This patent application is directed to the field of machine learning.
Statistical models are a machine learning mechanism for predicting for a system the value of a dependent variable based upon the values of related independent variables. Typically a model is trained to do so for a particular domain using “observations,” each a combination of a set of independent variable values that occur in the system with a particular value of the dependent variable. Training the model based upon these observations involves defining the model in such a way that it predicts, for the set of independent variable values of each observation, a value of the dependent variable that is similar to the dependent variable value of the observation. Once trained, a model can be applied to a particular set of independent variable values to predict what dependent variable value will occur in the system for this set of independent variable values.
A variety of types of statistical models are used in this way, including linear regression models and random forest models. A linear regression model is a mathematical expression in which a constant coefficient is established for each independent variable, along with a single constant intercept value. These constant values defining the linear regression model are established in a way that fits the linear regression model to the training observations. To apply the trained linear regression model to a particular set of independent variable values, each independent variable value of the set is multiplied by the corresponding coefficient, and these products are summed, along with the intercept value.
A random forest model constitutes a collection of partitioning decision trees. These decision trees are typically binary trees, each of which can be traversed from its root to a leaf based upon a set of independent variable values for which a dependent variable value is to be predicted. In particular, each non-leaf node represents a partitioning of the range of possible values for an independent variable. Traversal to a leaf involves, at each non-leaf node beginning with root node, following the edge assigned the part of the range of possible values for the corresponding independent variable in which the value of the independent variable of the set of independent variable values falls. Each node of the tree is assigned a value constituting an aggregation—such as the mean—of the dependent variable values of the training observations whose independent variable values result in the traversal from the root to the node. Applying a random forest model to a set of independent variable values for which a dependent variable value is to be predicted constitutes traversing each tree of the forest from the root to a leaf based upon those independent variable values, then aggregating the values of the traversed-to leaf of each tree, such as by determining the mean of these values.
As part of training a random forest model, each tree of the random forest is typically constructed by randomly selecting a proper subset of the available observations. To create each node of the tree, beginning with root node, a partitioning of the possible range of values for a particular independent variable is determined that, among the observations represented by the node, divide these observations into two groups each of whose dependent variable values are the smallest total distance from the group's aggregated dependent variable value.
Often, after applying a trained model to predict a dependent variable value for a set of independent variable values, a user can vary one or more of the independent variable values of the set, and apply the model to the modified set of independent variable values to predict a new dependent variable value.
The inventors have recognized significant disadvantages of conventional techniques that use statistical models to predict values of dependent variables. In particular, a user may (1) apply a trained model to predict the dependent variable value for a set of independent variable values, (2) alter one or more independent variable values in a way that the user expects to move the dependent variable value in a particular direction, (3) then apply the trained model to predict the dependent variable value for the changed independent variable values, and feel surprised that discovering that the dependent variable value has moved in the direction opposite the expected direction.
The inventors have noted that this result can have two different causes: (a) where the model is inaccurate over small changes in independent variable values, or (b) where the model is accurate in a way that is counterintuitive.
In response, the inventors have conceived and reduced to practice a software and/or hardware facility for enforcing, with respect to changes in one or more distinguished independent variable values, monotonicity in the predictions produced by a statistical model (“the facility”). In some cases, the set of independent variable values that changes is sometimes referred to herein as an “occurrence.” One or more independent variable values of an occurrence may change, for example, because the initial values of these independent variables are discovered to be incorrect for the occurrence, or because a user wishes to determine the effect on dependent variable value of possible future changes to these independent variable values for the occurrence.
In some embodiments, the facility uses a delta model approach as follows: First, the facility applies a substantive model within which monotonicity is not enforced to predict the dependent variable value for a first set of independent variable values. When a prediction is subsequently sought based upon a modified version of the first set of independent variable values, rather than applying the substantive model to the modified set of values, the facility applies a delta model to the modified values to determine a delta multiplier, and returns a value of the dependent variable obtained by multiplying the earlier -predicted dependent variable value by the determined delta multiplier. In some embodiments, the facility establishes a pipeline of delta models that progresses from a complex delta model to a simple delta model, and uses the most complex delta model that succeeds for the modified set of values.
In some embodiments, the facility uses an innate monotonicity approach, in which it constructs a substantive model that internally enforces monotonicity with respect to the distinguished independent variables. For example, where the substantive model is a model that employs decision trees—such as a random forest model—as part of constructing these decision trees, when choosing for a node of the tree a range partition for a distinguished independent variable, the facility chooses only a range partitions that result in the predicted value of the dependent variable for the left child being less than the predicted value of the dependent variable for the right child. That is, among the observations being used to construct the tree, the observations that traverse the left edge from the node have a lower aggregate value than the observations that traverse the right edge from the node.
By operating in some or all of the ways described above, the facility can overcome localized forms of inaccuracy inherent in many conventional statistical models, and can provide a prediction result that is more likely to be regarded as accurate than a conventional statistical model.
Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the acts shown in
Left child 412 is connected to root node 411 by an “A≤1” edge, while right child 413 is connected to root node 411 by an “A>1” edge. That is, the 8 observations represented by the root node are split into those in which the value of independent variable A is less than or equal to one, and those in which the value of independent variable A is greater than one. It can be seen that former three observations (observations 1, 5, and 7) are represented by left child 412, while the latter five observations (observations 2, 3, 4, 6, and 8) are represented by right child 413. Child node 412 has the value 340—the mean of the dependent variable values of the 3 observations that it represents, while child node 413 has the value 245—the mean of the dependent variable values of the 5 observations that node 413 represents.
One should note that, because the root node was split on values of an independent variable that is not distinguished and for which monotonicity is not enforced, the facility was permitted to establish a split—embodied by child nodes 412 and 413—in which the value of the left child (node 412), 340, is greater than the value of the right child (node 413), 245.
At this point, in addition to nodes 511-513 which appear in
In the first possible split, the value of the left child, 245, would not be greater than the value of the right child, 245.5. In the second possible split, the value of the left child, 243, would similarly not be greater than the value of the right child, 246.67. In each of the third and fourth possible splits, however, the value of the left child would be greater than the right child: 247 vs. 242.5, and 247.75 vs. 235, respectively. For this reason, because B* is a distinguished independent variable, the facility is prevented from pursuing the third and fourth possible splits. Among the first and second possible splits, the facility selects the possible split that produces the smallest overall sum of squared distances between each child's value and the dependent variable values of the observations it represents. The second possible split produces an overall sum of squared distances of 220.67 (that is, (245−243)2+(241−243)2+(255−246.67)2+(250−246.67)2+(235−246.67)2), which is smaller than the overall sum of squared distances produced by the first possible split, 240.75. Accordingly, the facility selects the second possible split, as shown in
As a result of selecting the second possible split of node 513, the facility ensures that, if an occurrence to which the model containing tree 500 is being applied is for example adjusted from having a value of B* of 22 to a value of B* of 23, the value produced for the occurrence would increase, from 243 to 246.67, and would not decrease. Indeed, there are no increases in B* from one value of B* to any higher value of B* that cause the value produced by the tree for the occurrence to decrease.
The construction of a sample tree shown in
Modeling Domains
Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the facility is adaptable to a wide variety of modeling domains. An incomplete list follows.
An illustrative example of delta models used by the facility in some embodiments in the home valuation modeling domain are described below.
In some embodiments, the facility uses a progression of delta models that have monotonic constraints on the coefficients for finished square feet (Sqft), lot size (LotSize), and bathroom count (#Bathrooms). Some of these delta models employ shape -constrained cubic basis splines (denoted as “ns” functions). These spline functions break up the input variable into pieces through which the facility fits a cubic polynomial that is constrained to have non-decreasing shape. The ends of each polynomial are also constrained so that they have the same value and are smooth at the transition point (i.e., the transition point has a second derivative of zero). These spline transformations are spline functions, as the spline breaks up the independent variable into sections (basis) based upon the local shape vs. the dependent variables. Thus, when the ns(x,y) function is used, price is the second argument, as that is implicitly the variable against which the interpolation is being evaluated.
In some embodiments, the facility fits unconstrained additional spline models, such as where spline expansion is used by the facility.
In a linear regression, the facility fits one slope for the entire range of an independent variable. With a spline, the facility selects a set of “knots” to break the data up into local ranges, each of which the facility fits with a local function. In the case of linear splines, the local function is a line segment; in the case of polynomial or natural splines, each local function is a smooth curve. The inventors regard natural splines as a good modeling choice because they produce smooth curves while limiting the squiggles that higher-order polynomial functions tend to produce.
The delta models outlined below include a set of smoothed features in which the facility takes the average value of the 50 nearest neighbors of a given property as the value of the independent variable; “SqftSmooth50” is the average value of the finished square feet of the fifty nearest geographic neighbors to a given property based upon latitude and longitude. Also, use code (“Usecode”) is a categorical independent variable that tracks the structure type, e.g., townhome vs. condominium vs. detached single family vs. duplex.
In some embodiments, the facility creates nine delta models for each distinct geographic region modeled by the facility. The delta models are ordered from most complex (delta model #1) to least complex (delta model #9), with the complexity being decreased between delta models by removing variables, functions of variables, and interaction terms. The full delta model (#1) is a highly non-linear model and, in cases where transaction data is thin, sometimes fails to produce a viable model that can meet all the constraints placed on the spline functions. In those cases, the facility proceeds to the next most complex model to see if it meets constraints, and can continue up to the ninth model which is a fully linear model and is very likely to meet constraints.
