1. Technical Field
The invention relates to the ordering of elements extracted from a database. More particularly, the invention relates to the ordering of displayed elements from a database through the ranking of database elements that are actually selected by a user.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Technological advances have enabled manufacturers to create various small-format personal electronic devices. Some examples are Personal Data Assistants (PDA), Cellular Phones, small-form-factor data entry units, and other small-form-factor communication units.
As the size of these small electronic data devices decreased, the size of the data entry keyboards on the devices shrank. The solution to reducing the keyboard size was to decrease the number of keys on the keyboard. Reducing the number of keys has created several problems. The most obvious is the overloading of keys such as on a cellular phone. A single key may represent several characters. When text is input into a reduced keyboard device, it becomes tedious and difficult for the user to enter any reasonable amount of text. The overloaded keys typically require multiple presses to obtain the correct characters.
Keyboard disambiguating systems such as described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,818,437, 5,953,541, 6,011,554, and 6,286,064 owned by the Applicant solve the text entry problem by processing user keystrokes and forming and presenting words to the user that are associated with the keys pressed. Complete words are presented to the user that begin with the letters represented by the key presses. Presenting a list of words associated with the keys pressed saves the user from entering additional keystrokes to spell an entire word and also saves time. The user simply selects the first word in the list or scrolls down and selects the desired word.
The words that are presented to the user are stored in a vocabulary database. An example of a vocabulary database is described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,818,437, 5,953,541, 6,011,554, and 6,286,064 owned by the Applicant.
Another example is iTap by Motorola, Inc. of Schaumburg, Ill., which performs predictive keypad text entry on cellular phones. The iTap system also displays predicted words to the user. However, iTap does not order the displayed words to the user based on which words were actually used by the user. Such a feature would be extremely helpful to the user to save even more time and enable the user to enter text more quickly and efficiently.
It would be advantageous to provide a dynamic database reordering system that displays words associated with key presses to a user in an order based on the user's actual use of the words. It would further be advantageous to provide a dynamic database reordering system that does not store frequency of use information in the main database.
The invention provides a dynamic database reordering system. The invention displays words associated with key presses to a user in an order based on the user's actual use, if any, of the words. In addition, the invention does not store frequency of use information in the main database, thereby requiring minimal storage space.
A preferred embodiment of the invention provides a linguistics database that contains words that are ordered according to a linguistics model that dictates the order in which words are presented to a user. A user enters keystrokes on a keypad of a communications device. While the user is pressing keys, the invention predicts the words, letters, numbers, or word stubs that the user is trying to enter. Complete words are dynamically displayed to the user that begin with the letters represented by the key presses. The user typically presses a sequence of keys which is associated with more that one word in the database. In order to save space storing the linguistics database, the linguistics database is pre-ordered before placement into the product.
The invention provides for reordering of the linguistics model order based on the user's usage of the system. If more than one word shares the same key sequence, the most commonly used word is presented as a first choice in the displayed list. If the user does not want that word, but wants another word that is associated with the key sequence, then the user has the ability to scroll through the displayed list of words by pressing a next key, or scroll up or down keys. Once the user has found the desired word, the user activates a select key and the system enters the desired word into the user's text message at the insertion point.
A preferred embodiment of the invention tracks the user's word selections. Once a word has been selected as a result of a next key selection (the nexted word), a frequency value is applied to the selected word and the word ordered first by the linguistics model in the linguistics database for that key sequence.
The first time that a word is nexted by the user, the frequency value of the nexted word is typically lower than the frequency value of the first ordered word in the displayed list. The next time the nexted word is nexted to again, the frequency value of the nexted word is increased relative to the frequency value of the first ordered word. The frequency values are adjusted every time a word is selected.
Another embodiment of the invention looks at the position of the nexted word in the displayed list. If the nexted word is positioned after the second word in the displayed list, then the nexted word is promoted to the second word position. This increases the nexted word's frequency to the second word's frequency or a frequency above the second word's frequency, but below the first word's frequency.
