The present application is related to pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/971,685, entitled “Data Feed Having Customizable Analytic and Visual Behavior”; Ser. No. 12/971,638, entitled “Data Mining in a Business Intelligence Document”; Ser. No. 12/971,725, entitled “Automated Generation of Analytic and Visual Behavior”; Ser. No. 12/971,782, entitled “Business Application Publication”; Ser. No. 12/972,205, entitled “Representation of an Interactive Document as a Graph of Entities”; and Ser. No. 12/972,249, entitled “Representation of an Interactive Document as a Graph of Entities”, all filed concurrently herewith and all of which are specifically incorporated by reference herein for all that they disclose or teach.
Business intelligence (BI) refers to a broad category of applications and technologies for gathering, storing, analyzing, and providing access to data to help information workers (IWs) make better business decisions. BI applications typically address activities such as decision support systems, querying, reporting, online analytical processing (OLAP), statistical analysis, forecasting, and data mining. BI tools allow IWs to create and execute a certain class of BI applications over a multi-dimensional data model, such a pivot table, a cube, or other hierarchical dimensional storage, thereby achieving sophisticated analytical results from increasingly complex data.
BI applications allow information workers (IW) to collect, store, analyze, and present data and analysis results intended to inform business decisions. In a typical scenario, an IW identifies one or more data sources from which data of interest may be obtained. Information Technology (IT) personnel then apply tools and techniques of ETL (extract/transform/load) to extract the desired data from the data sources, reformat (i.e., transform) the extracted data for the IW's specific BI application, and load the transformed data into a preferred datastore. The IW can then execute a BI application (as defined by a BI document) to analyze the data of interest in the preferred datastore and present the analysis results (e.g., via visualizations). For example, an IW can collect data from a data marketplace of sports scores and statistics and execute a BI application in a spreadsheet-like tool that allows the IW to analyze the scores and statistics (such as by applying specialized calculations, adjusting data constraints, groupings, and/or filters, etc.). The BI application also defines functionality for presenting the analysis results, such as in the form of a spreadsheet-like table, a graphical chart, a user interface comparing multiple scenarios based on different input data values and analysis parameters, etc.
As mentioned above, an initial operation of BI typically involves the collection and reformatting of arbitrary complex data from various data sources into a preferred datastore and format. This collection operation is commonly referred to as “extract, transform, and load” or ETL—the data is extracted from various sources, transformed to satisfy operational needs, and loaded into the preferred datastore (e.g., a hierarchical database). ETL generally refers to bringing data, some of which is external, into the preferred datastore where subsequent BI operations can analyze it locally (e.g., at a local client or server). It should be understood, however, that some semantics may be lost when complex data is transformed into a preferred datastore format for BI. Furthermore, extraction of data from the original data sources to the local BI system may result in the loss of certain analytical capabilities provided by those original source systems.
Moreover, modern data models have shifted dramatically, introducing a new consumption and delivery model on which cloud computing is based. Cloud computing takes advantage of Internet-based, dynamically scalable, and often virtualized data resources. Such data resources can be continuously changing in both content and location. The traditional ETL model of fetching data and analyzing locally (e.g., at a single client or server) does not easily accommodate such a new data model. Furthermore, modern mobile computing devices may not be configured internally (e.g., with enough memory or a powerful enough processor) to handle the storage and computation requirements of many BI operations.
Implementations described and claimed herein address the foregoing problems by providing a BI document that preserves references to the identities and formats of remote data sources and allows a local computing device to offload analytical operations to remote data sources. In one implementation, the BI document specifies a graph of entities (nodes) connected by directed edges from the output of one entity to an input of another entity. An entity, for example, can represent without limitation a data structure, an external data source, a control element, an external event source, a visualization, or an update service. In one aspect, the entities of a BI document at a local computing device can reference data at an original data source—rather than extracting data from the original data source to a preferred local datastore. Furthermore, an entity of the BI document can direct a remote data source to execute transformations on the remote data before returning a solution to the local computing device. In this manner, BI transformations can be accomplished by original, remote data sources or other computational resources that are better equipped (e.g., more available resources, better solver, etc.) than the local computing device. The resulting solutions can then be input to the BI application's other expressions, as defined by the BI document.
In some implementations, articles of manufacture are provided as computer program products. One implementation of a computer program product provides one or more computer program storage media readable by a computer system and encoding a computer program. Another implementation of a computer program product provides one or more computer program storage media encoding a data structure. Other implementations are also described and recited herein.
Other implementations are also described and recited herein.