In some embodiments, the facility tests each delta model's ability to satisfy constraints by checking the predictions these models make along a grid of possible values for the distinguished independent variables. For example, for a LotSize distinguished independent variable, the facility checks the predicted values along all lot sizes in a grid, such as from 0 to 5 acres. In some embodiments, the facility handles FinishedSquareFeet and bathroom count distinguished independent variables in a similar way. The facility also checks predictions along the surface of a 2-d grid such as size vs square feet to make sure that all points along the surface formed by predictions in this grid are also monotonically increasing with the respective independent variables.
In some embodiments, the facility computes a “minimum response” table of allowable delta adjustments for the chosen model. This table maps percentage changes in the distinguished independent variables—such as for lot size—to an allowable range of delta adjustments. For example, where lot size increases by 10%, allowable delta adjustments are [1, 1.09]—that is, from no change in value to +9%. The facility generates the cutoffs in this table by looking at the predictions the selection model makes at given percentage changes and setting the lower bound at or near the 25th and 75th percentiles of delta values produced for a given change in a distinguished independent variable. This all works to limit extreme delta adjustments from being produced by the models.
In the descriptions of the nine delta models that follow, notation is employed as follows:
1: Full model:
Δ=β0+β1ns(log(Sqft), price)+β2ns(log(Lotsize), price)+β3ZestPerSqftSmooth50* log(Sqft)+β3SqftSmooth50*log(Sqft)+β5LotsizeSmooth50* log(LotSize)+β6ns(#Bathrooms, price)*log(Sqft)+β7log(#Bedrooms)+β8s(log(Age), price)*log(Sqft)+β9#Stories+β10Usecode
2: Like the full model but without the interaction term on #Bathrooms with square footage.
Δ=β0+β1ns(log(Sqft), price)+β2ns(log(Lotsize), price)+β3ZestPerSqftSmooth50* log(Sqft)+β3SqftSmooth50*log(Sqft)+β5LotsizeSmooth50* log(LotSize)+β6ns(#Bathrooms, price)+β7log(#Bedrooms)+β8s(log(Age), price)*log(Sqft)+β9#Stories+β10Usecode
3: Like the second model but drops the smoothed lot size interaction with lot size
Δ=β0+β1ns(log(Sqft), price)+β2ns(log(Lotsize), price)+β3ZestPerSqftSmooth50* log(Sqft)+β3SqftSmooth50*log(Sqft)+β5LotsizeSmooth50+β6ns(#Bathrooms, price)+β7log(#Bedrooms)+β8s(log(Age), price)* log(Sqft)+β9#Stories+β10Usecode
4: Like the third model but removes the interaction between bathrooms and square feet:
Δ=β0+β1ns(log(Sqft), price)+β2ns(log(Lotsize), price)+β3zestPerSqftSmooth50* log(Sqft)+β3SqftSmooth50*log(Sqft)+β5LotsizeSmooth50+β6#Bathrooms+β7log(#Bedrooms)+β8s(log(Age), price)*log(Sqft)+β9#Stories+β10Usecode
5: Same as model four but drops Usecode from the model:
Δ=β0+β1ns(log(Sqft), price)+β2ns(log(Lotsize), price)+β3ZestPerSqftSmooth50* log(Sqft)+β3SqftSmooth50*log(Sqft)+β5LotsizeSmooth50+β6#Bathrooms+β7log(#Bedrooms)+β8s(log(Age), price)*log(Sqft) +β9#Stories
6: Like model five but removes spline function on lot size:
Δ=β0+β1ns(log(Sqft), price)+β2log(Lotsize)+β3ZestPerSqftSmooth50*log(Sqft) +β3SqftSmooth50*log(Sqft)+β5LotsizeSmooth50+β6#Bathrooms +β7log(#Bedrooms)+β8*s(log(Age), price)*log(Sqft)+β9#Stories
7: Like model six but removes all interaction terms involving lot size:
Δ=β0+β1sp(log(Sqft), price)+β2log(Lotsize)+β3ZestPerSqftSmooth50*log(Sqft) +β3SqftSmooth50+β5LotsizeSmooth50+β6#Bathrooms +β7log(#Bedrooms)+β8s(log(Age), price)*log(Sqft)+β9#Stories
8: Like model seven but removes square feet interactions to create a no interactions model:
Δ=β0+β1sp(log(Sqft), price)+β2log(Lotsize)+β3ZestPerSqftSmooth50+β3SqftSmooth50+β5LotsizeSmooth50+β6#Bathrooms +β7log(#Bedrooms)+β8s(log(Age), price)+β9#Stories
9: Like model eight but removes the spline function on square footage to make a model that is linear in all home characteristics but age.
Δ=β0+β1log(Sqft)+β2log(Lotsize)+β3ZestPerSqftSmooth50+β3SqftSmooth50+β5LotsizeSmooth50+β6#Bathrooms+β7log(#Bedrooms) +β8s(log(Age), price)+β9#Stories
It will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that the above-described facility may be straightforwardly adapted or extended in various ways. While the foregoing description makes reference to particular embodiments, the scope of the invention is defined solely by the claims that follow and the elements recited therein.
This application claims the benefit of US Provisional Application No. 62/300,054 filed on Feb. 25, 2016, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. In cases where this application and the application incorporated by reference conflict, this application controls.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4870576 | Tornetta | Sep 1989 | A |
5361201 | Jost et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5414621 | Hough | May 1995 | A |
5584025 | Keithley et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5680305 | Apgar, IV | Oct 1997 | A |
5754850 | Janssen | May 1998 | A |
5794216 | Brown | Aug 1998 | A |
5855011 | Tatsuoka | Dec 1998 | A |
5857174 | Dugan | Jan 1999 | A |
6115694 | Cheetham et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6178406 | Cheetham et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6240425 | Naughton | May 2001 | B1 |
6260033 | Tatsuoka | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6301571 | Tatsuoka | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6397208 | Lee | May 2002 | B1 |
6401070 | McManus et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6446261 | Rosser | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6493721 | Getchius et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6597983 | Hancock | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6609118 | Khedkar et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6615187 | Ashenmil | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6684196 | Mini et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6760707 | Provost | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6876955 | Fleming et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6877015 | Kilgore et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6915206 | Sasajima | Jul 2005 | B2 |
7016866 | Chin et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7092918 | Delurgio et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7120599 | Keyes | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7130810 | Foster et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7219078 | Lamont et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7249146 | Brecher | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7289965 | Bradley et al. | Oct 2007 | B1 |
7454355 | Milman et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7461265 | Ellmore | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7487114 | Florance et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7567262 | Clemens et al. | Jul 2009 | B1 |
7827128 | Yan et al. | Jan 2010 | B1 |
7711574 | Bradley et al. | May 2010 | B1 |
7725359 | Katzfey et al. | May 2010 | B1 |
7783562 | Ellis | Aug 2010 | B1 |
7788186 | An et al. | Aug 2010 | B1 |
7848966 | Charuk et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7933798 | Yan et al. | Apr 2011 | B1 |
7970674 | Cheng et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
8001024 | Graboske et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8015091 | Ellis | Sep 2011 | B1 |
8032401 | Choubey | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8051089 | Gargi et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8095434 | Puttick et al. | Jan 2012 | B1 |
8140421 | Humphries | Mar 2012 | B1 |
8180697 | Frischer | May 2012 | B2 |
8190516 | Ghosh et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8370267 | Carey et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8401877 | Salvagio | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8473347 | Koningstein | Jun 2013 | B1 |
8515839 | Ma et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8521619 | Perry, III et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8583562 | McDaniel et al. | Nov 2013 | B1 |
8628151 | Allen et al. | Jan 2014 | B1 |
8650067 | Moss | Feb 2014 | B1 |
8660919 | Kasower | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8676680 | Humphries et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8775300 | Showalter | Jul 2014 | B2 |
9536011 | Kirillov | Jan 2017 | B1 |
9605704 | Humphries et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
20010039506 | Robbins | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010044766 | Keyes | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020007336 | Robbins | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020035520 | Weiss | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020052814 | Ketterer | May 2002 | A1 |
20020082903 | Yasuzawa | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020087389 | Sklarz et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020188689 | Michael | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030004781 | Mallon et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030046099 | Lamont et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030055747 | Carr et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030078878 | Opsahl-Ong | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030078897 | Florance et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030101063 | Sexton et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030101074 | Suzuki et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030110122 | Nalebuff et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030149658 | Rossbach et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030191723 | Foretich et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030212565 | Badali et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040019517 | Sennott | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040030616 | Florance et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040039629 | Hoffman et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040049440 | Shinoda et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040054605 | Whittet | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040073508 | Foster et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040093270 | Gilbert | May 2004 | A1 |
