | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110113315 | Datha et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110113334 | Joy et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110213642 | Makar et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110246182 | Allen | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110249953 | Suri et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110261049 | Cardno et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110288852 | Dymetman et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110295903 | Chen | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110307435 | Overell et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110311144 | Tardif | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110314381 | Fuller et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120011428 | Chisholm | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120041903 | Beilby et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120069131 | Abelow | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120109637 | Merugu et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120143849 | Wong et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120158850 | Harrison et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120166180 | Au | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120265531 | Bennett | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120310699 | McKenna et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130041677 | Nusimow et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130091031 | Baran et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130096947 | Shah et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130144605 | Brager et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130145242 | Birnbaum et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130173285 | Hyde et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130174026 | Locke | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130185049 | Zhao et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130187926 | Silverstein et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130211855 | Eberle et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130238330 | Casella dos Santos | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130246934 | Wade et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130253910 | Turner et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130262092 | Wasick | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130275121 | Tunstall-Pedoe | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130304507 | Dail et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130316834 | Vogel et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140006012 | Zhou et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140040312 | Gorman et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140062712 | Reiter | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140075004 | Van Dusen et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140129942 | Rathod | May 2014 | A1 |
20140134590 | Hiscock, Jr. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140163962 | Castelli et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140200878 | Mylonakis et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140201202 | Jones et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140208215 | Deshpande | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140314225 | Riahi et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140351281 | Tunstall-Pedoe | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140356833 | Sabczynski et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140372850 | Campbell et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140375466 | Reiter | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150032730 | Cialdea, Jr. et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150049951 | Chaturvedi et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150078232 | Djinki et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150134694 | Burke et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150142704 | London | May 2015 | A1 |
20150161997 | Wetsel et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150169548 | Reiter | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150178386 | Oberkampf et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150186504 | Gorman et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150199339 | Mirkin et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150227508 | Howald et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150227588 | Shapira et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150242384 | Reiter | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150261745 | Song et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150268930 | Lee et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150324347 | Bradshaw et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150324351 | Sripada et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150324374 | Sripada et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150325000 | Sripada | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150331846 | Guggilla et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150331850 | Ramish | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150332665 | Mishra et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150347400 | Sripada | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150347901 | Cama et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150356967 | Byron et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150363364 | Sripada | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150370778 | Tremblay et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160019200 | Allen | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160026253 | Bradski et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160027125 | Bryce | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160054889 | Hadley et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160103559 | Maheshwari et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160132489 | Reiter | May 2016 | A1 |