The described technology enhances a BI application by allowing designation of remote data and computations within a BI document. In this manner, the BI application can offload certain computations to remote data sources, thereby avoiding local data collection, transformation, storage, and computation at a local computing system for certain aspects of its operation. For example, circumstances may exist to make local storage and analysis of certain relevant data impractical (e.g., on a mobile device, a heavily loaded server, or a device not equipped with the best available solver). Accordingly, offloading certain computations on certain data to a remote system may improve resource utilization in a BI environment.
A BI document of the described technology can group arbitrary expressions (e.g., transformations) into individual entities, which can be connected as nodes in a graph, to compose the BI application. An output of one entity may be connected to the input of another entity to create a pipeline of expression-containing entities. Each entity may be designated for local or remote computation, independent of each other entity, and the expressions of each entity may be evaluated by either a local system or a remote system, depending on the designation of the entity. As such, the content and connections of each entity can combine to yield a sophisticated BI application specifying arbitrary combinations of local and remote computations using local and remote data sources.
It should be understood that data sources may emit either data (e.g., remotely-resident data, remotely-computed solutions) or expressions. For example, a data source may return data from a database residing at a remote data warehouse or may return solutions based on remote or local data, wherein the solutions were evaluated at a remote computing system. Where the remote computing system does not provide its own data, the data source may be referred to as a “pure solver.” A data source that emits expressions may also be referred to as a “service.”
The BI document 100 defines the BI application using a data structure of arbitrary expressions that can be specified by a non-programmer. In one implementation, a BI application defined by sets of such arbitrary expressions are grouped into distinct entities, which may have input variables and output variables, wherein the relationships among inputs and outputs of these entities defined by the sets of expressions that define the entities. The expressions are generally not unique to any particular system but may be evaluated by either a local or remote system. However, an entity (and therefore the contained expressions) may be designated for local or remote computation on local or remote data, thereby directing computation to an appropriate system based on this designation.
Individual entities may be connected into a pipeline of entities, such that an output of one entity (e.g., an external equation set entity for remote computation) is connected to the input of another entity (e.g., an internal equation set entity of local computation), and so on. The input and output formats of connected entities are matched, such that the data output by one entity is compatible with the input format (e.g., schema) required by the entity to which that data is input. The pipeline-connection of multiple entities allows a user to specify a BI application for evaluating complex and arbitrary combinations of expressions using local or remote data and computation to obtain sophisticated BI solutions.
Furthermore, a non-programmer can develop a BI application defined by such expressions. In some implementations, the skill level adequate for a person to develop a BI application defined by expressions may be similar to the skill level adequate to use a spreadsheet software application, such as Microsoft EXCEL®.
An expression is a symbolic representation of a computation to be performed and may include operators and operands. Example operators of an expression may include without limitation mathematical operators (e.g., addition, subtraction, etc.), relational transformations (e.g., group, ungroup, join, filter, sort, etc.), aggregate transformations over nested structures (e.g., hierarchical filtering), classifiers (e.g., Bayesian algorithm that classified an unstructured set of data), BI aggregations and transformations, and arbitrary or customized transform expressions (e.g., sets of rules, equations, and/or constraints). Example operands of an expression may include without limitation data (e.g., numbers or strings), hierarchical data (such as records, tuples, and sequences), symbols that represent data, and other expressions that resolve to specific data. An expression may thus be recursive in that an expression may be defined by other expressions.
For example, an expression may take the form of a symbolic representation of an algebraic expression, such as x2+2xy+y2, where x and y are symbols that represent data or other expressions. A symbol may represent any type of data, including without limitation an integer, a rational number, a string, a Boolean, a sequence of data (potentially infinite), a tuple, or a record. In some implementations, a symbol may also represent an irrational number, although in other implementation, a symbol may be prohibited from representing an irrational number. Any expression may take the form of an equation, such as E=mc2, where E, m, and c are symbols representing data or other expressions. An expression may also take the form of a functional definition, such as ƒ(x)=x2−1, where ƒ is a symbol representing the function, x is a symbol representing an operand or argument of the function, and x2−1 is an expression that defines the function. In addition, an expression may take the form of a function invocations, such as ƒ(3), which indicates that the function ƒ is to be invoked with an argument of “3”.