The frequency value of the nexted word will become greater than the frequency value of the first displayed word upon nexting to the same word over and over again. Subsequent user entries of the key sequence for the nexted word and the first ordered word will result in displaying the nexted word before the word ordered first by the linguistics model.
In one embodiment of the invention, a word's frequency becomes greater than the first ordered word or another word with a higher frequency, when that word has been nexted to three (or a predetermined number) more times than the first ordered word.
Other aspects and advantages of the invention will become apparent from the following detailed description in combination with the accompanying drawings, illustrating, by way of example, the principles of the invention.
The invention is embodied in a dynamic database reordering system. A system according to the invention displays words associated with key presses to a user in an order based on the user's actual use, if any, of the words. The invention additionally does not store frequency of use information in the main database, thereby requiring minimal storage space.
A preferred embodiment of the invention provides a method for displaying results retrieved from a linguistic database to a user that match the user's key presses on a keyboard. Any word selected by the user from the displayed results is assigned a frequency value that is determined by the user's word usage patterns. The frequency value is preferably not stored in the main linguistic database and only words that are actually used by the user are assigned a frequency. Some words that are used by the user that do not have the possibility of collisions with other words do not need to have a frequency assigned. The method reduces the amount of memory required to 1/7 of what would typically be needed to track a user's usage.
Referring to
Presenting a list of words associated with the keys pressed saves the user from entering additional keystrokes to spell an entire word and also saves time. The user selects the first word in the list or scrolls down the list and selects the desired word. In this example, the user can press the space key 112 to accept the first word in the list. The selected word appears in the user's text entry position 104. The user can also continue to press keys to further narrow or refine the selection of words displayed.
The words that are presented to the user are stored in a vocabulary database. If the words in the database are sorted by the frequency of use of each word, then the same words are always presented 105 to the user in the same order.
The invention's T9® linguistics database (LDB) contains words that are ordered according to a linguistics model that dictates the order in which words are presented to a user. The user typically presses a sequence of keys which is associated with more that one word in the database.
In order to save space storing the LDB, the LDB is pre-ordered before placement into the product. The words are ordered using a linguistics model that measures the commonality frequency value for each word in the database. The database is assembled using the frequency ordering. The frequency values are not stored with the words in the database once it is compiled, thereby requiring less space to store the LDB.
For example,
The invention provides for reordering of the linguistics model order based on the user's usage of the system.
Referring again to
A preferred embodiment of the invention tracks the user's word selections. Once a word has been selected as a result of a NEXT key selection, a frequency value is applied to the selected word and the word ordered first by the linguistics model in the LDB for that key sequence. The frequency values applied to the word ordered first by the linguistics model and the word that has been selected as a result of a NEXT key (the nexted word) are dependent upon a number of factors. An example factor includes the commonality of usage of the nexted word relative to the first ordered word.
The first time that a word is nexted by the user, the frequency value of the nexted word is typically lower than the frequency value of the first ordered word in the displayed list. The next time the nexted word is nexted to again, the frequency value of the nexted word is increased relative to the frequency value of the first ordered word. The frequency values are adjusted every time a word is selected.
Another embodiment of the invention looks at the position of the nexted word in the displayed list. If the nexted word is positioned after the second word in the displayed list, then the nexted word is promoted to the second word position. This increases the nexted word's frequency to the second word's frequency or a frequency above the second word's frequency, but below the first word's frequency. Collisions will be discussed later in the text.
At some point upon nexting to the same word over and over again, the frequency value of the nexted word will become greater than the frequency value of the first displayed word. Thus, subsequent user entries of the key sequence for the nexted word and the first ordered word will result in displaying the nexted word before the word ordered first by the linguistics model.
In one embodiment of the invention, a word's frequency becomes greater than the first ordered word or another word with a higher frequency, when that word has been selected to three (or a predetermined number) more times than the first ordered word.
