Double document detection apparatus and a method for conducting the same

Abstract

An apparatus is disclosed. The apparatus includes a document processor and electronics connected to the document processor. The electronics includes a document sensor system and means for determining a document processing situation of a plurality of document processing situations. The document sensor system is connected to the means. The plurality of document processing situations include a single document situation and a double document situation. The double document situation includes a partially-overlapped, double document situation and a completely overlapped, double document situation. A method is also disclosed.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

The disclosure relates to a double document detection apparatus and a method for conducting the same.

BACKGROUND

Document processing machines are known in the art. Although known document processing machines perform adequately for their intended use, improvements are nevertheless continuously being sought in order to advance the art.

DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The disclosure will now be described, by way of example, with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which:

FIGS. 1A-1C illustrate front perspective, partial broken views of an exemplary document processing apparatus.

FIGS. 1D-1E illustrate rear perspective views of the exemplary document processing apparatus of FIGS. 1A-1C.

FIGS. 2A, 2B, 2C illustrate a sensor system and a pair of partially-overlapped documents according to lines 2A, 2B, 2C of FIGS. 1A, 1B, 1C.

FIG. 3 illustrates an exemplary graph produced by the document processing apparatus that is interacting with the partially-overlapped documents of FIGS. 2A-2C.

FIG. 4 illustrates an exemplary graph produced by the document processing apparatus that is interacting with single (i.e., non-overlapped) first exemplary document type.

FIG. 5 illustrates an exemplary graph produced by the document processing apparatus that is interacting with a single (i.e., non-overlapped) second exemplary document type.

FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary graph produced by the document processing apparatus that is interacting with two completely overlapped exemplary documents of the same type.

FIG. 7A illustrates a histogram of an upper sensor of the sensor system of FIGS. 2A-2C arising from a plurality of sensing situations conducted by a document processing apparatus.

FIG. 7B illustrates a histogram of a lower sensor of the sensor system of FIGS. 2A-2C arising from a plurality of sensing situations conducted by a document processing apparatus.

FIG. 8A is a front view of an exemplary, non-overlapped document.

FIG. 8B is a cross-sectional view of the document according to line 8B-8B of FIG. 8A, illustrating an exemplary thickness of the non-overlapped document.

FIG. 9A is a front view of an exemplary non-overlapped document.

FIG. 9B is a cross-sectional view of the document according to line 9B-9B of FIG. 9A, illustrating an exemplary thickness of the non-overlapped document.

FIG. 10A is a front view of two completely overlapped exemplary documents.

FIG. 10B is a cross-sectional view of the two completely overlapped exemplary documents according to line 10B-10B of FIG. 10A, illustrating an exemplary thickness of the two completely overlapped exemplary documents.

FIG. 11A is a front view of two partially overlapped exemplary documents.

FIG. 11B′ is a cross-sectional view of a first document of the two partially overlapped exemplary documents according to line 11B′-11B′ of FIG. 11A, illustrating an exemplary thickness of the first document of the two partially overlapped exemplary documents.

FIG. 11B″ is a cross-sectional view of both of the two partially overlapped exemplary documents according to line 11B″-11B″ of FIG. 11A, illustrating an exemplary thickness of both of the two partially overlapped exemplary documents.

FIG. 11B′″ is a cross-sectional view of a second document of the two partially overlapped exemplary documents according to line 11B′″-11B′″ of FIG. 11A, illustrating an exemplary thickness of the second document of the two partially overlapped exemplary documents.

FIGS. 12A-12B is a logic flow diagram of an exemplary algorithm for operating the document processor of FIGS. 1A-1E.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The figures illustrate an exemplary implementation of a double document detection apparatus and a method for conducting the same. Based on the foregoing, it is to be generally understood that the nomenclature used herein is simply for convenience and the terms used to describe the invention should be given the broadest meaning by one of ordinary skill in the art.

FIGS. 1A-1E illustrate an exemplary implementation of an apparatus 10 that processes at least one document, D (see also D₁, D₂, D_3A, D_3B, D₄, in FIGS. 8A-11B′″). Accordingly, in an implementation, the apparatus 10 may be referred to as a “document processor.” In an implementation, the at least one document, D, may include, but is not limited to, at least one financial/payment document (e.g., at least one check) or the like.

The processing of the at least one document, D, that is conducted by the document processor 10 may include the recording of and/or an analysis of one or more characteristics associated with one or more of a front surface, D_F, of the at least one document, D, and a rear surface, D_R, of the at least one document, D. In an implementation, the document processor 10 includes electronics 14 (see, for example, FIGS. 2A-2C) that may include analysis components (not shown) that perform, but is not limited to, one or more document processing application functions such as, for example: (1) imaging of one or more of the front and rear surfaces, D_F, D_R, of the at least one document, D, for recording an image of symbols and/or written indicia and/or printed indicia disposed upon one or more of the front and rear surfaces, D_F, D_R, of the at least one document, D, (2) converting the imaged symbols and/or written indicia and/or printed indicia upon one or more of the front and rear surfaces, D_F, D_R, of the document, D, into electronic form by way of, for example, optical character recognition (OCR) software, (3) magnetic ink character recognition (MICR) reading for magnetically identifying characters that are printed upon one or more of the front and rear surfaces, D_F, D_R, of the document, D, with magnetic ink (4) endorsing, (5) bar code reading, (6) biometric reading and the like. As described below, the electronics 14 may also detect a leading edge, D_1LE, D_4LE, or a trailing edge, D_1TE, D_4TE, of one or more documents, D.

In an implementation, the document processor 10 may include a communication interface that permits the document processor 10 to: receive commands from an operator and/or send processed document information to: a computer, C, database or the like. In an embodiment, the communication interface may permit wireless communication, W, or hardwired communication, H, to, for example, the computer, C, database or the like, by way of, for example, WiFi connection, an Ethernet connection, a Universal Serial Bus (USB) connection or the like.

In an implementation, the document processor 10 includes an outer protective shell 12. The outer protective shell 12 is supportably-connected to a baseplate (not shown) that supports the electronics 14 and one or more mechanical components 16 (see FIGS. 1A-1C) that contribute to the processing of the at least one document, D. The one or more mechanical components 16 may, for example, cause movement of the at least one document, D, along a document path such that the at least one document, D, may be transported through the document processor 10. The outer protective shell 12 and baseplate may include any desirable material such as, for example, plastic, metal or the like.