An expression may be solved by an expression engine (see expression engine 216 in
In evaluating an expression, the expression engine may apply the operators to the operands to the extent that the operators and operands are defined and to the extent that the expression engine is configured to apply the operators to the operands. For example, where the symbol x represents the number “3” and the symbol “y” is not yet defined, the expression x2+2xy+y2 may be solved by replacing the known symbol “x” with the value it represents (e.g., 22+2·2·y+y2) and then applying the operators to the operands to solve the entire expression as 4+4y+y2. Where the symbol x represents the number “3” and the symbol y represents the string “hello”, the expression x2+2xy+y2 may be solved as 4+4·hello+hello2, since the expression engine may not be configured to perform arithmetic operations on the string “hello”.
Each expression can further specify a data source, whether local or remote. For example, an expression in which data values for x are taken from a local data source and data values for y are taken from a remote data source may be declared as follows:
x2+2xy+y2|where x in local_table_contacts.Age and y in remote_table_contacts.Income
Furthermore, each expression can further designate local or remote computation. For example, the computation entity may be specifically identified for an expression as such:
x2+2xy+y2|local source.Solver
or
x2+2xy+y2|remote_source.Solver
In some implementations, expressions without a computation identifier are deemed local by default.
In some implementations, expression may be declarative. A declarative expression can identify a computation to be performed without specifying how to compute it. A declarative expression may be contrasted with an imperative expression, which may provide an algorithm or other specification for computing the expression. Declarative expressions may be input manually, such as into a field in a spreadsheet tool, or created through a declaration-generating control, such as a visual control element associated with a visualization (see e.g., control element 608 in
In some implementations, expressions may be immutable. An expression is immutable if it cannot be changed. For example, once a definition is given to an immutable expression, such as if E=mc2 is designated immutable, the expression E cannot later be given a different definition. One advantage of immutability is that a BI application having one or more expressions designated as immutable prevents users of the BI application from altering those expressions. Where expressions are being solved in a distributed execution environment, immutability may be advantageous in that devices can rely on the immutable expression having the same definition throughout the lifetime of the expression Immutability of expressions can make it easier for independent parts of a BI application to execute in parallel.
As discussed, a BI application may be defined by a data structure of expressions. In one implementation, the BI application is represented by a graph of nodes or entities specified in the BI document, wherein one or more expressions are partitioned into individual entities and connected via related inputs and outputs. Based on the BI document 100, the BI application can provide spreadsheet-like, incremental recalculation behavior (“recalc”), solving expressions as the data upon which they depend changes. In addition, the BI tool 102 and the BI document 100 are coordinated to allow BI and other operations over heterogeneous complex data, including data sourced from local and remote data sources.
In one implementation, declarative expressions are recorded in the BI document 100 to define one or more entities in the graph, each entity representing without limitation a data structure, an external data source, a control element, an external event source, a visualization, or an update service. In one implementation, each entity transforms its inputs (if any) into its outputs (if any) and is associated with:
More details pertaining to entities are described with regard to
Arrow 106 represents expressions of an entity defined in the BI document 100 being computed on the local device 104 with local data, wherein the solution is logically “returned” to the BI application defined by the BI document 100 as arrow 108. As an alternative to or in addition to specifying local computations on local data, another entity defined in the BI document 100 can reference data resident at a remote data source (such as the data warehouse 110). Furthermore, the entity can offload a portion of the BI application's computation to the data warehouse 110 or to a separate remote computation service (e.g., remote solver service 112). In either case, the data warehouse's solution and the solver's solution can be returned to the BI application when complete.
In should also be understood that the data warehouse 110 and/or the remote solver service 112 may also offload portions of the computations they been assigned by the application (as defined in the BI document 100) running on the local device 104. For example, if the data warehouse 110 receives expressions from the local device 104 for computation and the data warehouse 110 determines that it is unable or inappropriate for performing the computation (e.g., the solver service 112 has a better solver), the data warehouse 110 can offload one or more of the received expressions to the solver service 112, which can perform the computation and return the solution to the data warehouse 110. This sequential offloading forms a type of “offload chain.” The data warehouse 110 then returns the solution, or some solution that depends from this solution, to the local device 104. Furthermore, the solver service 112 can also extend the offload chain to yet another remote computation system. The local device 104 is agonistic about how the remote systems obtain their solutions (e.g., whether handling the computation themselves or offloading to other remote systems). In this manner, an offload chain can be established among multiple systems, such that the local device 104 offloads certain expressions to one or more remote systems and simply expects these remote systems to return corresponding solutions.