20040128215 | Florance et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040153330 | Miller et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040220872 | Pollock | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040243470 | Ozer et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040254803 | Myr | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040267657 | Hecht | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050071376 | Modi | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050080702 | Modi | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050108084 | Ramamoorti et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050154656 | Kim et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050154657 | Kim et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050187778 | Mitchell | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050192930 | Hightower et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050240429 | Dieden et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050254803 | Ono | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050288942 | Graboske et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050288957 | Eraker et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060015357 | Cagan | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060020424 | Quindel | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060080114 | Bakes et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060085210 | Owens | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060089842 | Medawar | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060105342 | Villena et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060122918 | Graboske et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060167710 | King et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060248555 | Eldering | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070005373 | Villena et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070043770 | Goodrich et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070050342 | Inkinen et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070067180 | James et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070106523 | Eaton et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070124235 | Chakraborty et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070132727 | Garbow et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070143132 | Linne et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070143312 | Wiseman | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070150353 | Krassner | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070244780 | Liu | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070255581 | Otto et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070265960 | Advani | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080004893 | Graboske et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080015890 | Malyala | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080077458 | Andersen et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080086356 | Glassman et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080109409 | Hengel | May 2008 | A1 |
20080133319 | Adiga et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080183598 | Carr et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080255921 | Flake et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080288335 | Goldberg | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080301064 | Burns | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080312942 | Katta et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090006185 | Stinson | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090030707 | Green | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090030864 | Pednault et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090037328 | Abuaf | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090043603 | Rutherford et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090043637 | Eder | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090048938 | Dupray | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090076902 | Grinsted et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090132316 | Florance et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090144097 | Fassio et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090150216 | Milman et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090164464 | Carrico et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090210287 | Chickering et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090240586 | Ramer et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090265285 | Balaishis | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090287596 | Torrenegra | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100005019 | Yang et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100023379 | Rappaport | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100076881 | O'Grady | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100094548 | Tadman et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100114678 | Axe et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100161498 | Walker | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100318451 | Niccolini | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110047083 | Lawler | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110066510 | Talegon | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110066561 | Lazarre et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110071899 | Robertson et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110196762 | DuPont | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110218934 | Elser | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110218937 | Elser | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110251967 | Klivington | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110251974 | Woodward et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110270779 | Showalter | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20120005111 | Lowenstein et al. | Jan 2012 | A2 |
20120011075 | Graboske et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120030092 | Marshall et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120072357 | Bradford et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120078770 | Hecht | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120158459 | Villena et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120191541 | Yang et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120254045 | Orfano | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120311431 | Breaker et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120323798 | Den Herder et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130041841 | Lyons | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130103459 | Marshall et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130159166 | Irick | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130304654 | Ma et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130332877 | Florance et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20130339255 | Talbird | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140012720 | O'Kane | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140180936 | Ma et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140236845 | Humphries et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140257924 | Xie | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140279692 | Boothby et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140316857 | Roberts | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140316999 | Cheng et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140372203 | Powell et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150006605 | Chu | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150066834 | Jeffries | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150149275 | Bax et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150269264 | Bolen | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150356576 | Malaviya | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150379588 | Ma et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20180232787 | Dupray | Aug 2018 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1903491 | Mar 2008 | EP |
WO-9524687 | Sep 1995 | WO |
WO-0055771 | Sep 2000 | WO |
WO-0211038 | Feb 2002 | WO |
WO-0242980 | May 2002 | WO |
WO-03100692 | Dec 2003 | WO |
WO-2005015441 | Feb 2005 | WO |
WO-2006025830 | Mar 2006 | WO |
WO-2006043951 | Apr 2006 | WO |
WO-2007051892 | May 2007 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Manski, Charles F., and John V. Pepper. “Monotone Instrumental Variables: With an Application to the Returns to Schooling.” Econometrica 68 (Jul. 2000): 997-1010. (Year: 2000). |
Lu, J. F., and L. Lin HZ Wen. “An improved method of real estate evaluation based on Hedonic price model.” IEEE International Engineering Management Conference. 2004. (Year: 2004). |
Zurowski, Brian.“Essays in Social and Behavioral Economics.” Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, http://hdl.handle.net/11299/175495 (Year: 2015). |
Oladunni, Timothy, and Sharad Sharma. “Predictive Real Estate Multiple Listing System Using MVC Architecture and Linear Regression.” ISCA 24th International Conference on Software Engineering and Data Engineering. 2015. (Year: 2015). |
Oladunni, Timothy, and Sharad Sharma. “Hedonic Housing Theory—A Machine Learning Investigation.” (Year: 2016). |
“2002 Inman Innovator Award Nominees Announced,” PR Newswire, Jul. 16, 2002, 3 pages. |
“About Reis, Products & Services,” [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Feb. 5, 2002 on Jun. 13, 2013, URL: http://reis.com/about/aboutproducts_rentcomps.cfm, 2 pages. |
“An Introduction to R,” <http://web.archive.org/web/20060118050840/http://crans-project.org/doc/manuals/R-intro.html>, [internet archive date: Jan. 18, 2006], pp. 1-105. |
“Banton Technologies Announces National Home Evaluation Coverage; Company's ValueWizard 3.0 Assesses All Regions of the United States,” Business Wire, Jun. 10, 2003, [online] Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.the free library.com/_/print/PrintArticle.aspx?id=102949279, 2 pages. |
“Basis100 Partners to Offer Automated Valuation Service,” Canada StockWatch, Jan. 27, 2004, 2 pages. |
“Basis100 Partners with First American,” PR Newswire, Jan. 27, 2004, 3 pages. |
“Casa(TM) to Value More Than $100 Billion of Residential Real Estate in 2001—Leading Lenders Saving Big without Compromising Loan Quality,” PR Newswire, May 21, 2001, 3 pages. |
“Centre for Mathematical Sciences,” Lund University, http://web.archive.org/web/20060101005103/http://www.maths.lth.se/, [internet archive date: Jan. 1, 2006], 1 page. |
“Directory of Valuation Providers, Your Source for Valuation Information,” Zackin Publications Inc., 2004, 5 pages. |
“First American Expands Real Estate Valuation Line, Aims to Increase Accuracy with Addition of Veros, Basis100 AVMs,” Inman News, Mar. 15, 2004, 2 pages. |
“First American Real Estate Solutions Experiences Record,” PR Newswire, Nov. 4, 2002, 3 pages. |
“First American Real Estate Solutions Releases ValuePoint4,” PR Newswire, Oct. 21, 2002, 3 pages. |
“First American Real Estate Solutions' ValuePoint(R)4 Experiences Explosive Growth in 2004—Leading Automated Valuation Model (AVM) Usage Grows More Than 700 Percent in 12-Month Period,” PR Newswire, Mar. 24, 2005, 3 pages. |
“Franchise Offering Circular for Prospective Franchisees,” U.S.Appraisal, Nov. 1, 1986, 87 pages. |
“GMAC-RFC Selects First American Real Estate Solutions' ValuePoint(R)4 Automated Valuation Model (AVM),” PR Newswire, Jun. 28, 2004, 3 pages. |
“HNC Software and RealQuest Team to Provide Widespread Automated Property Valuation; Areas Users to Have Online Access to Texas MLS,” Business Wire, Oct. 1, 1997, 3 pages. |
“HomeAdvisor Ranks First in Gomez Poll,” Realty Times, Jun. 13, 2001, 3 pages. |
“HomeAdvisor Spin-Off Aims to Service Realty Industry,” Directions on Microsoft, Apr. 24, 2000, 2 pages. |
“HomeSeekers.com and MSN HomeAdvisor Provide Free Web Pages for All Real Estate Agents,” PR Newswire, May 20, 1999, 3 pages. |
“How do we value your home?,” [online] CSWOnline, Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Oct. 23, 1999, URL: http://w w w .csw online.com/method.shtml, 1 page. |
“In Brief: HomeAdvisor Secures $100 Million in Equity Funding,” Directions on Microsoft, Aug. 28, 2000, 1 page. |
“Microsoft Real Estate Venture Gets Large Investment,” The New York Times, Technology section, Aug. 23, 2000, 2 pages. |