One or more of the outer protective shell 12 and the baseplate may cooperate to form a first pocket portion 18 and a second pocket portion 20. In an embodiment, the first pocket portion 18 may be referred to as an “input hopper” for receiving at least one un-processed document, D, and, in an embodiment, the second pocket portion 20 may be referred to as an “output bin” for receiving/storing at least one processed document, D.

The nomenclature associated with the at least one un-processed document, D, and the at least one processed document, D, may be dependent upon (1) the location of the at least one document, D, relative to the structure of the document processor 10 and (2) the un/successful performance of the one or more processing application functions applied to the at least one document, D, as the at least one document, D, is moved along the document path. For example, when the at least one document, D, is located/disposed within the input hopper 18, the at least one document, D, may be referred to as the at least one un-processed document, D; subsequently, when the at least one un-processed document, D, is (1) drawn out of/moved from the input hopper 18, then (2) passed through the document processor 10 along the document path in order to attempt to perform the one or more document processing application functions and then (3) deposited into the output bin 20, the at least one un-processed document, D, may then be referred to as the at least one processed document, D.

Referring to FIGS. 8A-8B, a document that may be processed by the document processor 10 is shown generally at D₁. The document, D₁, includes a front surface, D_F, a rear surface, D_R, and a thickness, T₁. The document, D₁, may be characterized as a conventional paper-stock-based financial document, such as, for example, a check (that may be obtained from, for example, a perforated check book). The check, D₁, may be further characterized as having a paper density (i.e., a pound weight) equal to approximately about 20-to-24-pounds (noting that the term “density” as it is used here is not in the traditional sense of mass per unit volume, but, rather, a measure of area density).

Referring to FIGS. 9A-9B, a document that may be processed by the document processor 10 is shown generally at D₂. The document, D₂, includes a front surface, D_F, a rear surface, D_R, and a thickness, T₂. The document, D₂, may be characterized as a conventional card-stock-based financial document, such as, for example, a check (that may have, for example, a higher durability [when compared to, e.g., the check, D₁] such that the check, D₂, may be mailed to, for example, a consumer in the form of, for example, a post card rebate check without being enclosed in a mailing envelope). The post card check, D₂, may be further characterized as having a paper density (i.e., a pound weight) that is greater than approximately about 24-pounds (noting that the term “density” as it is used here is not in the traditional sense of mass per unit volume, but, rather, a measure of area density).

Referring to FIGS. 10A-10B, at least one document, D, including a pair of documents that the document processor 10 may attempt to process are shown generally at D_3A, D_3B. The pair of documents, D_3A, D_3B, are aligned in manner such that the pair of documents, D_3A, D_3B, are described to be “completely overlapped.” As described in the following disclosure, because the pair of documents, D_3A, D_3B, are completely overlapped, the document processor 10 may attempt to process the pair of documents, D_3A, D_3B, but, upon learning of the completely overlapped condition, the document processor 10 will cease the processing attempt (by, for example, deactivating the one or more mechanical components 16 that would otherwise continue to advance the pair of documents, D_3A, D_3B, through the document processor 10).

As seen in FIGS. 10A-10B, each document of the pair of documents, D_3A, D_3B, include a front surface, D_FA, D_FB, a rear surface, D_RA, D_RB, and a thickness, T_3A, T_3B. Each document of the pair of documents, D_3A, D_3B, may be characterized as a conventional paper-stock-based financial document, such as, for example, a check (that may be obtained from, for example, a perforated check book). Each document of the pair of documents, D_3A, D_3B, may be further characterized as having a paper density (i.e., a pound weight) equal to approximately about 20-to-24-pounds (noting that the term “density” as it is used here is not in the traditional sense of mass per unit volume, but, rather, a measure of area density).

Referring to FIGS. 11A-11B′″, at least one document, D, including a pair of documents that the document processor 10 may attempt to process are shown generally at D₁, D₄. The pair of documents, D₁, D₄, are aligned in manner such that the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, are described to be “partially overlapped.” As described in the following disclosure, because the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, are partially overlapped, the document processor 10 may attempt to process the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, but, upon learning of the partially overlapped condition, the document processor 10 will cease the processing attempt (by, for example, deactivating the one or more mechanical components 16 that would otherwise continue to advance the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, through the document processor 10).

As seen in FIGS. 11A-11B′″, each document of the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, include a front surface, D_F, a rear surface, D_R, and a thickness, T₁, T₄. Further, the first document, D₁, may include different geometric and inherent characteristics when compared to the second document, D₄; for example, the first document, D₁, may include a shorter height and length when compared to the second document, D₄, and, further, the first document, D₁, may be characterized as a conventional paper-stock-based financial document (having a paper density (i.e., a pound weight) equal to approximately about 20-to-24-pounds), whereas the second document may be characterized as a conventional card-stock-based financial document (having a paper density (i.e., a pound weight) that is greater than approximately about 24-pounds).

Referring to FIG. 1A, at least a portion (see reference numeral 14a′) of the electronics 14 may be located proximate, but downstream of, the input hopper 18; the portion 14a′ of the electronics 14 located proximate but downstream of the input hopper 18 may include a component of, for example, a sensor system 14a (see FIGS. 2A-2C). The one or more mechanical components 16 may be located proximate the input hopper 18 and may include at least, for example, a pair roller members that contribute to the advancing of the pair of documents, D₁, D₄ (e.g., the partially-overlapped documents from FIGS. 11A-11B′″) from a location within the input hopper 18 to a different location (e.g., along the document path within the document processor 10) such that at least a portion of the document path may traverse at least, for example, the sensor system 14a (as shown in, e.g., FIGS. 2A-2C) and thereby permit the one or more documents, D, to move along the document path and also traverse the sensor system 14a.

As will be explained in the following disclosure, the electronics 14 may be utilized for detecting a “double document situation,” which may include, for example, a “completely overlapped” document (see, e.g., FIGS. 10A-10B) or a “partially overlapped” document (see, e.g., FIGS. 1A-1E and FIGS. 11A-11B′″). A “double document situation” may occur as follows: a user may firstly deposit a plurality of documents within the input hopper 18 (see also step S.1 of algorithm 500 at FIGS. 12A-12B); due to the rapid processing of the plurality of documents by the document processor 10, in some circumstances, more than one document may be undesirably retrieved by the one or more mechanical components 16 at the same time, or, nearly at the same time, which may undesirably result in two or more documents being routed through the document processor 10 (as seen, for example, in FIGS. 1A-1C, 2A-2C) at approximately about the same time (i.e., which is a “partially overlapped double document situation”), or, at substantially the exact same time (i.e., which is a “double document situation”). Because a first document (see, e.g., the document, D₁, in FIGS. 1A-1C, 2A-2C) in a “double document situation” inhibit the processing (e.g., the imaging, MICR reading or the like) of a second document (see, e.g., the document, D₄, in FIGS. 1A-1C, 2A-2C due to the fact that a portion of the document, D₁, is arranged in front of the document, D₄) in the “double document situation”, the processing operation to be conducted upon the second document by the document processor 10 may fail or otherwise be inhibited or prevented from occurring.