One of the BI tools 210 can input the BI document 212 and process an entity graph 214 recorded in the BI document 212. As discussed with regard to
In one implementation, the BI tool 210 analyzes the entity graph 214 and determines the data source designated to operate on each entity. Each entity designates data against which its expressions are to be evaluated. Some entities designate expressions for local computation on local data; other entities designate expression for remote computation on remote data. For local computation entities, the local computing system 200 employs a local expression engine 216, and one or more local data sources 218 to solve the expressions defined in the entities. It should be understood that “local” refers to data or computation within a device or a local area network (LAN) (e.g., at a local server), as compared with “remote,” which refers to data or computation outside of a LAN, such as on a wide area network (WAN). Examples of remote data and computation would reside in the “cloud,” such as at one or more Internet connected web services or data warehouses.
For remote computation entities, the local computing system 200 communicates the expressions specified in each entity (e.g., through a network 220) to a designated remote system for remote computation. In one implementation, a remote data source 222 employs one or more of its own data sources to solve the expressions defined in the entities. In one implementation, the remote data source includes an expression engine that interpret the expressions received from the local computing system 200 to allow the remote system to access data and perform computations designated in the received expressions.
The solutions for a remotely computed entity are communicated from the remote system to the local computing system 200 for use in the BI applications (e.g., for input to other entities defined in the BI document 212). The solution 226 of the BI application is output to the user, such as via a visualization (e.g., a map, a graph, etc.) displayed on a display device via one or more of the user interfaces 204.
Each entity can represent without limitation a data structure (e.g., a table or a hierarchical table), a terminal entity (e.g., a visualization or update service), a set of expressions with its bindings to identified data, an external data source (e.g., a remote data source, a query-able data source, a non-query-able data source, a control element that provides user interaction to allow data input, a remote service, etc.), and external event sources (e.g., timers). Each entity also defines the format of its one or more inputs and/or outputs. If the entity has an input, the entity further defines the source of the input data. The one or more expressions specified by each entity define transforms to be performed by the entity on its inputs (if any), the result of which is the output (if any) of the entity.
Individual entities may be characterized in a variety of ways, as described with regard to the example list below:
It should be understood that other types of entities and connections are also contemplated in other implementations. In particular, multiple entities may be connected in a pipeline to produce a complex and arbitrary sequence of expressions designated for local and/or remote computation.
As data that is input to an entity changes, the expression engine re-evaluates the expressions specified by the entity. Accordingly, data changes and re-computation results can ripple through the directed graph, changing the output data that is altered by the re-computations and leaving the outputs of other entities unchanged (where the initial data changes do not ripple to these entities). This incremental change provides a spreadsheet-like recalculation (“recalc”) effect—some data changes in the spreadsheet when data is changed, while other data remains unchanged.
Turning back to
A control element source entity 312 also has no input and one output. The output data of the control element source entity 312 changes based on the state of an associated control element (e.g., a visual slider control), which can be manipulated by a user. For example, the associated control element may be presented to the user as a slider that the user can slide back and forth within a predetermined range to change the output value of the entity 312. A control element source entity 318 is also connected to the input of a visualization entity 309.
As illustrated, individual entities may be connected into a pipeline, where the local or remote location of the data and the computation for one entity are immaterial to any previous or subsequent entity in the pipeline. For example, an output of the invariable data source entity 302 is connected to the external equation set entity 314 and an output connected to the internal equation set entity 306. The external equation set entity 314 has one output connected to an input of the internal equation set entity 306. It should be understood that the input and output formats of connected entities are compatible to allow a first entity to output data directly to a second entity.
Further, among other connections, inputs to the internal equation set entity 306 are connected to outputs of the invariable data source entity 302, the event source entity 304, and the control element source entity 312. Also, as shown, outputs of the entities 306, 314 and 318 are input to the visualization entity 309, which has three inputs and no outputs. The visualization entity 309 alters a visualization presented to the user based on the data received at its inputs from the entities 306, 314, and 318. In this manner, changes to the outputs of the entities 306, 314, and 318 results in changes to the visual display viewed by user.
For those entities designated for remote computation on remote data, the expression engine 412 directs the expressions of each such entity to the appropriate remote data source. As such, if the expression engine 412 identifies an entity designating a remote data source, then the expression engine 412 offloads the entity's expressions (shown as an offloaded expressions 414) to the designated remote system 402. If the designated remote data is available locally to the remote system 402 (e.g., the remote data 420), a data-application binder 418 binds remote data 420 (i.e., data local to the remote system but remote from the local system) to the offloaded expressions 414, to the extent possible, and passes the expressions to an expression engine 422 to evaluate the expressions based on the available data. It should be understood that the expression engine 422 may determine that the designated data and/or computation (or some portion thereof) is not local to the remote system 402 and therefore direct some portion of the offloaded expressions 414 to another remote system 424 where the designated data and/or computation is expected to reside.