20160140090 | Dale et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160162582 | Chatterjee | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160196491 | Chandrasekaran et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160217133 | Reiter et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160232152 | Mahamood | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160232221 | McCloskey et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160314121 | Arroyo et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20170004415 | Moretti et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170006135 | Siebel et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170017897 | Bugay et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170024465 | Yeh et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170026705 | Yeh et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170060857 | Imbruce et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170061093 | Amarasingham et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170068551 | Vadodaria | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170116327 | Gorelick et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20170140405 | Gottemukkala et al. | May 2017 | A1 |
20170185674 | Tonkin et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170199928 | Zhao et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20170212671 | Sathish et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20170213157 | Bugay et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20170228372 | Moreno et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170242886 | Jolley et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170270105 | Ninan et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170293864 | Oh et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170358295 | Roux et al. | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20170371856 | Can et al. | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20180025726 | Gatti de Bayser et al. | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180082184 | Guo et al. | Mar 2018 | A1 |
20180114158 | Foubert et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180232443 | Delgo et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180260380 | Birnbaum et al. | Sep 2018 | A1 |
20180261203 | Zoller et al. | Sep 2018 | A1 |
20180285324 | Birnbaum et al. | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20180314689 | Wang et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
20190042559 | Allen et al. | Feb 2019 | A1 |
20190138615 | Huh et al. | May 2019 | A1 |
20200074310 | Li et al. | Mar 2020 | A1 |
20200089735 | Birnbaum et al. | Mar 2020 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
9630844 | Oct 1996 | WO |
2006122329 | Nov 2006 | WO |
2014035400 | Mar 2014 | WO |
2014035402 | Mar 2014 | WO |
2014035403 | Mar 2014 | WO |
2014035406 | Mar 2014 | WO |
2014035407 | Mar 2014 | WO |
2014035447 | Mar 2014 | WO |
2014070197 | May 2014 | WO |
2014076524 | May 2014 | WO |
2014076525 | May 2014 | WO |
2014102568 | Jul 2014 | WO |
2014102569 | Jul 2014 | WO |
2014111753 | Jul 2014 | WO |
2015028844 | Mar 2015 | WO |
2015159133 | Oct 2015 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Allen et al., “StatsMonkey: A Data-Driven Sports Narrative Writer”, Computational Models of Narrative: Papers from the AAAI Fall Symposium, Nov. 2010, 2 pages. |
Andersen, P., Hayes, P., Huettner, A., Schmandt, L., Nirenburg, I., and Weinstein, S. (1992). Automatic extraction of facts from press releases to generate news stones. In Proceedings of the third conference on Applied natural language processing. (Trento, Italy). ACM Press, New York, NY, 170-177. |
Andre, E., Herzog, G., & Rist, T. (1988). On the simultaneous interpretation of real world image sequences and their natural language description: the system SOCCER. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 8th. European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI), Munich. |
Bailey, P. (1999). Searching for Storiness: Story-Generation from a Reader's Perspective. AAAI Technical Report FS-99-01. |
Bethem, T., Burton, J., Caldwell, T., Evans, M., Kittredge, R., Lavoie, B., and Werner, J. (2005). Generation of Real-time Narrative Summaries for Real-time Water Levels and Meteorological Observations in PORTS®. In Proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Artificial Intelligence Applications to Environmental Sciences (AMS-2005), San Diego, California. |
Bourbeau, L., Carcagno, D., Goldberg, E., Kittredge, R., & Polguere, A. (1990). Bilingual generation of weather forecasts in an operations environment. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), Helsinki, Finland, pp. 318-320. |
Boyd, S. (1998). TREND: a system for generating intelligent descriptions of time series data. Paper presented at Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on intelligent processing systems (ICIPS-1998). |
Character Writer Version 3.1, Typing Chimp Software LLC, 2012, screenshots from working program, pp. 1-19. |
Cyganiak et al., “RDF 1.1 Concepts and Abstract Syntax”, W3C Recommendation, 2014, vol. 25, No. 2. |
Dehn, N. (1981). Story generation after TALE-SPIN. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. (Vancouver, Canada). |
Dramatica Pro version 4, Write Brothers, 1993-2006, user manual. |
EnglisheForums, “Direct Objects, Indirect Objects, Obliques, Dative Movement?”, [online] https://www.englishforums.com, published 2007. (Year 2007). |
Gatt, A., and Portet, F. (2009). Text content and task performance in the evaluation of a Natural Language Generation System. Proceedings of the Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP-09). |
Gatt, A., Portet, F., Reiter, E., Hunter, J., Mahamood, S., Moncur, W., and Sripada, S. (2009). From data to text in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Using NLG technology for decision support and information management. AI communications 22, pp. 153-186. |
Glahn, H. (1970). Computer-produced worded forecasts. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 51(12), 1126-1131. |
Goldberg, E., Driedger, N., & Kittredge, R. (1994). Using Natural-Language Processing to Produce Weather Forecasts. IEEE Expert, 9 (2), 45. |
Hargood, C., Millard, D. and Weal, M. (2009) Exploring the Importance of Themes in Narrative Systems. |
Hargood, C., Millard, D. and Weal, M. (2009). Investigating a Thematic Approach to Narrative Generation, 2009. |
Hunter, J., Freer, Y., Gall, A., Logie, R., McIntosh, N., van der Meulen, M., Portet, F., Reiter, E., Sripada, S., and Sykes, C. (2008). Summarising Complex ICU Data in Natural Language. AMIA 2008 Annual Symposium Proceedings, pp. 323-327. |
Hunter, J., Gatt, A., Portet, F., Reiter, E., and Sripada, S. (2008). Using natural language generation technology to improve information flows in intensive care units. Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Prestigious Applications of Intelligent Systems, PAIS-08. |
Kittredge, R., and Lavoie, B. (1998). MeteoCogent: A Knowledge-Based Tool For Generating Weather Forecast Texts. In Proceedings of the American Meteorological Society AI Conference (AMS-98), Phoenix, Arizona. |