Further, in some circumstances, the electronics 14 may detect a financial document (see, e.g., the document, D₂, of FIGS. 9A-9B) that has a relatively greater thickness (see, e.g., the thickness, T₂, of FIGS. 9A-9B), which could be potentially misconstrued as a completely overlapped “double document situation” (see, e.g., the documents, D_3A, D_3B, of FIGS. 10A-10B having a collective thickness, T_3A+T_3B that may be approximately equal to the thickness, T₂); accordingly, as will be explained in the following disclosure, the electronics 14 may be programmed to also take this situation into consideration and may discriminate a “double document situation” from a document (see, e.g., the document, D₂, of FIGS. 9A-9B) that has a relatively greater thickness (see, e.g., the thickness, T₂, of FIGS. 9A-9B). Accordingly, in view of what is stated above, it should be understood that upon detection of a “double document situation” by the electronics 14, the document processor 10 will cease a processing operation in order to permit, for example, a user, U (see FIG. 1E), to manually resolve the “double document situation” by, for example, manually removing the two or more documents from the document processor 10; the user, U, may then manually separate the two or more documents and interface each document (on an individual basis) with the document processor 10 at the input hopper 18 such that both documents may be processed (e.g., imaged, MICR'd or the like). However, if the electronics 14 detect a document having a greater thickness (see, e.g., the thickness, T₂, of FIGS. 9A-9B), the document processor 10 will, as explained in the following disclosure, discriminate the document, D₂, having the greater thickness, T₂, from a “double document situation” by comparing one or more sensor values to programmed/calculated “threshold values” and permit the document processor 10 to continue processing the single document (i.e., a non-overlapped document situation) having the greater thickness, T₂.

Referring to FIGS. 1A-1E, detection of an exemplary “double document situation” by the electronics 14 is described. As seen in FIGS. 1A-1C, the at least one document, D, including the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, of FIGS. 11A-11B′″ are shown being pulled from the input hopper 18 and along the document path by the one or more mechanical components 16. Referring to FIGS. 2A-2C, the sensor system 14a may include a transmitter 14a′ and a receiver 14a″. The transmitter 14a′ directly opposes the front surface, D_F, of the one or more documents, D, and the receiver 14a″ directly opposes the rear surface, D_R, of the one or more documents, D.

The transmitter 14a′ may include a first pair of light sources 22a and a second pair of light sources 22b (i.e., each of the transmitter 14a′ and the receiver 14a″ may be alternatively referred to as a “light transmitter” and a “light receiver”). Referring to FIGS. 1A-1C, each of the first and second pair of light sources 22a, 22b include an upper light source 22a_U, 22b_U and a lower light source 22a_L, 22b_L that are vertically spaced-apart from one another. In an embodiment, each of the upper and lower light sources 22a_U, 22b_U, 22a_L, 22b_L may include an infrared light source that emits infrared light, L (see FIGS. 2A-2C), toward the front surface, D_F, of the one or more documents, D; however, the type of light source is not limited to an infrared light source emitting infrared light, and, accordingly, the first and second pair of light sources 22a, 22b may include any light source that emits any type of light.

As seen in FIGS. 2A-2C, the emitted infrared light, L (represented generally by three rays), is intended to be transmitted through the thickness (i.e., [1] T₁ alone as in FIG. 2A, [2] T₄ alone as in FIG. 2C, and [3] both of T₁ and T₄ together as in FIG. 2B) of the one or more documents, D, such that the infrared light, L, may be seen by/received at the receiver 14a″. As seen in FIG. 2A, because the thickness, T₁, of the first document, D₁, is less than that of the thickness, T₄, of the second document, D₄, most (represented by the three rays of the infrared light, L) of the emitted infrared light, L, is incident upon/seen by the receiver 14a″. As seen in FIG. 2C, because the thickness, T₄, of the second document, D₄, is greater than that of the thickness, T₁, of the first document, D₁, a lesser amount (represented by two rays of the infrared light, L) of the emitted infrared light, L, is incident upon/seen by the receiver 14a″. As seen in FIG. 2B, because the combined thickness, T₁+T₄, of the first and second documents, D₁, D₄, is greater than that of the thickness, T₄, of the second document, D₄, when taken alone (as seen in FIG. 2C) an even lesser amount (represented by one ray of the infrared light, L) of the emitted infrared light, L, is incident upon/seen by the receiver 14a″.

Referring to FIGS. 1A and 2A, the one or more mechanical components 16 moves the one or more documents, D, along the document path such that only a first document, D₁, of the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, traverse the sensor system 14a of the electronics 14. Referring to FIGS. 1B and 2B, the one or more mechanical components 16 further move the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, along the document path such that both of the first document, D₁, and the second document, D₄, of the pair of documents, D, traverse the sensor system 14a. Referring to FIGS. 1C and 2C, the one or more mechanical components 16 further move the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, along the document path such that only the second document, D₄, of the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, traverse the sensor system 14a of the electronics 14.

As described above, depending upon which document or both documents of the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, traverse the sensor system 14a, a different amount (i.e., approximately the same amount, a lesser amount or an even lesser amount) of the infrared light, L, is received by/seen by the receiver 14a″. The receiver 14a″ utilizes the amount of received infrared light, L, to derive an analogue value that is then communicated to an analogue-to-digital (hereinafter, “A-to-D”) converter 14b, which may be a portion of the electronics 14. As seen in FIGS. 2A-2C, the A-to-D converter 14b may be communicatively-coupled to the receiver 14a″; alternatively, the A-to-D converter 14b and the receiver 14a″ may be included in one component or device, chip or the like.

In an embodiment, as described above, the A-to-D converter 14b firstly obtains an analogue signal related to the amount of the received infrared light, L. Subsequently, the A-to-D converter 14b derives a digital signal by converting the received analogue signal into a digital signal that is then sent to a controller 14c, which may also be a portion of the electronics 14.