Assuming the expression engine 422 evaluates the offloaded expressions 414 against on the remote data 420, the solution of the entity is output as a solution 426 (albeit an intermediate solution to the BI application) and supplied to the data-application binder 408 of the local system 400. In this manner, local data 410 and remote solution data 426 can both be bound to expressions being evaluated by the expression engine 412 to produce local data solution data 428. In addition, certain entities of the BI document 404 may supply output data to a terminal entity, such as a visualization entity, which displays data and analysis results to the user.
A traversal operation 504 traverses the entity graph of the BI document, visiting each entity in the graph. If an unresolved entity (i.e., an entity having expression that have not been computed or having inputs or a state that have changed since the last visit), as determined by a decision operation 506, a decision operation 510 determines if the entity designates a remote data source. If so, an offloading operation 514 directs the entity's expressions to the designated remote data source, and a solution operation 516 receives a solution computed in return by the designated remote data source. (If no unresolved entity is found by the decision operation 506, processing continues to loop until an unresolved entity is found.)
If the decision operation 510 determines that the entity designates a local data source, then a computation operation 512 evaluates the entity's expressions against the local data. In either case, an updating operation 518 receives the solution of an entity's expression evaluation and updates data bindings in the local system based on this result. Thereafter, the traversal operation 504 continues its search for unresolved entities.
The new histogram visual element 602 is also based on input data and transformations, some of which are defined by a user through the control element 604. In the case of the control element 604, a user can configure a “constraint” transformation using a user-entered equation and an “allocation” transformation using a drop down box offering various selections (e.g., “Distribute Equally,” “Weighted,” etc.) Other transformations may also be applied to the input data in the configuration of the histogram visual 602 or any other visual element.
Other application controls are also shown in
The system bus 23 may be any of several types of bus structures including a memory bus or memory controller, a peripheral bus, a switched fabric, point-to-point connections, and a local bus using any of a variety of bus architectures. The system memory may also be referred to as simply the memory, and includes read only memory (ROM) 24 and random access memory (RAM) 25. A basic input/output system (BIOS) 26, containing the basic routines that help to transfer information between elements within the computer 20, such as during start-up, is stored in ROM 24. The computer 20 further includes a hard disk drive 27 for reading from and writing to a hard disk, not shown, a magnetic disk drive 28 for reading from or writing to a removable magnetic disk 29, and an optical disk drive 30 for reading from or writing to a removable optical disk 31 such as a CD ROM, a DVD, or other optical media.
The hard disk drive 27, magnetic disk drive 28, and optical disk drive 30 are connected to the system bus 23 by a hard disk drive interface 32, a magnetic disk drive interface 33, and an optical disk drive interface 34, respectively. The drives and their associated computer-readable media provide nonvolatile storage of computer-readable instructions, data structures, program modules and other data for the computer 20. It should be appreciated by those skilled in the art that any type of computer-readable media which can store data that is accessible by a computer, such as magnetic cassettes, flash memory cards, digital video disks, random access memories (RAMs), read only memories (ROMs), and the like, may be used in the example operating environment.
A number of program modules may be stored on the hard disk, magnetic disk 29, optical disk 31, ROM 24, or RAM 25, including an operating system 35, one or more application programs 36, other program modules 37, and program data 38. A user may enter commands and information into the personal computer 20 through input devices such as a keyboard 40 and pointing device 42. Other input devices (not shown) may include a microphone, joystick, game pad, satellite dish, scanner, or the like. These and other input devices are often connected to the processing unit 21 through a serial port interface 46 that is coupled to the system bus, but may be connected by other interfaces, such as a parallel port, game port, or a universal serial bus (USB). A monitor 47 or other type of display device is also connected to the system bus 23 via an interface, such as a video adapter 48. In addition to the monitor, computers typically include other peripheral output devices (not shown), such as speakers and printers.
The computer 20 may operate in a networked environment using logical connections to one or more remote computers, such as remote computer 49. These logical connections are achieved by a communication device coupled to or a part of the computer 20; the invention is not limited to a particular type of communications device. The remote computer 49 may be another computer, a server, a router, a network PC, a client, a peer device or other common network node, and typically includes many or all of the elements described above relative to the computer 20, although only a memory storage device 50 has been illustrated in
When used in a LAN-networking environment, the computer 20 is connected to the local network 51 through a network interface or adapter 53, which is one type of communications device. When used in a WAN-networking environment, the computer 20 typically includes a modem 54, a network adapter, a type of communications device, or any other type of communications device for establishing communications over the wide area network 52. The modem 54, which may be internal or external, is connected to the system bus 23 via the serial port interface 46. In a networked environment, program modules depicted relative to the personal computer 20, or portions thereof, may be stored in the remote memory storage device. It is appreciated that the network connections shown are example and other means of and communications devices for establishing a communications link between the computers may be used.