“MSN HomeAdvisor Becomes Most-Visited Home and Real Estate Web Site, According to Media Metrix,” Microsoft News Center, Apr. 13, 2001, Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.microsoft.com/enus/ news/press/2001/Apr01/04-13MarchTrafficPR.aspx?navV3Index=0, 2 pages. |
“MSN HomeAdvisor Helps Real Estate Agents and Customers Feel Right at Home on the Internet,” Microsoft News Center, Dec. 14, 1998, Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.microsoft.com/enus/ news/features/1998/12-14msn.aspx?navV3Index=0, 2 pages. |
“Nation's First Fully Interactive AVM Debuts in Las Vegas AVM News,” PRweb press release, AVM News, Feb. 4, 2006, 1 page. |
“NetNumina Solutions Creates Robust E-Business Solution for Leader in Real Estate Lending,” PR Newswire, Aug. 16, 1999, 3 pages. |
“Reis Inc.,” Commercial Property News, vol. 18, Issue 6, Mar. 16, 2004, 2 pages. |
“Reis, Inc. Launches Apartment Version of Online Valuation and Credit Risk Analysis Module,” Business Wire, Nov. 7, 2002, 2 pages. |
“RMBS: Guidelines for the Use of Automated Valuation Models for U.K. RMBS Transactions,” Standard and Poors.com [online], Sep. 26, 2005 [retrieved Aug. 6, 2013], Retrieved from the Internet, S&P Archive: URL: www.standardandpoors.com/prot/ratings/articles/en/us/?articleType=HTML&assetID=1245330509010, 4 pages. |
“Sample CASA Report,” [online] CSWOnline, Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Nov. 6, 1999, URL: http://w w w .csw online.com/sample.shtml, 3 pages. |
“Standard on Automated Valuation Models (AVMs)”, International Association of Assessing Officers, Approved Sep. 2003, 36 pages. |
“The Appraisal” Report, U.S.Appraisal, dated at least by Sep. 29, 1983, 4 pages. |
“The Appraiser,” Certificate of Copyright Registration, Jun. 25, 1982, 4 pages. |
“The Appraiser,” Certificate of Copyright Registration, Oct. 19, 1981, 3 pages. |
“The Assessor” Demo Video, U.S.Appraisal, [Accessed for review on Jun. 21, 2013, Zillow Inc. vs. Trulia Case No. 2:12-cv-01549-JLR], [Transcribed Oct. 8, 2013], 10 pages. |
“The Assessor” Newsletter, US Appraisal, dated at least by Apr. 10, 1985, 4 pages. |
“The Assessor” Source Code, U.S.Appraisal, [Accessed for review on Jun. 21, 2013, Zillow Inc. vs. Trulia Case No. 2:12-cv-01549-JLR], 2,460 pages. |
“The Assessor,” Certificate of Copyright Registration, Feb. 2, 1984, 2 pages. |
“The Comprehensive R Archive Network,”, www.crans-project.org, http://web.archive.org/web/20050830073913/cran.r-project.org/banner.shtml, [internet archive date: Aug. 30, 2005], pp. 1-2. |
“The R Project for Statistical Computing,” www.r-project.org, http://web.archive.org/web/20060102073515/www.r-project.org/main.shtml, [internet archive date: Jan. 2, 2006], 1 page. |
“TransUnion Acquires Banton Technologies,” PR Newswire, Oct. 20, 2003, 3 pages. |
“TransUnion and CSW Form Partnership,” Mortgage Banking, vol. 62, Issue 6, Mar. 31, 2002, 1 page. |
“Trulia Estimates,” [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Jan. 16, 2013, URL:http//www.trulia.com/trulia_estimates/, 2 pages. |
“Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and Advisory Opinions 2005 Edition<” Electronic USPAP 2005 Edition, Appraisal Standards Board, The Appraisal Foundation, Effective Jan. 1, 2005, 10 pages. |
“USPAP Q&A,” vol. 9, No. 6, The Appraisal Foundation, Jun. 2007, 2 pages. |
“What Is an AVM?”, Real-Info.com [online], Dec. 22, 2005 [retrieved on Aug. 6, 2013]. Retrieved from the Internet via Internet Archive Wayback Machine: URL: web.archive.org/web/20051222120807/http://www.real-info.com/products_avm.asp?RISID=e8fc23a9a1189fbff9b968e8f86ccde6], 3 pages. |
Xactware Unveils Web-Based Valuation Tool for Underwriting, PR Newswire, Dec. 10, 2002, 3 pages. |
“Xactware. (Central Utah),” Utah Business, vol. 17, Issue 3, Mar. 1, 2003, 1 page. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/927,623 by Humphries et al., filed Oct. 29, 2007. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037 by Flint et al., filed Sep. 16, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,480 by Humphries et al., filed Mar. 9, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,490 by Humphries et al., filed Mar. 9, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/828,680 by Humphries et al., filed Mar. 14, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/830,497 by Humphries et al., filed Mar. 14, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/843,577 by Humphries et al., filed Mar. 15, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/041,450 by Humphries et al., filed Sep. 30, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/078,076 by Daimler et al., filed Nov. 12, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/325,094 by Bruce et al., filed Jul. 7, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/524,148 by Humphries et al., filed Oct. 27, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/640,860 by Rao et al., filed Mar. 6, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/704,567 by Wang et al., filed May 5, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/709,719 by Humphries et al., filed May 12, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/721,437 by Humphries et al., filed May 26, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/220,518 by VanderMey, filed Jul. 27, 2016. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/456,235 by VanderMey, filed Mar. 10, 2017. |
Appeal Brief for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,048, Aug. 9, 2010, 20 pages. |
Assignment of Copyright to U.S.Appraisal by Flying Software, Inc., Jan. 2, 1982, 2 pages. |
Australian Examiner's First Report in Australian Patent Application 2007216858, dated Dec. 22, 2008, 2 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 1 Jan. 2002, 23 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 10, Oct. 2002, 34 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 11, Nov. 2002, 28 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 12, Dec. 2002, 14 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 2, Feb. 2002, 13 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 3, Mar. 2002, 21 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 4, Apr. 2002, 24 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 5, May 2002, 35 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 6, Jun. 2002, 19 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 7, Jul. 2002, 24 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 8, Aug. 2002, 17 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 9, Sep. 2002, 15 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 10, Issue 1-2, Jan.-Feb. 2011, 72 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 10, Issue 11-12, Nov.-Dec. 2011, 70 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 10, Issue 3-4, Mar.-Apr. 2011, 100 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 10, Issue 5-6, May-Jun. 2011, 106 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 10, Issue 7-8, Jul.-Aug. 2011, 82 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 10, Issue 9-10, Sep.-Oct. 2011, 90 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 11, Issue 1-2, Jan.-Feb. 2012, 66 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 11, Issue 3-4, Mar.-Apr. 2012, 76 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 11, Issue 5-6, May-Jun. 2012, 72 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 1, Jan. 2003, 24 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 10, Oct. 2003, 31 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 11, Nov. 2003, 28 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 12, Dec. 2003, 18 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 2, Feb. 2003, 26 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 3, Mar. 2003, 29 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 4, Apr. 2003, 22 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 5, May 2003, 33 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 6, Jun. 2003, 38 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 7, Jul. 2003, 31 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 8, Aug. 2003, 24 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 2, Issue 9, Sep. 2003, 30 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 1, Jan. 2004, 24 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 10, Oct. 2004, 55 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 11, Nov. 2004, 54 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 12, Dec. 2004, 18 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 2, Feb. 2004, 26 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 3, Mar. 2004, 31 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 4, Apr. 2004, 36 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 5, May 2004, 37 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 6, Jun. 2004, 35 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 7, Jul. 2004, 49 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 8, Aug. 2004, 37 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 3, Issue 9, Sep. 2004, 31 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 1, Jan. 2005, 45 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 10, Oct. 2005, 51 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 11, Nov. 2005, 52 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 12, Dec. 2005, 56 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 2, Feb. 2005, 31 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 3, Mar. 2005, 39 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 4, Apr. 2005, 40 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 5, May 2005, 51 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 6, Jun. 2005, 34 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 7, Jul. 2005, 53 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 8, Aug. 2005, 30 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 4, Issue 9, Sep. 2005, 48 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 1, Jan. 2006, 58 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 10, Oct. 2006, 85 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 11, Nov. 2006, 86 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 12, Dec. 2006, 54 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 2, Feb. 2006, 53 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 3, Mar. 2006, 41 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 4, Apr. 2006, 54 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 5, May 2006, 48 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 6, Jun. 2006, 62 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 7, Jul. 2006, 74 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 8, Aug. 2006, 57 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 5, Issue 9, Sep. 2006, 63 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6 Issue 3, Mar. 2007, 49 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6, Issue 1, Jan. 2007, 42 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6, Issue 10, Oct. 2007, 52 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6, Issue 11, Nov. 2007, 23 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6, Issue 2, Feb. 2007, 47 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6, Issue 4, Apr. 2007, 59 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6, Issue 5, May 2007, 66 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6, Issue 6, Dec. 2007, 38 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6, Issue 6, Jun. 2007, 46 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6, Issue 8, Aug. 2007, 35 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6, Issue 9, Sep. 2007, 37 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 6, Issue7, Jul. 2007, 51 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 7, Issue 07-08, Jul.