The digital signal output by the A-to-D converter 14b may be quantified as having a value, such as, for example, one byte that ranges between a value of zero (0) and two-hundred-and-fifty-five (255). In an embodiment, a digital value approximately equal to about two-hundred-and-fifty-five (255) means that the receiver 14a″ is not saturated (i.e., little if none of infrared light, L, being seen by the receiver 14a″ due to, for example, a thickness of the one or more documents, D, being large enough to block substantially all of the light, L, which could be construed as a “double document situation”, or, the infrared light sources 22a_U, 22b_U, 22a_L, 22b_L are not working or turned off). In an embodiment, a digital value approximately equal to about zero (0) means that the receiver 14a″ is saturated (i.e., substantially all of the light, L, is being seen by receiving 14a″ due to none of the one or more documents, D, being located between the transmitter 14a′ and the receiver 14a″.

Referring to FIG. 3, an exemplary graph 100 including a plurality of digital sensor value samples produced by the A-to-D converter 14b as a result of the partially-overlapped documents, D₁, D₄, interacting with the document processor 10 as described above at FIGS. 1A-1C and 2A-2C is shown according to an embodiment. The graph 100 is identified to include four segments (see, e.g., segments 100a, 100b, 100c and 100d) and is an exemplary pictorial representation of a partially-overlapped double document situation.

The first segment 100a may generally relate to the orientation of the partially-overlapped documents, D₁, D₄, as seen in FIGS. 1A and 2A where only the first document, D₁, of the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, traverse the sensor system 14a. The orientation of the one or more documents, D, shown in FIGS. 1A and 2A thereby results in some of the light, L, being absorbed in the thickness, T₁, and thereby results the digital signal moving away from a saturation value of zero and being equal to approximately about fifty (i.e., approximately about fifty on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale).

The second segment 100b may generally relate to the orientation of the partially-overlapped documents, D₁, D₄, as seen in FIGS. 1B and 2B where the both of the first and second documents, D₁, D₄, of the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, traverse the sensor system 14a. The orientation of the one or more documents, D, shown in FIGS. 1B and 2B thereby results in even more of the light, L, being absorbed in the combined thickness, T₁+T₄, and thereby results the digital signal moving much further away from the prior value of approximately about fifty (i.e., approximately about fifty on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale) and being equal to approximately about two hundred (i.e., approximately about two hundred on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale).

The third segment 100c may generally relate to the orientation of the partially-overlapped documents, D₁, D₄, as seen in FIGS. 1C and 2C where only the second document, D₄, of the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, traverse the sensor system 14a. The orientation of the one or more documents, D, shown in FIGS. 1C and 2C thereby results some of the light, L, being absorbed in the thickness, T₄, and thereby results the digital signal moving away from the prior value of approximate about two hundred (i.e., approximately about two hundred on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale) and being equal to approximately about one hundred (i.e., approximately about one hundred on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale).

Comparatively, because the thickness, T₄, of the second document, D₄, is greater than the thickness, T₁, of the first document, D₁, a greater amount of the light, L, is absorbed by the second document, D₄, and, as a result, the “second document digital value” related to the third segment 100c of approximately about one hundred (i.e., approximately about one hundred on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale) is greater than the “first document digital value” related to the first segment 100a of approximately about fifty (i.e., approximately about fifty on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale). Further, because the combined thickness, T₁+T₄, of both of the first and second documents, D₁, D₄, is greater than the thickness, T₄, of the second document, D₄, the “combined first and second document digital value” related to the second segment 100b of approximately about two hundred (i.e., approximately about two hundred on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale) is greater than the “second document digital value” related to the third segment 100c of approximately about one hundred (i.e., approximately about one hundred on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale).

The fourth segment 100d may generally relate to the orientation of the partially-overlapped documents, D₁, D₄, as seen in FIGS. 1D and 1E where neither of the first and second documents, D₁, D₄, of the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, traverse the sensor system 14a. Because neither of the first and second documents, D₁, D₄, of the pair of documents, D₁, D₄, traverse the sensor system 14a, that the receiver 14a″ is substantially saturated by approximately about all of the light, L, due to neither of the first and second documents, D₁, D₄, being located between the transmitter 14a′ and the receiver 14a″. Accordingly, at the fourth segment 100d, the graph 100 includes a digital saturation value approximately about zero on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale.

As seen in FIG. 3, the “Y-axis” includes the digital values ranging between the above-described zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale whereas the “X-axis” includes a plurality of instances of samples of the digital sensor value data. The samples on the “X-axis” may include a time component that may relate to, for example, a period of time that the respective thicknesses (i.e., T₁ alone for the segment 100a, T₁+T₄ for the segment 100b, T₄ alone for the segment 100c,) intervene between the transmitter 14a′ and receiver 14a″; alternatively, the samples on the “X-axis” may include a length component that relates to a length of the document that intervenes between the transmitter 14a′ and the receiver 14a″.

Referring back to FIGS. 2A-2C, the electronics 14 may further comprise the controller 14c. The A-to-D converter 14b may be communicatively-coupled to the controller 14c for receiving the digital sensor value samples that collectively represent the graph 100. The controller 14c may be programmed to include an algorithm, program or logic (see 500 at FIGS. 12A-12B) that will utilize the digital sensor value samples for automatically determining, in real time, a particular “document situation” for the purpose of optimizing operation of the document processor 10. For example, as explained below, the controller 14c may utilize one or more of the digital sensor value samples to calculate a threshold value (see, e.g., TV_PO, in FIGS. 12A-12B) in order to determine if, for example, the document processor 10 is processing a non-overlapped, “single document situation,” “partially overlapped double document situation” and “completely overlapped double document situation.” If a double document situation is determined, the controller 14c may communicate with, for example, the one or more mechanical components 16 to cease routing of the one or more documents, D, along the document path (as seen, e.g., in FIGS. 1D and 1E). Referring to FIG. 1E, once movement of the one or more documents, D, through the document processor 10 has ceased, the user, U, may: (1) remove the one or more documents, D, (2) manually separate the two or more documents, and (3) interface each document (on an individual basis) with the document processor 10 at the input hopper 18.

Although a pictorial representation of a partially-overlapped double document situation (related to FIGS. 11A-11B′″) is shown above, the other above-described document situations (related to, e.g., FIGS. 8A-10B) include different digital sensor value characteristics. For example, referring to FIGS. 4-6, a plurality of exemplary digital value samples collectively form graphs 200, 300 and 400 of one or more documents, D, being routed along the document path through the document processor 10; in a substantially similar manner as described above, the algorithm, program or logic 500 may utilize the plurality of exemplary digital value samples collectively forming the graphs 200, 300 and 400 to determine other document situations.