In an example implementation, an expression engine, a data source, a computation service, and other modules and services may be embodied by instructions stored in memory 22 and/or storage devices 29 or 31 and processed by the processing unit 21. Source data, BI documents, and other data may be stored in memory 22 and/or storage devices 29 or 31 as persistent datastores. Further, local computing systems, remote data sources and/or services, and other associated logic represent hardware and/or software configured to provide BI functionality for network-connected systems. Such sources and services may be implemented using a general purpose computer and specialized software (such as a server executing service software), a special purpose computing system and specialized software (such as a mobile device or network appliance executing service software), or other computing configurations.
The embodiments of the invention described herein are implemented as logical steps in one or more computer systems. The logical operations of the present invention are implemented (1) as a sequence of processor-implemented steps executing in one or more computer systems and (2) as interconnected machine or circuit modules within one or more computer systems. The implementation is a matter of choice, dependent on the performance requirements of the computer system implementing the invention. Accordingly, the logical operations making up the embodiments of the invention described herein are referred to variously as operations, steps, objects, or modules. Furthermore, it should be understood that logical operations may be performed in any order, unless explicitly claimed otherwise or a specific order is inherently necessitated by the claim language.
The above specification, examples, and data provide a complete description of the structure and use of exemplary embodiments of the invention. Since many embodiments of the invention can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention, the invention resides in the claims hereinafter appended. Furthermore, structural features of the different embodiments may be combined in yet another embodiment without departing from the recited claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4633430 | Cooper | Dec 1986 | A |
5669007 | Tateishi | Sep 1997 | A |
5867714 | Todd et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
6691100 | Alavi et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6865720 | Otani et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6931589 | Baltsan et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
7028306 | Boloker et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7263663 | Ballard et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7263694 | Clewis et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7315861 | Seibel et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7343585 | Lau et al. | Mar 2008 | B1 |
7349947 | Slage et al. | Mar 2008 | B1 |
7440902 | Greenstein et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7506243 | Kotler et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7603620 | Erol et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7752314 | Trevor et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7752536 | Megiddo et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7802230 | Mendicino et al. | Sep 2010 | B1 |
7870545 | Saha et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7900111 | Kim et al. | Mar 2011 | B1 |
7908186 | Gabelmann et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7941791 | Wang et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
8032875 | Kosche et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8117606 | Chakrabarti et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8135655 | Oaten et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8201160 | Hauser | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8332772 | Janzen et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8429630 | Nickolov et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8473473 | Wang et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8589172 | Alonso et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8635211 | Jiang et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8713058 | Nagoski et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
20010047372 | Gorelik et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020065673 | Rooke | May 2002 | A1 |
20020066782 | Swaminathan et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020091609 | Markowski | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020169658 | Adler | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020191199 | Imada et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030041104 | Wingard et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030144868 | MacIntyre et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20040015481 | Zinda | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040098358 | Roediger | May 2004 | A1 |
20040153992 | Molina-Moreno et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040162842 | Ono et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040181519 | Anwar | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050004911 | Goldberg et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050043961 | Torres et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050187809 | Falkenhainer | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050231392 | Meehan et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060074882 | Scherer et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060080400 | Guha | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20070038657 | Denton et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070046664 | Raspl et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070061711 | Bodin et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070112714 | Fairweather | May 2007 | A1 |