Kittredge, R., Polguere, A., & Goldberg, E. (1986). Synthesizing weather reports from formatted data. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Bonn, Germany, pp. 563-565. |
Kukich, K. (1983). Design of a Knowledge-Based Report Generator. Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Cambridge, MA, pp. 145-150. |
Kukich, K. (1983). Knowledge-Based Report Generation: A Technique for Automatically Generating Natural Language Reports from Databases. Paper presented at Proceedings of the Sixth International ACM SIGIR Conference, Washington, DC. |
Mack et al., “A Framework for Metrics in Large Complex Systems”, IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings, 2004, pp. 3217-3228, vol. 5, doi: 10.1109/AERO .2004.1368127. |
Mahamood et al., “Generating Annotated Graphs Using the NLG Pipeline Architecture”, Proceedings of the 8th International Natural Language Generation Conference (INLG), 2014. |
McKeown, K., Kukich, K., & Shaw, J. (1994). Practical issues in automatic documentation generation. 4th Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing, Stuttgart, Germany, pp. 7-14. |
Meehan, James R., TALE-SPIN. (1977). An Interactive Program that Writes Stories. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. |
Memorandum Opinion and Order for O2 Media, LLC v. Narrative Science Inc., Case 1:15-cv-05129 (N.D. IL), Feb. 25, 2016, 25 pages (invalidating claims of U.S. Pat. No. 7,856,390, U.S. Pat. No. 8,494,944, and U.S. Pat. No. 8,676,691 owned by O2 Media, LLC. |
Moncur, W., and Reiter, E. (2007). How Much to Tell? Disseminating Affective Information across a Social Network. Proceedings of Second International Workshop on Personalisation for e-Health. |
Moncur, W., Masthoff, J., Reiter, E. (2008) What Do You Want to Know? Investigating the Information Requirements of Patient Supporters. 21st IEEE International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS 2008), pp. 443-448. |
Movie Magic Screenwriter, Write Brothers, 2009, user manual. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/235,594 dated Jun. 12, 2020. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/235,636 dated Jul. 9, 2020. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/235,705 dated Jun. 18, 2020. |
Portet, F., Reiter, E., Gatt, A., Hunter, J., Sripada, S., Freer, Y., and Sykes, C. (2009). Automatic Generation of Textual Summaries from Neonatal Intensive Care Data. Artificial Intelligence. |
Portet, F., Reiter, E., Hunter, J., and Sripada, S. (2007). Automatic Generation of Textual Summaries from Neonatal Intensive Care Data. In: Bellazzi, Riccardo, Ameen Abu-Hanna and Jim Hunter (Ed.), 11th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (AIME 07), pp. 227-236. |
Reiter et al., “Building Applied Natural Generation Systems”, Cambridge University Press, 1995, pp. 1-32. |
Reiter, E. (2007). An architecture for Data-To-Text systems. In: Busemann, Stephan (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th European Workshop on Natural Language Generation, pp. 97-104. |
Reiter, E., Gatt, A., Portet, F., and van der Meulen, M. (2008). The importance of narrative and other lessons from an evaluation of an NLG system that summarises clinical data. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Natural Language Generation. |
Reiter, E., Sripada, S., Hunter, J., Yu, J., and Davy, I. (2005). Choosing words in computer-generated weather forecasts. Artificial Intelligence, 167:137-169. |
Response to Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/235,594 dated Jun. 12, 2020. |
Response to Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/235,705 dated Jun. 18, 2020. |
Riedl et al., “From Linear Story Generation to Branching Story Graphs”, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 2006, pp. 23-31. |
Riedl et al., “Narrative Planning: Balancing Plot and Character”, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 2010, pp. 217-268, vol. 39. |
Roberts et al., “Lessons on Using Computationally Generated Influence for Shaping Narrative Experiences”, IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games, Jun. 2014, pp. 188-202, vol. 6, No. 2, doi: 10.1109/TCIAIG .2013.2287154. |
Robin, J. (1996). Evaluating the portability of revision rules for incremental summary generation. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 34th. Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL'96), Santa Cruz, CA. |
Rui, Y., Gupta, A., and Acero, A. 2000. Automatically extracting highlights for TV Baseball programs. In Proceedings of the eighth ACM international conference on Multimedia. (Marina del Rey, California, United States). ACM Press, New York, NY 105-115. |
Segel et al., “Narrative Visualization: Telling Stories with Data”, Stanford University, Oct. 2010, 10 pgs. |
Smith, “The Multivariable Method in Singular Perturbation Analysis”, SIAM Review, 1975, pp. 221-273, vol. 17, No. 2. |
Sripada, S., Reiter, E, and Davy, I. (2003). SumTime-Mousam: Configurable Marine Weather Forecast Generator. Expert Update 6(3):4-10. |
Storyview, Screenplay Systems, 2000, user manual. |
Theune, M., Klabbers, E., Odijk, J., dePijper, J., and Krahmer, E. (2001) “From Data to Speech: A General Approach”, Natural Language Engineering 7(1): 47-86. |
Thomas, K., and Sripada, S. (2007). Atlas.txt: Linking Geo-referenced Data to Text for NLG. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 2007 European Natural Language Generation Workshop (ENLGO7). |
Thomas, K., and Sripada, S. (2008). What's in a message? Interpreting Geo-referenced Data for the Visually-impaired. Proceedings of the Int. conference on NLG. |
Thomas, K., Sumegi, L., Ferres, L., and Sripada, S. (2008). Enabling Access to Geo-referenced Information: Atlas.txt. Proceedings of the Cross-disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility. |
Van der Meulen, M., Logie, R., Freer, Y., Sykes, C., McIntosh, N., and Hunter, J. (2008). When a Graph is Poorer than 100 Words: A Comparison of Computerised Natural Language Generation, Human Generated Descriptions and Graphical Displays in Neonatal Intensive Care. Applied Cognitive Psychology. |
Yu, J., Reiter, E., Hunter, J., and Mellish, C. (2007). Choosing the content of textual summaries of large time-series data sets. Natural Language Engineering, 13:25-49. |
Yu, J., Reiter, E., Hunter, J., and Sripada, S. (2003). SUMTIME-TURBINE: A Knowledge-Based System to Communicate Time Series Data in the Gas Turbine Domain. In P Chung et al. (Eds) Developments in Applied Artificial Intelligence: Proceedings of IEA/AIE-2003, pp. 379-384. Springer (LNAI 2718). |
Response to Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/235,636 dated Jul. 9, 2020. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62618249 | Jan 2018 | US |