Referring to FIG. 4, the graph 200 generally includes a first segment 200a and a second segment 200b. The first segment 200a includes a “document digital value” of approximately about fifty (i.e., approximately about fifty on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale) for approximately about ninety-percent (90%) of the plurality of samples whereas the second segment 200b includes a digital saturation value approximately about zero on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale. In an embodiment, the graph 200 may be related to the single document situation of the check, D₁, as seen in FIGS. 8A-8B.

Referring to FIG. 5, the graph 300 generally includes a first segment 300a and a second segment 300b. The first segment 300a includes a “document digital value” of approximately about one hundred (i.e., approximately about one hundred on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale) for approximately about ninety-percent (90%) of the plurality of samples whereas the second segment 300b includes a digital saturation value approximately about zero on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale. In an embodiment, the graph 300 may be related to the single document situation of the check, D₂, as seen FIGS. 9A-9B.

Referring to FIG. 6, the graph 400 generally includes a first segment 400a and a second segment 400b. The first segment 400a includes a “document digital value” of approximately about one-hundred-and-fifty (i.e., approximately about one-hundred-and-fifty on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale) for approximately about ninety-percent (90%) of the plurality of samples whereas the second segment 400b includes a digital saturation value approximately about zero on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale. In an embodiment, the graph 400 may be related to the completely overlapped double document situation of the documents, D_3A, D_3B, of FIGS. 10A-10B.

An embodiment of the algorithm, program or logic 500 at FIGS. 12A-12B of the controller 14c is described in further detail below. Firstly, a type of light source (e.g., an infrared light source) of the first pair of light sources 22a and the second pair of light sources 22b is selected; the type of light source that is selected should have an intensity value that does not saturate the receiver 14a″ even when relatively (a) thinner document(s) (such as, e.g., a document that is relatively thinner than that of, for example, the document, D₁, as seen in, e.g., FIGS. 8A-8B) is/are interfaced with the document processor 10 (i.e., if the intensity is too great, the light, L, may shine through one or more of the documents, D, and thereby cause the one or more of the exemplary graphs 100, 200, 300400 above to have a sensor value of approximately about zero for approximately about all of the plurality of samples along the X-axis.

Once the light source is selected, the programmer of the controller 14c creates a histogram (see, e.g., FIGS. 7A, 7B) for one or more of the upper light source 22a_U, 22b_U and a lower light source 22a_L, 22b_L. Prior to the discussion of the histogram at FIGS. 7A and 7B, a brief overview of the inclusion of four light sources including an upper light source 22a_U, 22b_U and a lower light source 22a_L, 22b_L associated with the transmitter 14a′ is discussed. The four spaced apart light sources are provided in order to capture a first set of “upper spatial sensor values” and a second set of “lower spatial sensor values” in order to compensate for circumstances where, for example, the document, D, may include, for example, ink on the front surface, D_F, of the document, D, that blocks the light, L. The ink may include decorative indicia such as, for example, a large bank logo printed upon the upper corner front surface, D_F, of the document, D; accordingly, the upper portion of the document, D, where the bank logo may be located may obscure the light, L, from the upper light source 22a_U, 22b_U and thereby cause the A-to-D converter 14b to return a higher sensor value (which could be otherwise improperly construed as a double-document situation when, for example, one check, alone, is being passed in a non-overlapped, single document situation) whereas the lower portion of the document, D, where no bank logo exists may not otherwise obscure the light, L, from lower light source 22a_L, 22b_L and thereby cause the A-to-D converter 14b to return a lower sensor value (which would be properly construed as, for example, a non-overlapped, single document situation).

Referring to FIG. 7A, an exemplary histogram of sensor values on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale related to the upper light source 22a_U, 22b_U is shown according to an embodiment. Referring to FIG. 7B, an exemplary histogram of sensor values on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale related to the lower light source 22a_L, 22b_L is shown according to an embodiment. In an embodiment, the histograms of FIGS. 7A and 7B were created by the programmer of the controller 14c from a plurality of trial run processing situations (i.e., approximately about three hundred trial run processing situations) of the document processor 10.

The plurality of trial run processing situations that were run by the programmer of the controller 14c included a majority of: manually known “non-overlapped, single document situations” (as a result of the programmer manually feeding of the plurality of single documents, D₁, D₂) and a minority of: manually known “partially overlapped double document situations” (as a result of the programmer manually feeding some partially overlapped documents, D₁ and D₄) and a minority of: “completely overlapped, double document situations” (as a result of the programmer manually feeding some completely overlapped documents, D_3A, D_3B). As an observation, the histogram of FIG. 7A includes a wider spread and higher sensor values (which may have occurred due to, for example, the blocking of the light, L, caused by, for example, a bank logo as described above) when compared to those in FIG. 7B.

In view of the results of the plurality of trial run processing situations shown in FIGS. 7A and 7B, the programmer may elect to utilize histogram sensor values between approximately about 30 and 80 for defining a histogram percentile range. An embodiment of programming the controller 14c may include the calculation of a “Completely Overlapped, Double Document Situation Threshold Value” (see: “TV_CO” in equation 2 below) that includes an “Average Point” (see: “AP” in equation 1 below). As explained below, the “AP” may be derived from approximately about the 25^th and 75^th percentile values of the percentile range of either of the histograms of FIGS. 7A and 7B; in the embodiment described in the following pages, the 25^th and 75^th percentile values were selected from the histogram of FIGS. 7B.AP=(25^th Percentile Value+75^th Percentile Value)/2  (1)TV_CO=AP+((256−AP)×Multiplier Value)  (2)In addition to the “AP,” the TV_CO equation also calls for a “Multiplier Value,” which is also discussed in greater detail below.

Referring to FIG. 7B, in an embodiment, the 25^th percentile value may be a sensor value equal to approximately about forty-two (i.e., approximately about forty-two on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale). With reference to FIG. 7B, the 75^th percentile value may be a sensor value equal to approximately about sixty-eight (i.e., approximately about sixty-eight on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale). Accordingly, utilizing equation (1) above, the “AV” may be determined to be a sensor value equal to approximately about fifty-five (i.e., approximately about fifty-five on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale).

The “Multiplier Value” may be an arbitrary value determined by the programmer of the controller 14c. In an embodiment, the programmer may select a “Multiplier Value” equal to approximately about “0.3.”

Accordingly, utilizing fifty-five for the “AV” and “0.3” for the “Multiplier Value,” equation (2) above may be utilized to determine that the TV_CO may be equal to approximately about “115.3” on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale. In an embodiment, the programmer may then program “115.3” as the TV_CO that may utilized in the algorithm 500 as a threshold value that is compared against one or more digital sensor value samples (of, e.g., a plurality of digital value sampled that collectively form, for example, the exemplary graphs 100, 200, 300, 400) to determine if the document situation of one or more documents, D, being processed by the document processor is a “completely overlapped, double document situation.”