-Aug. 2008, 56 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 7, Issue 1, Jan. 2008, 44 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 7, Issue 11-12, Nov.-Dec. 2008, 52 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 7, Issue 2, Feb. 2008, 35 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 7, Issue 3, Mar. 2008, 34 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 7, Issue 4, Apr. 2008, 33 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 7, Issue 4-5, May-Jun., 2008, 46 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 7, Issue 9-10, Sep.-Oct. 2008, 68 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 8, Issue 1-2, Jan.-Feb. 2009, 71 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 8, Issue 11-12, Nov.-Dec. 2009, 62 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 8, Issue 3-4, Mar.-Apr. 2009, 45 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 8, Issue 5-6, May-Jun. 2009, 65 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 8, Issue 7-8, Jul.-Aug. 2009, 71 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 8, Issue 9-10, Sep.-Oct. 2009, 53 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 9, Issue 1-2, Jan.-Feb. 2010, 66 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 9, Issue 11-12, Nov.-Dec. 2010, 75 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 9, Issue 3-4, Mar.-Apr. 2010, 63 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 9, Issue 5-6, May-Jun. 2010, 69 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 9, Issue 7-8, Jul.-Aug. 2010, 63 pages. |
AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 9, Issue 9-10, Sep.-Oct. 2010, 69 pages. |
Bailey, Martin J. et al., A Regression Method for Real Estate Price Index Construction, Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 58, No. 304 (Dec. 1963), Published by: American Statistical Association, Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2283324, pp. 933-942, 11 pages. |
Basch, Mark, “Basis100 Sold to California Firm,” The Florida Times Union, Jacksonville.com, Jul. 1, 2004, 2 pages. |
Bennett, Kristin P. et al.., “Support Vector Machines: Hype or Hallelujah?” SIGKDD Explorations, Dec. 2000, vol. 2, issue 2, ACM SIGKDD, 13 pages. |
Borst, Richard A. et al., “An Evaluation of Multiple Regression Analysis, Comparable Sales Analysis and Artificial Neural Networks for the Mass Appraisal of Residential Properties in Northern Ireland,” 1996, 16 pages. |
Borst, Richard A. et al., “Use of GIS to Establish and Update CAMA Neighborhoods in Northern Ireland,” Available prior to Sep. 1997, 9 pages. |
Borst, Richard A., “A Valuation and Value Updating of Geographically Diverse Commercial Properties Using Artificial Neural Networks,” 1993, 2 pages. |
Borst, Richard A., “Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal, a New Growth Industry in the United States,” Accessed from International Association of Assessing Officers Research and Technical Services Department, Document 00994, Dated no later than Jun. 8, 1979, 28 pages. |
Borst, Richard A., “The Common Thread in Market Data Systems,” World Congress on Computer-Assisted Valuation, Aug. 1-6, 1982, 14 pages. |
Boston Housing Data, http://www.ics.uci.edu/˜mlearn/databases/housing/housing.names, [accessed Dec. 13, 2005], 1 page. |
Breiman et al., “Random Forest,” Classification Description, http://www.stat.berkeley.edu/users/breiman/RandomForests/cc_home.htm, [accessed Dec. 13, 2005], pp. 1-28. |
Breiman, L., “Random Forests,” Machine Learning, 45, 2001, Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, pp. 5-32. |
Breiman, Leo et al., Random Forests, R Mathematical Software Package, licensed by Salford Systems, available at URL cran.r-project.org, and described at “Package TandomForest”, version 4.6-7, Feb. 15, 2013, Published Oct. 16, 2012, available at URL cran.r-project.org/web/packages/randomforest/randomForest.pdf., 29 pages. |
Calhoun, Charles A., “Property Valuation Methods and Data in the United States,” Housing Finance International Journal 16.2, Dec. 2001, pp. 12-23. |
Casa Property Valuation screen capture, dated at least by Jan. 24, 2005, 1 page. |
Case, Karl E., et al., “Prices of Single Family Homes Since 1970: New Indexes for Four Cities,” Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics at Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, Discussion Paper No. 851, Oct. 1987, 54 pages. |
CDR Business Solutions, LLC, What is RELAR, <http://www.relar.com/relarsystem.aspx> Aug. 24, 2011, Archived by Internet Wayback Machine <http://web.archive.org/web/20110824084613/http://www.relarcom/relarsystem.aspx> viewed Aug. 20, 2015, pp. 1-4. |
Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Lund University, “Classification and Regression with Random Forest,” http://web.archive.org/web/20060205051957/http://www.maths.lth.se/help/R/.R/library/randomForest/html/randomForest.html, [internet archive date: Feb. 5, 2006], pp. 1-4. |
Complaint for Patent Infringement, Demand for Jury Trial for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case 2:12-cv-01549-JLR, Sep. 12, 2012, 8 pages. |
Cozzi, Guy, Real Estate Appraising from A to Z, 4th Edition, Nemmar Real Estate Training, Jan. 1, 2002, 226 pages, Parts 1-2. |
Crowston, Kevin, et al., “Real Estate War in Cyberspace: an Emerging Electronic Market?,” Syracuse University Surface, School of Information Studies (iSchool), Jan. 1, 1999, 14 pages. |
Curriculum Vitae of Steven R. Kursh, Ph.D., CSDP, CLP, Aug. 2013, 9 pages. |
Cypress Software Introduces AVM Module for Mark IV Application; Module Provides Instant Home Appraisal for Loans Processed by the Loan-Decisioning Platform, Business Wire, Nov. 15, 2005, 2 pages. |
Decision—Institution of Covered Business Method Patent Review for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case CBM2013-00056, Entered Mar. 10, 2014, 36 pages. |
Decision—Institution of Inter Partes Review for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Apr. 2, 2013, 28 pages. |
Decision on Appeal for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,048, dated Oct. 19, 2012, 7 pages. |
Decision on Request for Rehearing for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Apr. 22, 2013, 5 pages. |
Declaration Brooke A.M. Taylor in Support of Plaintiff Vasudevan Software, Inc.'s Motion for Sanctions Against Microstrategy, Case No. 3:11-06637-RS-PSG, Nov. 20, 2012, 3 pages. |
Declaration of Dr. Richard Borst, Aug. 26, 2013, 43 pages. |
Declaration of John Kilpatrick, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Jun. 14, 2013, 23 pages. |
Declaration of Jordan Connors in Support of Plaintiff Vasudevan Software, Inc.'s Motion for Sanctions Against Microstraqtegy, Case No. 3:11-06637-RS-PSG, Nov. 20, 2012, 4 pages. |
Declaration of Leslie V. Payne in Support of Plaintiff Vasudevan Software, Inc.'s Motion for Sanctions Against Microstrategy, Case No. 3:11-06637-RS-PSG, Nov. 20, 2012, 3 pages. |
Declaration of Steven R. Kursh, Ph.D., CSDP, CLP, CBM 2013-00056, Filed Sep. 11, 2013, 108 pages. |
Declaration of Steven R. Kursh, Ph.D., CSDP, CLP, CBM2014-00115, Filed Apr. 10, 2014, 108 pages. |
Defendant Trulia, Inc.'s Answer to Complaint for Patent Infringement and Counterclaim, Demand for Jury Trial, Case No. 2:12-cv-01549-JLR, Mar. 1, 2013, 10 pages. |
Defendant Trulia, Inc.'s Non-Infringement and Invalidity Contentions, Case No. 2:12-cv-01549-JLR, Jun. 21, 2013, 24 pages. |
Defendant Trulia, Inc.'s Non-Infringement and Invalidity Contentions, Exhibit A, Case No. 2:12-cv-01549-JLR, Jun. 21, 2013, 267 pages. |
Dempster, A.P. et al., “Maximum Likelihood from Incomplete Data via the Algorithm,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 1977, Series B 39 (1): 1-38, JSTOR 2984875, MR 0501537, [online], Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2984875?origin=JSTOR-pdf, 38 pages. |
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, “How to Depreciate Property,” Publication 946, made available at www.irs.gov by dated at least 2004, 112 pages. |
Deposition Transcription of John A. Kilpatrick, Ph.D., Aug. 8, 2013, 263 pages. |
European Examination Report, Application No. 07018380.1, dated May 16, 2013, 6 pages. |
European Examination Report, Application No. 07018380.1, dated Oct. 24, 2008, 6 pages. |
European Examination Report, Application No. 07018380.1, dated Nov. 8, 2012, 6 pages. |
Evaluation Services, Inc. Warranty to Lender's Service, Inc., dated at least by Feb. 12, 1997, 144 pages. |
Evans, Blanche, “Microsoft HomeAdvisor: Software Giant, Real Estate Portal,” Realty Times, Mar. 30, 2000, 3 pages. |
Evans, Blanche, The Hottest E-careers in Real Estate, Dearborn Financial Publishing Inc., 2000, 241 pages. |
Examiner's Answer for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,048, dated Oct. 28, 2010, 13 pages. |
Fannie Mae Form 2055, Federal National Mortgage Association [online], Mar. 2005, Retrieved from the Internet: URL: https://www.fanniemae.com/content/guide_form/2055.pdf, 8 pages. |
Fannie Mae Form 2075, Desktop Underwriter Property Inspection Report, Federal National Mortgage Association [online], not dated, Retrieved from the Internet: URL: https://www.fanniemae.com/content/guide_form/2075.pdf, 3 pages. |
Feldman, David et al., “Mortgage Default: Classification Trees Analysis,” The Pinhas Sapir Center for Development Tel-Aviv University, Discussion Paper No. Mar. 2003, Oct. 2003, 46 pages. |
FHFA, “Distress-Free House Price Indexes.” https://www.fhfa.gov/DataTools/Downloads/Documents/HPI_Focus_Pieces/2012Q2_HPI_N508.pdf. Jul. 13, 2014. |
File History of U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, dated Feb. 3, 2006-Apr. 2, 2013, 404 pages, Parts 1-4. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,000, dated Jan. 3, 2012, 17 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,024, dated Feb. 3, 2011, 28 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,047, dated Jul. 23, 2010, 7 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,047, dated Sep. 28, 2012, 8 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,047, dated Jun. 12, 2015, 31 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,048, dated Dec. 8, 2009, 11 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,480, dated Feb. 19, 2014, 31 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,480, dated Jul. 10, 2015, 35 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,490, dated Mar. 14, 2013, 35 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,490, dated May 7, 2015, 36 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/417,804, dated Aug. 13, 2014, 14 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/943,604, dated Mar. 6, 2015, 28 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/167,962, dated Sep. 30, 2015, 13 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/191,388, dated Dec. 15, 2014, 12 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/318,536, dated Dec. 11, 2014, 47 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/927,623, dated Sep. 19, 2011, 13 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/927,623, dated Nov. 3, 2016, 15 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037, dated May 16, 2013, 11 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037, dated Jun. 16, 2015, 19 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,490, dated Mar. 29, 2017, 7 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/417,804, dated Oct. 14, 2015, 11 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/828,680, dated Jul. 26, 2016, 59 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/843,577, dated Mar. 22, 2016, 63 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/078,076, dated Feb. 26, 2016, 21 pages. |