In another embodiment of the invention, words and their order are stored in a linguistics database and the frequency values determined as a result of nexting are stored in a separate database (a reorder database). The order identified by the frequency values in the reorder database takes priority over the order of words in the linguistics database. When frequency values are stored in the linguistic database, the frequencies in the linguistic database provide initial values for the frequencies in the reorder database.
In yet another embodiment of the invention, if no frequency values are stored in the linguistic database, the order of the words in the linguistic database are used to synthesize initial values for the frequencies in the reorder database.
With respect to
The Database Manager 301 accesses the linguistic database on the host device's storage device 304 and forms a predictive word list by extracting the first n number of words form the linguistic database that match the keys pressed. The value n is dependent upon the length of list preferred by the manufacturer or user. If the list is too long, then the number of keystrokes that it takes to scroll through the list would be much greater than the total amount of key presses required to type in a complete word. The Database Manager 301 passes the list of words to the Display Manager 302. The Display Manager 302 displays the list of words to the user.
Each time a scroll key or select is pressed, the Keyboard Manager 303 notifies the Display Manager 302. The Display Manager 302 highlights the proper word in the display list using the scroll key presses. When the user presses a select key, the Display Manager 302 inserts the selected word into the user's text entry field and notifies the Database Manager 301 which word was selected.
The Database Manager 301 adjusts the frequency record for the selected word if the word is being tracked. The frequency is set by the individual user's word usage patterns. The invention does not track every word that is used. Some words do not have collisions and do not need a frequency count. The invention orders collisions that occur from equal frequency values relative to each other. The approach typically reduces the amount of memory required to store the frequency data to 1/7 of what is typically needed.
The Database Manager 301 must limit the frequencies for the tracked words because, otherwise, the counts might exceed the storage capacity of a register on the device. The system must adjust to a user's change in usage. The invention's aging algorithm goes through the recorded frequencies and discounts older usage frequencies. Older usages do not reflect the user's current habits and therefore count for less.
This section details the processes of learning the user's usage patterns and generating the displayed selection list that will resemble the user usage patterns.
Referring to
The Manufacturer Database 402 is a custom database provided by the OEM. The Manufacturer Database 402 is optional and is provided when an OEM has needs for an additional custom database beyond what is supplied in the Linguistic Database 401.
The User Database 403 contains user defined words and a reordering database (RDB) which is a region of the User Database 403 that tracks the words that the user selects and their frequencies.
The following terms are used in the text below:
UDB Reorder Word—An LDB word that was added to the RDB via word selection.
Active Word—A UDB Reorder Word that has an LDB field matching the current LDB. The concept of an active word is important when discussing the aging and garbage collection algorithms below.
Last Deletion Cut-Off Frequency—This is the frequency of the last UDB Reorder word deleted from the RDB by the garbage collection algorithm.
Reorder Words—Reorder Words are words whose frequencies are greater than or equal to the last deletion cut-off-frequencies. These words will be first on the selection display list and they include both UDB Added and UDB Reorder words.
UDB Added Words—UDB Added Word and UDB word have the same meaning; they refer to a word that has been added to the UDB by the user, either explicitly or by the system detecting a novel word constructed by the user.
Reordering Database (RDB)—The portion of the UDB where UDB Reorder Words are stored. The RDB resides within the same memory or storage space of the UDB.
First-Word and Non First-Word—Both first-word and non first-word are LDB words. Relative to the LDB, the first-word is the first displayed LDB word and the non first-word is not.
The invention's Database Manager 301 learns a user's usage patterns by keeping track of the frequencies or usage counts of each of the UDB Added and UDB Reorder words. The usage counts (frequencies) of each word are updated and set according to the word's usage patterns. The usage counts are used to determine the relative position of a word in the displayed selection list, for garbage collection, and for aging.
The first step of keeping track of the usage pattern of an LDB word is by adding it to the RDB. This adding process is kicked in when a word is accepted. The key events for accepting a word are described below. Once an LDB word is added to the RDB it is called a UDB Reorder word. The rules for adding words to the RDB are described in Table 1 where the columns refer to the type of the first object in the selection list and the rows refer to the currently selected object type. The numbers in the table refers to the adding rules, below.