Although the exemplary “Multiplier Value” is discussed above as being an arbitrary value of “0.3,” the invention is not limited to a “Multiplier Value” of “0.3.” That is, the “Multiplier Value” may be adjusted by the manufacturer of the document processor 10 and/or the programmer of the controller 14c as described below.

For example, the “Multiplier Value” of “0.3” may be an arbitrary value (i.e., the “Multiplier Value” may be kept as “0.3” or adjusted upwardly or downwardly by the programmer; adjustment upwardly or downwardly by the programmer may be dependent upon, for example, how a consumer (e.g., a bank)/user, U, will be utilizing the document processor 10). For example, upon determining that the consumer/user, U, will be processing more than one type of document thickness such as, for example, some relatively thin documents (see, e.g., D₁, D_3A, D_3B) and some relatively thick documents (see, e.g., D₂), the programmer may choose to retain the “Multiplier Value” of 0.3 when programming the controller 14c of the document processor. However, upon determining that the user, U, will be not be processing relatively thick documents (see, e.g., D₂), the “Multiplier Value” may be reduced to a value of approximately equal to about “0.25;” alternatively, upon determining that the user, U, will not be processing relatively thin documents (see, e.g., D₁, D_3A, D_3B), the “Multiplier Value” may be increased to a value approximately equal to about “0.35.” An exemplary table of Multiplier Values is shown below in Table 1.

TABLE 1
Designated Type(s) of Documents To Be Programmer-Selected
Processed By The Consumer/User   “Multiplier Value”
No Thick Documents               0.25
Some Thin Documents & Some Thick Documents 0.30
No Thin Documents                0.35

An embodiment of the algorithm 500 may further call for the calculation of a “Partially Overlapped Double Document Situation Threshold Value” (see: TV_PO in equation 3 below).TV_PO=Lower Sensor Value+((256−Lower Sensor Value)×Multiplier Value)  (3)As seen above, the equation for TV_PO is substantially similar to the equation for TV_CO with the difference being that a “lower sensor value” (of two sensor values) is utilized to calculate TV_PO instead of calculating a value for the “AP.”

An embodiment of the algorithm 500 may further call for the comparison of a “higher sensor value” against the calculated TV_PO. Further, the embodiment of the algorithm 500 may further call the determination that if, for example, the TV_PO is less than the “higher sensor value,” the algorithm 500 will have determined that the document situation is that of a partially overlapped double document situation and cease the processing operation being conducted by the document processor 10.

In order to explain how TV_PO is calculated, Table 2 is provided below, which shows twelve successive sensor value samples from the A-to-D converter 14b for each of the upper light source 22a_U and the lower light source 22a_L of the first pair of light sources 22a. The twelve successive sensor value samples may represent, for example, approximately about one-inch of a document containing a partially overlapped document that occurs for about half-of-an-inch. The data is then utilized in Table 3 below (noting that Table 3 only utilizes the values associated with the lower light source 22a_L).

TABLE 2
Sensor Value Sample	Sensor Value for 22aL	Sensor Value for 22aU
1	100	125
2	105	124
3	103	128
4	104	122
5	156	144
6	161	178
7	158	174
8	158	180
9	162	176
10	157	181
11	100	125
12	95	123

Upon obtaining at least three sensor values samples from Table 2, each row in Table 3 (shown below) may be populated with data. As seen in Table 3 below, the first sensor value sample (e.g., ‘100’ from Table 2 in relation to the Sensor Value Sample ‘1’ of the lower sensor 22a_L) is compared to the second sample (e.g., ‘105’ from Table 2 in relation to the Sensor Value Sample ‘2’ of the lower sensor 22a_L) in order to determine which of the first and second sensor values has a “lower value” and which sensor value has a “higher value.” In the first instance, the lower value is ‘100,’ and, as a result, ‘100’ is utilized as a variable in calculating the TV_PO (i.e., ‘146.8’ on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale); after calculating TV_PO (e.g., by software within the controller 14c), the controller 14c determines (with, e.g., software) if the TV_PO is less than the higher value (i.e., by comparing values ‘100’ and ‘105,’ with the higher value of the two values being ‘105’).

Next, the controller 14c determines if the TV_PO (of ‘146.8’ in the above-described first instance) is less than the higher value (of ‘105’ in the above-described first instance); because ‘146.8’ is not less than ‘105,’ the methodology then considers the second subsequent sensor value (e.g., ‘103’ from Table 2 in relation to the Sensor Value Sample ‘3’ of the lower sensor 22a_L). As seen in Table 3, the first sensor value sample (e.g., ‘100’ from Table 2 in relation to the Sensor Value Sample ‘1’ of the lower sensor 22a_L) is compared to the second subsequent sensor value sample (e.g., ‘103’ from Table 2 in relation to the Sensor Value Sample ‘3’ of the lower sensor 22a_L) in order to determine which of the first and second subsequent sensor values has a “lower value” and which sensor value has a “higher value.” The lower value of the two is ‘100,’ and, as a result, ‘100’ is utilized as a variable in calculating the TV_PO (i.e., ‘146.8’ on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale); after calculating TV_PO (e.g., by software within the controller 14c), the controller 14c determines (with, e.g., software) if the TV_PO is less than the higher value (i.e., by comparing values ‘100’ and ‘103,’ with the higher value of the two values being ‘103’).

After determining that the TV_PO is still not less than the higher value (arising from the second subsequent sensor value of ‘103’), the methodology (as seen in Trial 2 of Table 3) then discards the previous first sensor value sample (e.g., ‘100’ from Trial 1 of Table 3) and replaces the first sensor value with the value of the previous subsequent sensor value (i.e., ‘105’ from Trial 1 of Table 3). Similarly, as seen in Trial 2 of Table 3, the methodology discards the previous subsequent sensor value (i.e., ‘105’ from Trial 1 of Table 3) and replaces the subsequent sensor value with the previous second subsequent sensor value (i.e., ‘103’ from Trial 1 of Table 3). The methodology also discards the previous second subsequent sensor value (i.e., ‘103’ from Trial 1 of Table 3) and replaces the second subsequent sensor value with the next available data value from Table 2 (e.g., ‘104’ from Table 2 in relation to the Sensor Value Sample ‘4’ of the lower sensor 22a_L).