Final Written Decision for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case IPR2013-00034, Entered Mar. 27, 2014, 44 pages. |
Finkelstein, Brad, “PlatinumData Improving Value of Its Information,” Origination News and SourceMedia, Inc., vol. 15, Section: Special Report, Section:2, Nov. 1, 2005, 2 pages. |
First American Real Estate Solutions Releases ValuePoint4, AVM News, Thomson Media, vol. 1, Issue 10, Oct. 2002, pp. 28-29. |
Fletcher, June, “High-Tech Is Coming for High-End House Sales,” Wall Street Journal, Sep. 19, 1997, 1 page. |
Fletcher, June, “On the Web: What's Your House Worth?,” Wall Street Journal, Sep. 26, 1997, 1 page. |
Fletcher, Jun., “Touring the Tangled Web of For-Sale-by-Owner Homes,” The Wall Street Journal, Jun. 6, 1997, 1 page. |
Freddie Mac Form 70, Uniform Residential Appraisal Report, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation [online], Mar. 2005, Retrieved from the Internet: URL: https://www.fanniemae.com/content/guide_form/1004.pdf, 8 pages. |
Freddie Mac's Home Value Explorer screen capture, dated at least by Jul. 15, 2003, 1 page. |
Google, Google Trends, retrieved from the internet Oct. 12, 2015 <http://www.google.com/trends> (website address only—No document). |
Great Britain Examination Report in Application No. GB0701944.1, dated May 5, 2010, 3 pages. |
Great Britain Search Report for GB0701944.1, dated Mar. 23, 2007, 3 pages. |
Hill, T. and Lewicki, P., “K-Nearest Neighbors,” Statistics Methods and Applications, 2007, http://www.statsoft.com/textbook/stknn.html, [internet accessed on [Dec. 6, 2007], 5 pages. |
Hochgraf, Lisa, “Tools for Top Speed,” Credit Union Management, vol. 26, Issue 8, Aug. 1, 2003, 4 pages. |
HomeSearch Report, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Dec. 10, 2005 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://homesmartreports.com/samples/samplehomesearch.htm, 3 pages. |
HomeSmart About, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Dec. 10, 2005 http://homesmartreports.com/hs_about.htm, 2 pages. |
HomeSmart Reports, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Dec. 10, 2005 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://homesmartreports.com/default.aspx, 1 page. |
HomeSmart Sellers, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Dec. 10, 2005 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://homesmartreports.com/hs_owners.htm, 1 page. |
HomeSmart Terms of Use, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Dec. 10, 2005 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://homesmartreports.com/hs_disclaimer.htm, 3 pages. |
HomeSmartReports, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Oct. 13, 2005 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://homesmartreports.com/, 2 pages. |
Indeed, Job Trends: Podcast, retrieved from the internet Oct. 12, 2015 <http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends> (website only—No document). |
Infinite Regression, Certificate of Copyright Registration Filing, Apr. 2, 1984, 3 pages. |
Inman, “Zilpy, the new ‘Z’ site in online real estate”, published Feb. 7, 2008, retrieved from http://www.inman.com/2008/02/07/zilpy-new-z-site-in-online-real-estate/ on Aug. 11, 2016, 2 pages. |
Jensen, David L., “Alternative Modeling Techniques in Computer-Assisted Mass Appraisal,” Property Tax Journal, vol. 6, No. 3, Sep. 1987, pp. 193-237. |
Jobster, Job Search Trends for Keywords and Locations, retrieved from the internet Oct. 12, 2015 <http://www.jobster.com/find/US/jon/search/trends> (website only—No document). |
John Battelle's Searchblog,: The Database of Intentions, Nov. 13, 2003. |
Kilpatrick, John A., “The Future of Real Estate Information,” Real Estate Issues, Spring 2001, 8 pages. |
Kilpatrick, John A., et al., “House Price Impacts of School District Choice,” South Carolina Center for Applied Real Estate Education and Research, Dec. 28, 1998, 25 pages. |
Krasilovsky, Peter, “Chris Terrill Discusses ServiceMagic's Rebranding to ‘Home Advisor,’” Home Advisor, Oct. 17, 2012, 5 pages. |
Lankarge, Vicki, et al., How to Increase the Value of Your Home: Simple, Budget-Conscious Techniques and Ideas That Will Make Your Home Worth Up to $100,000 More!, McGraw-Hill, 2004, 176 pages. |
Leonhardt, David, The Internet Knows What You'll Do Next, Jul. 5, 2006, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/business/05leonhardt.html?ex=1309752000&en=8be0be92819a6f8f&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss. |
McCluskey, William J. et al., “An Evaluation of Mra, Comparable Sales Analysis, and ANNs for the Mass Appraisal of Residential Properties in Northern Ireland,” Assessment Journal, Jan./Feb. 1997, 8 pages. |
Mcgarity, M., “The Values Debate,” Mortgage Banking, vol. 65, Issue 6, Mar. 1, 2005, 14 pages. |
McWilliams, Charlyne H., “The Tale of AVMs,” Mortgage Banking, vol. 64, Issue 5, Feb. 1, 2004, 7 pages. |
Melville, J., “How much should I charge to rent my house?”, published Dec. 5, 2010, retrieved from http://homeguides.sfgate.com/much-should-charge-rent-house-8314.html on Aug. 11, 2016, 2 pages. |
Meyer, Robert T., “The Learning of Multiattribute Judgment Policies,” The Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 14, No. 2, Sep. 1987, 20 pages. |
Microstrategy Inc.'s Opposition to Plaintiff Vasudevan Software, Inc.'s Motion for Sanctions, Case No. 11-CV-06637-RS-PSG, Jan. 4, 2013, 23 pages. |
Miller et al., A Note on Leading Indicators of Housing Market Price Trends, vol. 1, No. 1, 1986. |
Miller et al., Multiple Regression Condominium Valuation with a Touch of Behavioral Theory, The Appraisal Journal 1987. |
Miller et al., Pricing Strategies and Residential Property Selling Prices, The Journal of Real Estate Research, vol. 2, No. 1, Nov. 1, 1987. |
Miller et al., The Impact of Interest Rates and Employment on Nominal Housing Prices, International Real Estate Review, vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 26-42, 2005. |
Mobasher B. “Classification Via Decision Trees in WEKA,” DePaul University, Computer Science, Telecommunications, and Information Systems, ECT 584—Web Data Mining, 2005, http://maya.cs.depaul.edu/˜classes/Ect584/WEKA/classify.html, [internet accessed on Dec. 6, 2007], 5 pages. |
Morton, T. Gregory, Regression Analysis Appraisal Models: Selected Topics and Issues, Center for Real Estate and Urban Economic Studies, University of Connecticut, Real Estate Report: No. 19, Oct. 1976, 85 pages. |
Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission and Exhibit a for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Filing Date Dec. 17, 2012, 13 pages. |
MRMLS Realist Tax System Foreclosure User Guide, crmls.org/help/realist_manuals/realist_foreclosure.pdf. Oct. 30, 2007. |
MSN House & Home—More Useful Everyday screen capture, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Mar. 23, 2003 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20030323183505/http://houseandhome.msn.com/, 2 pages. |
Mullaney, Timothy J., “A new Home Site on the Block,” Bloomberg Businessweek [online], Feb. 7, 2006, Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2006-02-07/a-new-home-site-on-the-block, 3 pages. |
Munarriz, Rick A., “Pop Goes the Bubble,” The Motley Fool, Fool.com [online] Feb. 14, 2006, Retrieved from the Internet; URL: http://www.fool.com/investing/small-cap/2006/02/14/pop-goes-the-bubble.aspx, 4 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,047, dated May 7, 2012, 7 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,047, dated Nov. 4, 2013, 8 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,480, dated Oct. 24, 2013, 29 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,000, dated Oct. 27, 2010, 23 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,000, dated Nov. 23, 2012, 6 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,000, dated Apr. 9, 2010, 18 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,000, dated May 27, 2011, 13 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,024, dated Dec. 10, 2009, 45 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,024, dated May 13, 2010, 33 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,047, dated Dec. 1, 2014, 26 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,047, dated Oct. 28, 2009, 8 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,047, dated Jul. 8, 2011, 7 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,048, dated Apr. 29, 2009, 10 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/927,623, dated Jan. 11, 2016, 13 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/927,623, dated Dec. 28, 2010, 10 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/971,758, dated Feb. 2, 2011, 22 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,480, dated Jul. 17, 2014, 31 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,480, dated Mar. 12, 2015, 32 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,490, dated Jan. 14, 2016, 18 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,490, dated Dec. 17, 2014, 30 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,490, dated Oct. 11, 2012, 30 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/417,804, dated Jan. 28, 2015, 12 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/417,804, dated Feb. 26, 2014, 13 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/828,680, dated Dec. 15, 2015, 42 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/830,497, dated Sep. 14, 2016, 52 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/843,577, dated Sep. 24, 2015, 50 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/843,577, dated Dec. 19, 2016, 80 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/943,604, dated Nov. 19, 2014, 24 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/078,076, dated Oct. 19, 2016, 29 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/167,962, dated Mar. 3, 2015, 26 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/167,962, dated Oct. 31, 2014, 23 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/191,388, dated Aug. 7, 2014, 5 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/318,536, dated Aug. 8, 2014, 38 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037, dated Nov. 17, 2014, 13 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037, dated Jan. 10, 2013, 9 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037, dated Nov. 10, 2016, 19 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037, dated May 27, 2014, 14 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,480, dated Aug. 17, 2016, 40 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,490, dated Jul. 22, 2016, 11 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/041,450, dated Aug. 18, 2016, 48 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/078,076, dated Aug. 14, 2015, 15 pages. |