Based on the current selected object type and the object type of the first item in the displayed selection list, the table indicates the following rules:
When an active word is accepted, the word is either added or not added to the RDB based on the adding rules. If the word is already in the RDB/UDB its frequency is bumped. The events for accepting a word are described as follows.
A UDB Add word is added to the UDB when it is accepted as described above. The initial frequency is set to three use counts higher (this can be set to any value that sets it apart from the first-word) than the first-word. The UDB Added word frequency is bumped when the word is used.
The invention uses the “non-aggressive” learning principle, where a single usage of a non-first word should not beat the first-word to the first position in the displayed selection list, by employing a gradual learning of the user's usage patterns to promote word ordering. The “non-aggressive” principle can be achieved by carefully updating and setting the frequencies.
At some time intervals, all of the UDB Add and UDB Reorder words will be aged. Aging means reducing their frequencies by some factor. How often the aging is performed is based on the unit of time interval used, the unit of time interval is maintained by the Database Manager. Since there is no concept of time in the database, the invention heuristically computes the time intervals by maintaining an update count. This update count is incremented by one every time a space key is pressed to select a word. When the update count has reached a certain value, the Aging process is kicked in. This is performed as follows:
For garbage collection, the “easy come, easy go” principle is used to first delete UDB Reorder Words and then UDB Add Words from the RDB and UDB storage space. Reorder words are preferred for deletion by a factor of 2. Thus, before a UDB Add word with X frequency is deleted, the invention first removes all Reorder words with frequencies less than or equal to 2*X. The garbage collection algorithm is described as follows:
One skilled in the art will readily appreciate that the threshold value of ⅛ can be adjusted to reach a desired amount of UDB free space.
The new displayed selection list is composed of first (visually from top) Reorder Words, UDB, LDB, and MDB words (depending on the MDB fence). The MDB fence is used to set the maximum number of LDB words that can appear before the list of MDB words. This is to ensure that the OEM will have its words displayed. The number of Reorder Words in the displayed selection list is determined by the last deletion cut-off frequency or the non first-word initial frequencies, which ever is smaller—call this number RDB Count. All UDB Add and UDB Reorder Words whose frequencies are greater than or equal to RDB Count are Reorder Words and will appear first in the displayed selection list. The order of their appearance in the displayed selection list is hierarchically described as follows:
Tie Breaker refers to Reorder Words with the same frequencies when competing for the first 5 (number of sorted items) positions in the displayed selection list. The following rules are applied to break the tie:
Each UDB Reorder Word is stored as a key sequence along with its LDB object number. With that information and the knowledge of which LDB they came from, the word can be re-constructed. This technique uses less memory to store a RDB word. Using only one nibble for a character rather one or two bytes per character.
One UDB Reorder Word should cost on average of eight bytes—two bytes frequency, one byte length, one byte LDB object number, one byte Language ID, plus three bytes for six characters word [average word length]. 4 Kbytes of RDB space is capable of holding around 512 UDB Reorder Words, 3 Kbytes would capable of holding around 384 words, 2 Kbytes would hold around 256 words, and 1 Kbytes holds around 128 words.
The user can to turn on and off the RDB. The behaviors are described as follows:
One skilled in the art will readily appreciate that, although the term word has been used throughout the text above, the invention will equally apply to other linguistic input units such as a syllable or a phrase. For example, single syllables are input in Chinese and whole phrases are input in Japanese.
Although the invention is described herein with reference to the preferred embodiment, one skilled in the art will readily appreciate that other applications may be substituted for those set forth herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. Accordingly, the invention should only be limited by the claims included below.