20070124285 | Wright et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070136326 | McClement et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070179941 | Huang et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070185746 | Chieu et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070250764 | Jiang | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070265995 | Remington et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070294614 | Jacquin et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080040346 | Aggarwal et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080058969 | Nixon et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080127052 | Rostoker | May 2008 | A1 |
20080178083 | Bergman et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080183710 | Serjeantson et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080184140 | Koerner | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080189438 | Zimmerer et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080195930 | Tolle | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080209314 | Sylthe et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080215559 | Fontoura et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080238925 | Meehan et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080271127 | Naibo et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080288889 | Hunt et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080294996 | Hunt et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080306981 | Jiang et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080307334 | Chaudhri et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080319829 | Hunt et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090037363 | Kozlov et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090049422 | Hage et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090094674 | Schwartz et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090100360 | Janzen et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090100407 | Bouillet et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090125553 | Dickinson | May 2009 | A1 |
20090172024 | Hsu et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090172773 | Moore | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090216758 | Tuttle et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090225082 | Hargrove et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090254971 | Herz et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090287814 | Robertson et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090300544 | Psenka et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090312992 | Chen et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090322739 | Rubin et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090327878 | Grandison et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100070448 | Omoigui | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100088258 | Oaten et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100100561 | Cooper et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100106853 | Kashiyama et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100131255 | Beckman et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100179951 | McPhail | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100198697 | Brown et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100205178 | Bush et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100241620 | Manister et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100287459 | Mital et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110029636 | Smyth et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110093430 | B'Far et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110131253 | Peukert et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110179020 | Ozzie et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110231385 | Wang et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110295795 | Venkatasubramanian et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110295853 | Li et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120158643 | Mital et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120158644 | Mital et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120158732 | Mital et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120158754 | Mital et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120159312 | Mital et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120159333 | Mital et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120159465 | Mital et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
Hilary Cheng et al. “An ontology-based business intelligence application in a financial knowledge management system”, [Online], 2008, pp. 3614-3622, [Retrieved from Internet on Jan. 31, 2015], <http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0957417408001887/1-s2.0-S0957417408001887-main.pdf>. |
Liyi Zhang et al., “A Feasible Enterprise Business Intelligence Design Model”, [Online], 2009, pp. 182-187, [Retrived from Internet on Jan. 31, 2015], <http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5280009>. |
Zhang Jing et al., “Improvement Design on the Data Structure of Business Intelligence”, [Online], 2011, pp. 313-321, [Retrieved from Internet on Jan. 31, 2015], <http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/174/chp%253A10.1007%252F978-3-642-25538-0—46.pdf>. |
Zhijun Ren, “Practicing for Business Intelligence Application with SQL Server 2008”, [Online], 2010, pp. 1499-1503, [Retrieved from Internet on Jan. 31, 2015], <http://scholar.google.com/scholar—url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scientific.net%2FAMM.20-23.1499.pdf>. |
“Document Processing System”—Published Date: Nov. 16, 2007; http://www.wolfram.com/products/mathematica/analysis/content/DocumentProcessingSystems.html. |