Notice of Allowability and Examiner-Initiated Interview Summary for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,048, dated Jul. 3, 2013, 11 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,024, dated Apr. 18, 2011, 7 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,048, dated Feb. 25, 2013, 14 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 11/971,758, dated Nov. 10, 2011, 12 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,000, dated Oct. 24, 2013, 12 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,048, dated Jul. 18, 2013, 10 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 13/417,804, dated Aug. 18, 2016, 15 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/191,388, dated Jun. 25, 2014, 9 pages. |
Notice of Appeal for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case IPR2013-00034, May 1, 2014, 5 pages. |
O'Brien, Jeffrey M., “What's Your House Really Worth?,” Fortune [online], Feb. 15, 2007, Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/02/19/8400262/index.htm, 6 pages. |
Oldham, Jennifer, “Pricing's Tangled Web, Consumers Using the Internet to Calculate Home Values Find that the Results—and Data They're Based on—Vary,” Los Angeles Times, Jul. 30, 2000, 5 pages. |
One-month Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,000, dated Jul. 26, 2013, 6 pages. |
Oral Hearing Petitioner Demonstratives, Patent 7,970,674, Case IPR2013-00034, Email Date Nov. 14, 2013, 85 pages. |
Oral Hearing Transcript for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case IPR2013-00034, Held Nov. 21, 2013, Entered Feb. 20, 2014, 96 pages. |
Order Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Filing Date Jan. 3, 2013, 4 pages. |
Pagourtzi, E. et al., “Real Estate Appraisal: A Review of Valuation Methods,” Journal of Property Investment & Finance, vol. 21, No. 4, 2003, pp. 383-401. |
Palmquist, Raymond B., “Alternative Techniques for Developing Real Estate Price Indexes,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 62, No. 3 (Aug. 1980), pp. 442-448. |
Pass screen capture, dated at least by Oct. 20, 2004, 1 page. |
Patent Owner's Demonstrative Exhibit for Oral Hearing, Patent 7,970,674, Case IPR2013-00034, Exhibit 2023, Email Date Nov. 21, 2013, 56 pages. |
Patent Owner's Observations on Cross Examination of Dr. Richard A. Borst, Ph.D., U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case IPR2013-00034, Oct. 10, 2013, 9 pages. |
Patent Owner's Response to Revised Petition for Inter Partes Review for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Jun. 14, 2013, 41 pages. |
Patent Owner's Response to the Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. CBM2013-00056, Jun. 20, 2014, 72 pages. |
Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, CBM2013-00056, Sep. 11, 2013, 87 pages. |
Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, CBM2014-00115, Apr. 10, 2014, 69 pages. |
Petition for Inter Partes Review for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Mail Date Oct. 26, 2012, 65 pages. |
Petitioner Response to Patent Owner's Observations on Cross Examination of Dr. Richard A. Borst, Ph.D., Patent 7,970,674, Case IPR2013-00034, Oct. 24, 2013, 7 pages. |
Petitioner's Reply to Patent Owner Response to Petition, U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Aug. 26, 2013, 20 pages. |
Plaintiff Vasudevan Software, Inc.'s Notice of Motion and Motion for Sanctions Against Microstrategy, Case No. 3:11-06637-RS-PSG, Dec. 12, 2012, 23 pages. |
Plaintiff Vasudevan Software, Inc.'s Reply in Support of Motion for Sanctions Against Microstrategy, Case No. 3:11-06637-RS-PSG, Jan. 24, 2013, 25 pages. |
Potharst, R. et al., “Classification Trees for Problems with Monotonicity Constraints,” ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter 4.1, 2002, pp. 1-10. |
Potharst, R. et al., “Classification Trees for Problems with Monotonicity Constraints,” ERIM Report Series Research in Management, Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Apr. 2002, 39 pages. |
PowerBase 6.0 screen capture, dated at least by Oct. 20, 2004, 1 page. |
Prasad, Nalini et al., “Measuring Housing Price Growth—Using Stratification to Improve Median-based Measures”, Reserve Bank of Australia, 2006, p. 1. |
Preliminary Patent Owner Response and Exhibits for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Feb. 15, 2013, 228 pages. |
Preliminary Patent Owner Response for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. CBM2013-00056, Dec. 18, 2013, 85 pages. |
Preliminary Patent Owner Response for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Feb. 15, 2013, 39 pages. |
Quinlan, Ross J., “C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning,” Machine Learning, 1993, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, CA, USA., 302 pages. Book to be mailed to USPTO. |
Quirk, B., “Zilpy.com launches a rental data website built in partnership with Zillow!!!”, published Jan. 29, 2008, retrieved from http://www.propertymanagementmavens.com/archives/2008/1 on Aug. 11, 2016, 3 pages. |
Real Info Inc., Relar Sample Report, <http://www.real-info.com/products_RELAR.asp> Aug. 18, 2010, Archived by Internet Wayback Machine <http://web.archive.org/web/20100818012252/http://www.real-info.com/products_RELAR.asp> viewed Aug. 24, 2015, pp. 1-4. |
Real-info.com, “What is an AVM,” www.real-info.com/products_avm.asp? Internet Archive Date: Oct. 30, 2005, [accessed Mar. 21, 2007], 5 pages. |
RealEstateABC.com, see paragraph headed “How do I make the estimate more accurate?” www.realestateabc.com/home-values/ <http://www.realestateabc.com/home-values/>, Internet Archive Dated: Apr. 5, 2006, [accessed Mar. 20, 2007], 4 pages. |
RealQuest.com screen capture, dated at least by Dec. 12, 2002, 1 page. |
RealQuest.com screen capture, dated at least by Oct. 20, 2004, 1 page. |
RealQuest.com ValuePoint R4 Report screen capture, dated at least by Sep. 30, 2002, 1 page. |
RealQuest.com Vector screen capture, dated at least by Oct. 20, 2004, 1 page. |
Redfin, https://web.archive.org/web/20060907212454/http :/ /www .redfin.com/stingray/do/terms-ofuse?rt=fn-tl, Wayback Machine Sep. 7, 2006. |
Reis SE 2.0 User Guide Book, Reis, 2004, 40 pages. |
Reis SE 2.0 User Guide Book, Reis, 2005, 37 pages. |
Reis Valuation and Credit Risk Analysis Module Overview, [online], Sep. 18, 2003, Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Sep. 19, 2003 on Jun. 17, 2013, URL: http://www.reiscom/valuation/valuationOverview.cfm, 2 pages. |
Replacement Demonstrative Exhibit for Oral Hearing, U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case IPR2013-00034, File Date Nov. 21, 2013, 83 pages. |
Replacement Patent Owner's Demonstrative Exhibit for Oral Hearing, U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case IPR2013-00034, File Date Nov. 21, 2013, 36 pages. |
Reply Brief for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,048, dated Dec. 22, 2010, 6 pages. |
Request for Rehearing for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Apr. 16, 2013, 8 pages. |
Requirement Under Rule 105 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/927,623, dated Jul. 2, 2014, 4 pages. |
Response to Decision on Appeal for U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,048, Dec. 19, 2012, 7 pages. |
Response to Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/347,024, dated Mar. 4, 2011, 17 pages. |
Revised Petition for Inter Partes Review for U.S. Pat. No. 7,970,674, Case No. IPR2013-00034, Mail Date Nov. 13, 2012, 55 pages. |
Rossini, Peter, “Using Expert Systems and Artificial Intelligence for Real Estate Forecasting,” Sixth Annual Pacific-Rim Real Estate Society Conference, Sydney, Australia, Jan. 24-27, 2000, 10 pages. |
Rye, Owen E., “A Multiple Criteria Analysis Model for Real Estate Evaluation,” Journal of Global Optimization 12.2, Mar. 1998, pp. 197-214. |
Rye, Owen E., “Automated Property Assessment,” Transactions of the American Association of Cost Engineers, Nov. 2004, pp. 28-32. |
Sample Appraisal Report of a Single-Family Residence, U.S.Appraisal, Sep. 15, 1982, 16 pages. |
Sample HomeSmart Value Report, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Dec. 10, 2005 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://homesmartreports.com/samples/samplevaluation.htm, 4 pages. |
Sample Residential Appraisal Report, U.S.Appraisal, Jul. 16, 1982, 2 pages. |
Second Office Action in Chinese Patent Application No. 200710306194.8, dated Apr. 1, 2010, 9 pages, english translation. |
Simons, R. A., “Chapter 6: Valuation of Impaired Property,” When Bad Things Happen to Good Property, Throupe, R. et al., Environmental Law Institute, May 2006, 30 pages. |
Software Referral Agreement with Sole Source Provision between Sperry Corporation and U.S.Appraisal, May 1985, 47 pages. |
Standard & Poors, “Guidelines for the use of Automated Valuation Models for U.K. RMBS Transactions,” http://www.rics.org/NR/rdonlyres/8Fcdd20c-7FAC-4549-86FB-3930CD0CBC05/0/StandardandPoorsReportonAVMs.pdf, Published Feb. 20, 2004, 4 pages. |
StatSoft, Inc., “Classification Trees,” http://www.statsoft.com/textbook/stclatre.html, ã1984-2003 [accessed Dec. 13, 2005], pp. 1-20. |
Svetnik et al., “Random Forest: A Classification and Regression Tool for Compound Classification and QSAR Modeling”, J Chem Info. Computer Science, vol. 43, 2003, pp. 1947-1958. |
System Operations Manual for “The Research Assistant”, Evaluation Services, Inc., Feb. 12, 1997, 92 pages. |
System Operations Manual, “The Research Assistant”, Database Valuation Version, Evaluation Services, Inc., Feb. 12, 1997, 35 pages. |
Tay et al., “Artificial Intelligence and the Mass Appraisal of Residential Apartments,” Journal of Property Valuation and Investment, Feb. 1, 1992, 17 pages. |
The Assessor, A Computerized Assessment System, Ncr Corporation, 1986, 6 pages. |
The MicroAppraisal, Certificate of Copyright Registration, Feb. 2, 1984, 2 pages. |
Transcript of Deposition of R. A. Borst, Ph. D., Case IPR2013-00034 (JL), Transcribed Sep. 19, 2013, 177 pages. |
Transcript of Proceedings in Case No. C 11-06637 RS, Jan. 24, 2013, 24 pages. |
U.S. Appraisal Business Plan, dated at least since Aug. 1, 1985, 30 pages. |
U.S. Appraisal Offering Memorandum, Sep. 12, 1984, 66 pages. |
US. Appraisal Profit and Loss Proforma, dated at least since Aug. 1, 1985, 38 pages. |
Valuation Reports, Schedule A, U.S. Appraisal, dated at least by Nov. 1, 1986, 6 pages. |
Valuations, Claims Cross Engines, Inman News Features, Dec. 10, 2002, 1 page. |
ValuePoint4 Report; File No. 04040103629, Apr. 12, 2004, 3 pages. |
Vapnik et al., “Support-Vector Networks,” Machine Learning, vol. 20, 1995, 25 pages. |
VeroValue screen capture, dated at least by Sep. 30, 2004, 1 page. |
Visual PAMSPro 2000, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Mar. 4, 2001 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://www.visualpamspro.com/prod01.htm, 2 pages. |
Visual PAMSPro Custom Add Ins, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Mar. 5, 2001 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://www.visualpamspro.com/serv04.htm, 2 pages. |
Visual PAMSPro Downloads, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Mar. 2, 2001 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://www.visualpamspro.com/download.htm, 1 page. |
Visual PAMSPro Home, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Mar. 2, 2001 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://www.visualpamspro.com/, 1 page. |
Visual PAMSPro News, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Mar. 2, 2001 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://www.visualpamspro.com/news.htm, 2 pages. |
Visual PAMSPro Products, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Mar. 2, 2001 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://www.visualpamspro.com/products.htm, 1 page. |