This application claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/397,253, filed on 18 Jul. 2002.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3980869 | Lombardino et al. | Sep 1976 | A |
4286329 | Goertzel et al. | Aug 1981 | A |
4365235 | Greanias et al. | Dec 1982 | A |
4439649 | Cecchi | Mar 1984 | A |
4454592 | Cason et al. | Jun 1984 | A |
4559598 | Goldwasser et al. | Dec 1985 | A |
4561105 | Crane et al. | Dec 1985 | A |
4573196 | Crane et al. | Feb 1986 | A |
4689768 | Heard et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
4725694 | Auer et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
4782464 | Gray et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
4783758 | Kucera | Nov 1988 | A |
4783761 | Gray et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
4891777 | Lapeyre | Jan 1990 | A |
4891786 | Goldwasser | Jan 1990 | A |
5109352 | O'Dell | Apr 1992 | A |
5127055 | Larkey | Jun 1992 | A |
5187480 | Thomas et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5224179 | Denker et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5305205 | Weber et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5317507 | Gallant | May 1994 | A |
5457454 | Sugano | Oct 1995 | A |
5462711 | Ricottone | Oct 1995 | A |
5533147 | Arai et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5561446 | Montlick | Oct 1996 | A |
5574482 | Niemeier | Nov 1996 | A |
5583946 | Gourdol | Dec 1996 | A |
5586198 | Lakritz | Dec 1996 | A |
5612690 | Levy | Mar 1997 | A |
5649223 | Freeman | Jul 1997 | A |
5664896 | Blumberg | Sep 1997 | A |
5734750 | Arai et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5745719 | Falcon | Apr 1998 | A |
5748512 | Vargas | May 1998 | A |
5754686 | Harada et al. | May 1998 | A |
5784008 | Raguseo | Jul 1998 | A |
5796867 | Chen et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5798760 | Vayda et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5805911 | Miller | Sep 1998 | A |
5812696 | Arai et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5812697 | Sakai et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5818437 | Grover et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5870492 | Shimizu et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5896321 | Miller et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5917476 | Czerniecki | Jun 1999 | A |
5923793 | Ikebata | Jul 1999 | A |
5926566 | Wang et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5933526 | Sklarew | Aug 1999 | A |
5952942 | Balakrishnan et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5953541 | King et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5956021 | Kubota et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5963671 | Comerford et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5973676 | Kawakura | Oct 1999 | A |
6002390 | Masui | Dec 1999 | A |
6002799 | Sklarew | Dec 1999 | A |
6009444 | Chen | Dec 1999 | A |
6011554 | King et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6028959 | Wang et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6041137 | Van Kleeck | Mar 2000 | A |
6044165 | Perona et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6054941 | Chen | Apr 2000 | A |
6075469 | Pong | Jun 2000 | A |
6094197 | Buxton et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6104317 | Panagrossi | Aug 2000 | A |
6104384 | Moon et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6130962 | Sakurai | Oct 2000 | A |
6144764 | Yamakawa et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6148104 | Wang et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6157379 | Singh | Dec 2000 | A |
6169538 | Nowlan et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6172625 | Jin et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6204848 | Nowlan et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6212297 | Sklarew | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6275611 | Parthasarathy | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6278445 | Tanaka et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6286064 | King et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6307549 | King et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6314418 | Namba | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6320943 | Borland | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6362752 | Guo et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6392640 | Will | May 2002 | B1 |
6424743 | Ebrahimi | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6437709 | Hao | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6448987 | Easty et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6453079 | McInerny | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6489951 | Wong et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6493464 | Hawkins et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6502118 | Chatterjee | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6542170 | Williams et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6549219 | Selker | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6567072 | Watanabe | May 2003 | B2 |
6585162 | Sandbach et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6616703 | Nakagawa | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6654733 | Goodman et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6686852 | Guo | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6686907 | Su et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6711290 | Sparr et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6757544 | Rangarjan et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6765554 | Millington | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6801659 | O'Dell | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6807529 | Johnson et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6819315 | Toepke et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6820075 | Shanahan et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6829607 | Tafoya et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6864809 | O'Dell et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6912581 | Johnson et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6947771 | Guo et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6955602 | Williams | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6956968 | O'Dell et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