The above methodology is repeated until the controller 14c determines that the TV_PO is less than the higher value. Referring to Trial 3 of Table 3, the controller 14c determines that the TV_PO is less than the higher value, and, as a result, a leading edge (see, e.g., D_4LE, in FIGS. 2A-2C) of a second document (i.e., D₄) will have said to be been detected and a partially-overlapped double document situation is declared; however, if the TV_PO is greater than the higher value (see, e.g., Trials 1 and 2 in Table 3), the leading edge is said to not be detected.

In view of the data from Table 2 and the above-discussed aspect of the algorithm 500, Table 3 is populated with data as shown in an embodiment below. As seen below for the rows related to Trials 3 and 4, the right-most column indicates that TV_PO is less than the higher value and a leading edge of a second document is said to be detected for declaring that a partially-overlapped double document situation has occurred; the trailing edge (see, e.g., D_1TE, in FIGS. 2A-2C) of the first document (i.e., D₁) of the double document situation is then similarly located in the row related to Trials 9 and 10, thereby confirming the partial overlap double document situation.

TABLE 3
					Lower		Higher
				Lower	Value of	Higher	Value of
				Value of	the First	Value of	the First
				the First	Sensor	the First	Sensor	TVPO	TVPO
				Sensor	Value and	Sensor	Value and	(Derived	(Derived	Is TVPO <
	First		Second	Value and	Second	Value and	Second	from	from	the
	Sensor	Subsequent	Subsequent	Subsequent	Subsequent	Subsequent	Subsequent	First	Second	Matching
	Value	Sensor	Sensor	Sensor	Sensor	Sensor	Sensor	Lower	Lower	Higher
Trial	Sample	Value	Value	Values	Values	Values	Values	Value)	Value)	Value?
1	100	105	103	100	100	105	103	146.8	146.8	No
2	105	103	104	103	104	105	105	148.9	149.6	No
3	103	104	156	103	103	156	156	148.9	148.9	Yes
4	104	156	161	104	104	161	161	149.6	149.6	Yes
5	156	161	158	156	156	161	158	186.0	186.0	No
6	161	158	158	158	158	161	161	187.4	187.4	No
7	158	158	162	158	158	162	162	187.4	187.4	No
8	158	162	157	158	157	158	158	187.4	186.7	No
9	162	157	100	157	100	162	162	186.7	146.8	Yes
10	157	100	95	100	95	157	157	143.3	143.3	Yes

Referring to FIGS. 12A-12B, an exemplary algorithm 500 is described according to an embodiment. First, at step S.1, one or more documents, D, are loaded into the input hopper 18 of the document processor 10. Then, at step S.2, the user, U, may activate the document processor 10 by, for example, manually pressing a start button on the document processor 10 or the computer, C, such that the one or more mechanical components 16 may start moving the one or more documents, D, along the document path. Alternatively, the document processor 10 may include a sensor (not shown) that senses if the one or more documents, D, have been placed/are located in the input hopper 18; if the one or more documents, D, are sensed, the electronics 14 may cause the one or more mechanical components 16 to start moving the one or more documents, D, along the document path.

Then, at step S.3, the A-to-D converter 14b provides a plurality of digital sensor values (on the zero-to-two-hundred-and-fifty-five scale) to the controller 14c as described above (i.e., one of an exemplary graph 100, 200, 300, 400 is created). The controller 14c may include memory that for storing the plurality of digital sensor values. Step S.3 may also include the step of the controller 14c determining (by way of software) a minimum digital sensor value of the plurality of digital sensor values.

Then, at step S.4, the controller 14c (using software) determines if the determined minimum digital sensor value is greater than the programmed TV_CO that was coded into the controller 14c by the programmer. If the controller 14c determined, at step S.4, that the determined minimum digital sensor value is greater than the programmed TV_CO, the algorithm 500 is advanced from step S.4 to S.4a where the controller 14c communicates with the one or more mechanical components 16 in order to instruct the one or more mechanical components to cease advancing the one or more documents, D, along the document path (i.e., by arriving at step S.4a, the electronics 14 have determined that a “completely overlapped double document situation” has occurred) such that the user, U, may manually resolve (see FIG. 1E) the double document situation. If, however, the controller 14c determined, at step S.4, that the determined minimum digital sensor value is not greater than the programmed TV_CO, the algorithm 500 is advanced from step S.4 to S.4b where continued analysis of the document situation of one or more documents, D, is carried out (i.e., in order to determine if the document situation is a non-overlapped, single document situation or a partially-overlapped double document situation).

At step S.4b (and with reference to, for example, the lower sensor values of 22a_L in Table 2 and Table 3, above), the controller 14c (by using software) determines the “lower sensor value” and the “higher sensor value” of the first digital value sample and the subsequent (i.e., the second) digital value sample. Then, at step S.5, the controller 14c (by using software) calculates TV_PO. Then, at step S.6, the controller 14c (using software) determines if the calculated TV_PO is less than the determined “higher sensor value.” If the controller 14c determined, at step S.6, that the calculated TV_PO is less than the determined “higher sensor value,” the algorithm 500 is advanced from step S.6 to S.6a (see FIG. 12B), which is explained in greater detail below.

If, however, the controller 14c determined, at step S.6, that the calculated TV_PO is not less than the determined “higher sensor value.” the algorithm 500 is advanced from step S.6 to S.6b where the subsequent (i.e., the second) digital value sample from the plurality of digital sensor values is substituted with that of the next (i.e., a third) digital value sample from the plurality of digital sensor values. The algorithm is then advanced to step S.7 where the controller 14c (by way of software) determines if the subsequent (i.e., the “next”/third) digital value sample is saturated. If the subsequent digital value is not saturated, the algorithm 500 is looped from step S.7 back to step S.4b (however, prior to returning to step S4.b from step S.7, the first digital value sample is replaced with the second digital value sample, and, the third digital value sample that was read at step S.6b now becomes the second digital value sample for the subsequent logic loop starting at step S.4b). If, however, at step S.7, it is determined that the subsequent digital value is saturated, the algorithm 500 is advanced to step S.7a where continued processing of the document, D, is permitted (due to the algorithm 500 determining that the document situation is a non-overlapped, single document situation). As step S.7a, if the input hopper 18 does not contain a document, D, the document processor 10 may be manually/automatically deactivated; however, at step S.7a, if the input hopper 18 contains one or more documents, D, the document processor 10 continues operating and the algorithm is looped back to step S.2 where subsequent one or more documents is/are analyzed to determine the single/double document situation of the subsequent document.