Visual PAMSPro Real Estate Appraisal Software, Appraisal Software Real Estate, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Sep. 2, 2001 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://www.visualpamspro.com/prodvpp2.htm, 6 pages. |
Visual PAMSPro Tips and Tricks, [online], Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Mar. 2, 2001 on Jun. 19, 2013, URL: http://www.visualpamspro.com/Tips- Tricks.htm, 1 page. |
Wikipedia, Expectation-maximization Algorithm, [online] Retrieved from the Internet via the Wayback Machine dated Dec. 21, 2013 on Feb. 28, 2014, URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expectation%E2%80%93maximization_algorithm, 13 pages. |
Wikipedia, Survival Analysis, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_analysis> Oct. 16, 2011, Archived by Internet Wayback Machine <http://web.archive.org/web/20111016061152/http:/!en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_analysis>, viewed Aug. 28, 2015, pp. 1-5. |
Zillow.com, Quarterly Report 2Q 2006, A Review of the San Francisco Real Estate Market. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/125,318 of Humphries et al., filed Sep. 7, 2018. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/129,282 of Humphries et al., filed Sep. 12, 2018. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/721,437, dated Nov. 9, 2018, 84 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/709,719, dated Aug. 3, 2018, 27 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/640,860, dated Oct. 23, 2018, 85 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037, dated Nov. 7, 2018, 10 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/843,577, dated Aug. 30, 2018, 63 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,490, dated Dec. 5, 2018, 6 pages. |
Readyratios.com, “Cost Approach to Value,” https://www.readyratios.com/reference/appraisal/cost_approach_to_value.html, archived on Jul. 16, 2013, https://web.archive.org/web/20130716153950/https:www.readyratios.com/reference/appraisal/cost_approach_tovalue.html, viewed Oct. 30, 2018, p. 1. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,480, dated Dec. 14, 2018, 35 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/325,094, dated Dec. 18, 2018, 95 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/846,632, dated Dec. 26, 2018, 13 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/996,787 of VanderMey, filed Jun. 4, 2018. |
Archer, W.R. et al., “Measuring the Importance of Location in House Price Appreciation”, J. of Urban Economics, vol. 40, 1996, pp. 334-353, accessible at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119096900364 (accessed Feb. 26, 2018). (Year: 1996). |
Campbell, “Forced Sales and House Prices”, 101 American Economic Review 2108, pp. 2108-2131, Aug. 2011. |
Clauretie, “Estimating the House Foreclosure Discount Corrected for Spatial Price Interdependence and Endogeneity of Marketing Time”, 37 Real Estate Economics 43, pp. 44-48, 2009. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/041,450, dated Jun. 29, 2018, 14 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/704,567, dated May 1, 2018, 24 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037, dated Jun. 7, 2018, 19 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/325,094, dated Jun. 5, 2018, 81 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/524,148, dated Jul. 19, 2018, 54 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/828,680, dated Jul. 11, 2018, 59 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/846,632, dated Jun. 11, 2018, 16 pages. |
Gelfand, A.E. et al., “The Dynamics of Location in Home Price,” J. of Real Estate Fin. and Econ., vol. 29:2, 2004, pp. 149-166, accessible at https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1023%2FB%3AREAL.0000035308.15346.0a.pdf (accessed Feb. 26, 2018). (Year: 2004). |
Humphries, S., “Foreclosure Liquidations Abate in the Fourth Quarter But at the Expense of Number of Homes Underwater,” Zillow Research, Feb. 8, 2011, 3 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,480, dated May 2, 2018, 51 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/927,623, dated Mar. 26, 2018, 15 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/640,860, dated Mar. 7, 2018, 141 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/830,497, dated Apr. 12, 2018, 48 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,490, dated May 22, 2018, 8 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/167,962, dated Apr. 9, 2018, 11 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/167,962, dated May 14, 2018, 8 pages. |
Quercia, R.G. et al., “Spatio-Temporal Measurement of House Price Appreciation in Underserved Areas,” J. of Housing Research, vol. 11, 2000, available at https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3a44/ddfbc508t61f8952d7e440c37cfdfat441 ba.pdf (accessed Feb. 26, 2018). (Year: 2000). |
Roth, JD, “Is it Better to Rent or to Buy?” Time Business, Dec. 3, 2012, 2 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/698,276 of Humphries et al., filed Sep. 7, 2017. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/715,098 of Moghimi, filed Sep. 25, 2017. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/789,617 of VanderMey, filed Oct. 20, 2017. |
Beracha, E., et al., “The Rent versus Buy Decision: Investigating the Needed Property Appreciation Rates to be Indifferent between Renting and Buying Property.” Journal of Real Estate Practice and Education, 15(2), 71-88. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037, dated Jul. 19, 2017, 25 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/078,076, dated Jul. 27, 2017, 32 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/167,962, dated Nov. 9, 2017, 23 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,480, dated Jun. 12, 2017, 55 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/830,497, dated Jun. 8, 2017, 57 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/843,577, dated Oct. 6, 2017, 83 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/041,450, dated Apr. 6, 2017, 47 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/041,450, dated Nov. 16, 2017, 11 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/704,567, dated Dec. 7, 2017, 19 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037, dated Jan. 10, 2018, 17 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,490, dated Jan. 24, 2018, 8 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/828,680, dated Nov. 16, 2017, 47 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/325,094, dated Oct. 31, 2017, 69 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/524,148, dated Dec. 15, 2017, 27 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/721,437, dated Dec. 18, 2017, 53 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/846,632, dated Jan. 16, 2018, 9 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/927,623, dated Oct. 6, 2017, 15 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/167,962, dated Apr. 6, 2017, 22 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/709,719, dated Jan. 31, 2018, 11 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/235,009 for Humphries, filed Dec. 28, 2018. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/041,450, dated Jan. 8, 2019, 23 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/325,094, dated Jun. 7, 2019, 58 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/927,623, dated Jun. 14, 2019, 18 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/704,567, dated Apr. 1, 2019, 29 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/828,680, dated Jul. 1, 2019, 63 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/709,719, dated Jun. 3, 2019, 29 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 12/924,037, dated Apr. 24, 2019, 11 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 13/044,480, dated Jun. 26, 2019, 17 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/449,210 for Flint et al., filed Jun. 21, 2019. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/041,450, dated Sep. 24, 2019, 22 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/846,632, dated Aug. 6, 2019, 16 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/640,860, dated Sep. 6, 2019, 83 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/721,437, dated Aug. 22, 2019, 84 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/698,276, dated Oct. 16, 2019, 34 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/704,567, dated Oct. 15, 2019, 17 pages. |
Eamer, M., “ZipRealty and Redfin Integrate with Zillow's API,” via the Wayback Machine as published on Oct. 23, 2006. |
Gudell, Svenja, “One More Advance in Creating a Better Price-to-Rent Ratio”, retrieved from the Internet, URL: https://www.zillow.com/research/one-more-advance-in-creating-a-better-price-to-rent-ratio-2968, Jul. 27, 2012, 4 pages. |
Kottle, M.L., Zillow traffic up after shift; site known for real estate prices decided to add for-sale listings. San Francisco Chronicle. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/927,623, dated Nov. 5, 2019, 18 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/325,094, dated Nov. 4, 2019, 58 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/524,148, dated Nov. 1, 2019, 44 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/457,390 for Shahbazi et al., filed Jun. 28, 2019. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/665,426 for Humphries et al., filed Oct. 28, 2019. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/698,276, dated Apr. 9, 2020, Examiner C.E. Zelaskiewicz, 32 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/828,680, dated Jan. 3, 2020, Examiner E.L. Pratt, 60 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/325,094, date Apr. 22, 2020, Examiner G. Araque, Jr., 53 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/524,148, dated Mar. 9, 2020, Examiner J.H. Austin, 62 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/640,860, dated Apr. 14, 2020, Examiner P. McAtee, 85 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/709,719, dated Dec. 2, 2019, Examiner A.K. Robinson, 35 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/721,437, dated Apr. 16, 2020, Examiner M.C. Young, 103 pages. |
Mikhed, V., et al., “Testing for Bubbles in Housing Markets: A Panel Data Approach,” the Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, vol. 38, 2007, pp. 366-386. |
Nazerzadeh, H., “Internet Advertising: Optimization and Economic Aspects,” Stanford University, 2009, 6 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/846,632, dated Nov. 29, 2019, Examiner K.S. Campen, 24 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/789,617, dated Mar. 26, 2020, Examiner W.B. Bunker, 37 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/125,318, dated Mar. 13, 2020, Examiner H. Tran, 20 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/235,009, dated Jan. 24, 2020, Examiner K. Gills, 18 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/704,567, dated Jun. 25, 2020, Examiner M.L. Hamilton, 17 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/078,076, dated Apr. 10, 2020, Examiner T.H. Dang, 9 pages. |
Remodeling Magazine, Remodeling Cost vs Value Report 2006, Hanley Wood LLC, pp. 1-6. |
Turner, J., “Ad Slotting and Pricing: New Media Planning Models for New Media,” Carnegie Mellon University, Apr. 23, 2010, 132 pages. |
Chen, T. et al., “XGBoost: Reliable Large-scale Tree Boosting System,” University of Washington, 2015, 6 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62300054 | Feb 2016 | US |