“How to Customize Ubuntu into your own custom distribution,” Retrieved at <<http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/ubuntu-63/how-to-customize-ubuntu-into-your-own-custom-distribution-663412/>>, Aug. 17, 2008, 10 pages. |
“Introduction to the XML Pipeline Definition Language (XPL)”—Retrieved Date: Sep. 15, 2010; http://www.orbeon.com/orbeon/doc/reference-xpl-pipelines. |
“LeoStatistic—building histogram, curve fit, multivariate regression, data modeling software,” Retrieved at <<http://www.leokrut.com/leostatistic.html>> Retrieved Date Sep. 21, 2010, pp. 1-6. |
“Optimizing forms processing”—Retrieved Date: Sep. 15, 2010; http://www.movetonow.com/content/optimizing—forms—processing. |
“Publishing applications to market place,” Retrieved at <<https://help.creator.zoho.com/Publishing-applications-to-market-place.html>>, Retrieved Date Nov. 26, 2010, pp. 1-5. |
“Square your search results with Google Squared,” Retrieved at <<http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/06/square-your-search-results-with-google.html>>, Jun. 2009, pp. 1-4. |
“User Customization,” Retrieved at <<http://docstore.mik.ua/orelly/perl3/tk/ch16—01.htm>>, Retrieved Date Nov. 26, 2010, pp. 1-4. |
“Windows Azure and Cloud Computing,” Retrieved at <<http://oakleafblog.blogspot.com/2010/09/windows-azure-and-cloud-computing-posts—09.html>>, Sep. 9, 2010, pp. 1-68. |
Ayachit et al., “Customizing ParaView,” Retrieved at <<http://www.itk.org/Wiki/images/7/77/Branding—paper.pdf>>, Oct. 2009, 3 pages. |
Banerjee, Atanu, “The 2007 Microsoft Office System and Other Platform Technologies for Building Composite Applications,” Retrieved at <<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb220802.aspx>>, Dec. 2006, 14 pages. |
Biddick, Michael, “Six Questions to Ask Before Buying End-to-End APM,” Retrieved at <<http://www.networkcomputing.com/end-to-end-apm/6-questions-to-ask-before-buying-end-to-end-apm.php>>, Jun. 21, 2010, pp. 1-9. |
Collins, J., “Using Innovation in Technology to Create New Business Models,” Retrieved at <<http://www.theshiftonline.com/?p=666>>, Oct. 25, 2010, 3 pages. |
Delaney, A., “Direct Data Feed Services,” Retrieved at <<http://www.a-teamgroup.com/?dl—id=7460&dl—cm=on&dl—la=0&dl—ls=0>>, Jun. 2010, 8 pages. |
Frisch, A. et al. “Streaming XML transformations using term rewriting”—Published Date: 2007; http://pauillac.inria.fr/˜frisch/xstream/long.pdf. |
Gardarin, G. et al. “XML-based Components for Federating Multiple Heterogeneous Data Sources” Lecture Notes in Computer Science—Published Date: 1999; http://dntt.free.fr/publi/er1999.pdf. |
Janeiro, et al., “Improving the Development of Service-Based Applications Through Service Annotations,” Retrieved at <<http://www.rn.inf.tu-dresden.de/uploads/Publikationen/AnnotationPaperWWW-Internet2009.Pdf>>, 2009, 8 pages. |
Jelinek, J. et al. “XML Visualization Using Tree Rewriting”—Published Date: 2004; http://mummy.intranet.gr/includes/docs/Conferences/—02—XMLvisualization-Jelinek-SCCG04.pdf. |
McNee et al., “Creating Auction Ads for Marketplaces,” Retrieved at <<http://e-articles.info/e/a/title/Creating-Auction-Ads-for-Marketplaces/>>, Apr. 2007, pp. 1-2. |
Mostarda et al., “MU: an hybrid language for Web Mashups,” Retrieved at <<http://em-up.googlecode.com/svn/wiki/papers/www2009.pdf>>, 2009, 10 pages. |
Nagel, Nick, “Enterprise Data Modeling Using XML Schema,” Retrieved at <<http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.135.6120&rep=rep1&type=pdf>>, 2007, 30 pages. |
Page, S. “XSL Pipeline Processing”—Published Date: Jul. 2, 2007; http://www.usingxml.com/Transforms/XslPipelines. |
Spillner et al., “Flexible Human Service Interfaces,” Retrieved at <<http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.70.7734&rep=rep1&type=pdf>>, 2007, 7 pages. |
White, Colin J., “IBM enterprise analytics for the intelligent e-business,” Retrieved at <<http://sysdoc.doors.ch/IBM/bi.pdf>>, Sep. 2001, 34 pages. |
Ravindran, Karthik, “Integrating LOB Systems with the Microsoft Office System”, Retrieved at <<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb896607.aspx >>, Nov. 2007, pp. 1-18. |
Johnson et al., “Building ETL Processes for Business Intelligence Solutions”, Retrieved at <<http://www.ca.com/files/whitepapers/ca-erwin-building-etl-processes-sql-wp-us-en.pdf >>, Jul. 10, 2008 , pp. 6. |
“Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 12/972,205”, Dated: Nov. 26, 2012, pp. 33. |
“Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,638”, Dated: Aug. 30, 2012, pp. 19. |
“Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,685”, Dated: Jul. 13, 2012, pp. 10. |
“Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,685”, Dated: Oct. 11, 2012, pp. 16. |
“Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,725”, Dated: Aug. 21, 2012, pp. 11. |
“Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,725”, Dated: May 1, 2013, pp. 15. |
“Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,782”, Dated: Jul. 13, 2012, pp. 8. |
“Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,782”, Dated: Jan. 31, 2013, pp. 11. |
“Quella Business Intelligence Package”, Retrieved on: Jun. 19, 2013, Available at: https://secure.shareit.com/shareit/product.html?affiliateid=200070834&productid=300110398. |
“Non-Final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/972,249”, Mailed Date: Jul. 31, 2014, Filed Date: Dec. 17, 2010, 30 pages. |
“Non-Final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,685”, Mailed Date: Apr. 24, 2014, Filed Date: Dec. 17, 2010, 15 Pages. |
“Final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,638”, Mailed Date: Feb. 25, 2014, Filed Date: Dec. 17, 2010, 11 Pages. |
“Non-final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,725”, Mailed Date: Jun. 23, 2014, Filed Date: Dec. 17, 2010, 18 Pages. |
“Non-final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,782”, Mailed Date: Apr. 10, 2014, Filed Date: Dec. 17, 2010, 10 Pages. |
“Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 12/972,205”, Dated: Jun. 7, 2013, pp. 35. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20120159465 A1 | Jun 2012 | US |