6970599 | Longe et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6973332 | Mirkin et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6982658 | Guo | Jan 2006 | B2 |
6990534 | Mikhailov et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7020270 | Ghassabian | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7020849 | Chen | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7057607 | Mayoraz et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7075520 | Williams | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7088861 | Van Meurs | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7095403 | Lyustin et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7107204 | Liu et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7139430 | Sparr et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7149550 | Kraft et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7151533 | Van Ieperen | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7155683 | Williams | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7224989 | Kraft | May 2007 | B2 |
7256769 | Pun et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7257528 | Ritchie et al. | Aug 2007 | B1 |
7272564 | Phillips et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7313277 | Morwing et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7349576 | Hotsberg | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7385531 | Zhang | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7389235 | Dvorak | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7437001 | Morwing et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7466859 | Chang et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
20010048425 | Partridge | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020093491 | Allen et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020122072 | Selker | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020135499 | Guo | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020135561 | Rojewski | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020145587 | Watanabe | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020163544 | Baker et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020168107 | Tang et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030006956 | Wu et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030023426 | Pun et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030048257 | Mattila | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030054830 | Williams et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030144830 | Williams | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030179930 | O'Dell et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030184451 | Li | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040153963 | Simpson et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040153975 | Williams et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040163032 | Guo et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040243389 | Thomas et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050060138 | Wang et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050114770 | Sacher et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050223308 | Gunn et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060062461 | Longe et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060129928 | Qiu | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060136408 | Weir et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060155536 | Williams et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060158436 | LaPointe et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060173807 | Weir et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060190819 | Ostergaard et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060193519 | Sternby | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060236239 | Simpson et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060239560 | Sternby | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060247915 | Bradford et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070094718 | Simpson | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070203879 | Templeton-Steadman et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070276814 | Williams | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070285397 | LaPointe et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080130996 | Sternby | Jun 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1116335 | Feb 1996 | CN |
1190205 | Aug 1998 | CN |
1232204 | Oct 1999 | CN |
1358299 | Jul 2002 | CN |
1606753 | Apr 2005 | CN |
3401942 | Nov 1984 | DE |
0114250 | Nov 1983 | EP |
0739521 | May 1996 | EP |
0762265 | Mar 1997 | EP |
0858023 | Aug 1998 | EP |
0961208 | Dec 1999 | EP |
1018679 | Dec 1999 | EP |
1085401 | Mar 2001 | EP |
1168780 | Jan 2002 | EP |
1355225 | Oct 2003 | EP |
2824979 | Nov 2002 | FR |
57010832 | Jan 1982 | JP |
62065136 | Mar 1987 | JP |
1023021 | Jan 1989 | JP |
1047565 | Feb 1989 | JP |
1993081482 | Apr 1993 | JP |
1994083816 | Mar 1994 | JP |
7094376 | Apr 1995 | JP |
1995-146918 | Jun 1995 | JP |
1996-305701 | Nov 1996 | JP |
8319721 | Dec 1996 | JP |
10135399 | May 1998 | JP |
10-275046 | Oct 1998 | JP |
11021274 | Jan 1999 | JP |
11028406 | Feb 1999 | JP |
1999336858 | Dec 1999 | JP |
2001043205 | Feb 2001 | JP |
2001282778 | Oct 2001 | JP |
A 2003-500771 | Jan 2003 | JP |
2001-0107388 | May 2000 | KR |
20020004419 | Jan 2002 | KR |
498264 | Aug 2002 | TW |
WO9816889 | Sep 1997 | WO |
WO 9915952 | Apr 1999 | WO |
WO0072300 | Nov 2000 | WO |
WO 0074240 | Dec 2000 | WO |
WO03021788 | Mar 2003 | WO |
WO 2004111812 | Dec 2004 | WO |
WO 2004111871 | Dec 2004 | WO |
WO2004111812 | Mar 2006 | WO |
WO 2006026908 | Mar 2006 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040083198 A1 | Apr 2004 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60397253 | Jul 2002 | US |