As seen in FIG. 12A, the algorithm 500 may remain in a loop at step S.4b, step S.5, step S.6, step S.6b and step S.7 until the calculated TV_PO is less than the determined “higher sensor value” at step S.6. If, for example, the calculated TV_PO is determined (by the controller 14c) to be less than the determined “higher sensor value” at step S.6, the algorithm 500 may exit the loop (at steps S.4b-S.7) and advance from step S.6 to step S.6a.

Referring to FIG. 12B, at step S.6a, the determination that the calculated TV_PO is less than the determined “higher sensor value” means that a leading edge (e.g., D_4LE) of a second document (e.g., D₄) of a partially overlapped document situation (see, e.g., D₁, D₄, of FIGS. 11A-11B′″) may have been located. The algorithm 500 may then be advanced from step S.6a to step S.6a′ where the detection of the leading edge (e.g., D_4LE) of the second document (e.g., D₄) is verified. The verification at step S.6a′ includes the use of the upper sensor values of 22a_U from Table 2 with that of the methodology employed by the lower sensor values of 22a_L from Table 2 described above at steps S.4b, S.5 and S6. If verified at step S.6a′, the algorithm 500 is then advanced from step S.6a′ to step S.6a″ where the controller 14c communicates with the one or more mechanical components 16 in order to instruct the one or more mechanical components to cease advancing the one or more documents, D, along the document path (i.e., by arriving at step S.6a″, the electronics 14 have determined that a “partially overlapped double document situation” has occurred) such that the user, U, may manually resolve (see FIG. 1E) the double document situation.

For teaching purposes herein, the exemplary embodiments have been described using the aid of a graphical/pictorial-based representation of a collection of data including a histogram. However, one skilled in the art will readily recognize that no such graphical/pictorial-based implementations are need to implement the present invention using a digital computer. Specifically, the data sample could be stored in ascending or descending order (within digital memory) and the desired percentile cut-off points (such as, for example, 25% or 75%) can be easily determined from the ordered data. Accordingly, the implementation of the algorithms disclosed herein is not limited to a graphical/pictorial-based display of data.

A number of implementations have been described. Nevertheless, it will be understood that various modifications may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the disclosure. Accordingly, other implementations are within the scope of the following claims. For example, the actions recited in the claims can be performed in a different order and still achieve desirable results.

Claims

1. A method, comprising the steps of: interfacing one or more documents with a document processor: routing the one or more documents along a document path of the document processor; and determining a document processing situation of a plurality of document processing situations of the one or more documents, wherein the plurality of document processing situations include a single document situation, and a double document situation, wherein the double document situation includes a partially-overlapped, double document situation, and a completely overlapped, double document situation, wherein, prior to the determining step, further comprising the steps of: transmitting an amount of light across the document path from a light transmitter to a light receiver; utilizing the light receiver to derive an analogue signal that is based upon the transmitted amount of light; communicating the analogue signal from the light receiver to an analogue-to-digital converter; utilizing the analogue-to-digital converter to derive a digital signal from the analogue signal; communicating the digital signal to a controller for conducting the determining the document processing situation step, wherein the digital signal includes a plurality of sensor value samples; determining a minimum sensor value of the plurality of sensor value samples; determining that the document situation is the completely overlapped, double document situation if the determined minimum sensor value is greater than a pre-programmed complete overlap threshold value; utilizing one of at least two sensor value samples of the plurality of sensor value samples for determining a partially overlapped threshold value; and determining that the document situation is the partially-overlapped, double document situation if the partially overlapped threshold value is less than the other of the at least two sensor value samples.

2. A method, comprising the steps of: interfacing one or more documents with a document processor; routing the one or more documents along a document path of the document processor; and determining a document processing situation of a plurality of document processing situations of the one or more documents, wherein the plurality of document processing situations include a single document situation, and a double document situation, wherein the double document situation includes a partially-overlapped, double document situation, and a completely overlapped, double document situation, wherein, prior to the determining step, further comprising the steps of: transmitting an amount of light across the document path from a light transmitter to a light receiver; utilizing the light receiver to derive an analogue signal that is based upon the transmitted amount of light; communicating the analogue signal from the light receiver to an analogue-to-digital converter; utilizing the analogue-to-digital converter to derive a digital signal from the analogue signal; communicating the digital signal to a controller for conducting the determining the document processing situation step, wherein the digital signal includes a plurality of sensor value samples; determining a minimum sensor value of the plurality of sensor value samples; determining that the document situation is the completely overlapped, double document situation if the determined minimum sensor value is greater than a pre-programmed complete overlap threshold value; (a) determining a minimum sensor value of the plurality of sensor value samples; and determining that the document situation is the completely overlapped, double document situation if the determined minimum sensor value is greater than a pre-programmed complete overlap threshold value, (b) utilizing one of at least two sensor value samples of the plurality of sensor value samples for determining a partially overlapped threshold value; and determining that the document situation is the partially-overlapped, double document situation if the partially overlapped threshold value is less than the other of the at least two sensor value samples, and (c) if the completely overlapped, double document situation and the partially-overlapped, double document situation are not determined, determining that the document situation is the single document situation.

3. A method, comprising the steps of: interfacing one or more documents with a document processor; routing the one or more documents along a document path of the document processor; and determining a document processing situation of a plurality of document processing situations of the one or more documents, wherein the plurality of document processing situations include a single document situation, and a double document situation, wherein the double document situation includes a partially-overlapped, double document situation, and a completely overlapped, double document situation, wherein, prior to the determining step, further comprising the steps of transmitting an amount of light across the document path from a light transmitter to a light receiver; utilizing the light receiver to derive an analogue signal that is based upon the transmitted amount of light; communicating the analogue signal from the light receiver to an analogue-to-digital converter; utilizing the analogue-to-digital converter to derive a digital signal from the analogue signal; communicating the digital signal to a controller for conducting the determining the document processing situation step, wherein the digital signal includes a plurality of sensor value samples; determining a minimum sensor value of the plurality of sensor value samples; determining that the document situation is the completely overlapped, double document situation if the determined minimum sensor value is greater than a pre-programmed complete overlap threshold value utilizing one of at least two sensor value samples of the plurality of sensor value samples for determining a partially overlapped threshold value that relates to detecting a leading edge or a trailing edge of one of a first document and a second document of the one or more documents that are partially-overlapped for determining that the document situation is the partially-overlapped, double document situation if the partially overlapped threshold value is less than the other of the at least two sensor value samples.

4. The apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the detecting step includes: detecting the leading edge of the second document and not detecting the leading edge of the first document and not detecting the trailing edge of one of the first document and the second document.