The present invention relates generally to the field of travel search sites, and more specifically, describes an improved global distribution system (GDS) capable of more efficiently processing end-user travel search requests.
The proliferation of travel search sites in the recent years has changed the way travelers research and book travel solutions. Travel search sites include a variety of specialized websites easily accessible over the Internet, the world network, through its most spread application: the world-wide-web or Web. Indeed, more and more travelers are now booking travel products online. However, end-users of those websites well know they have no guarantee of finding the cheapest air fares, hotel rooms and other travel products they are looking for if they only consult a single website. Indeed, no single site has presently the capability of exploring all possible solutions in response to a particular travel request. All have their own limitations, e.g., they do not consider all airlines or all hotel chains when searching to be able to return a response in an acceptable elapsed time or because they just do not have access to some travel vendor databases and reservation systems.
As a consequence, an end-user who wants to know where to get the best deal for a particular travel request must consider, as a first option, the possibility of submitting the same request to several sites. This generally implies to spend a long time navigating among numerous travel websites though; each site having its own user interface. And, eventually, the end-user has however only gathered information from the travel vendors he/she is aware of and better travel opportunities may have been missed.
To simplify the online travel shopping process other travel search sites have been made able to search several travel websites simultaneously. Sometime referred to as meta-search sites or aggregators they are devised to perform a comparison between what is offered on multiple online travel vendor websites. If this second option is more comfortable for the end-user which has normally to interrogate only a single comparison site, it has its own limitations too. Travel vendor comparison websites, which have necessarily finite computer resources, must work with a pre-selected list of vendors. This does not guarantee to compare all existing travel deals either. Knowing this limitation, the end-user will then attempt to verify the relevance of a proposed solution by further comparing it with what can be obtained from other known travel vendor comparison websites.
Hence, in both cases, the number of transactions generated for a same travel request, taken also into consideration the number of end-users to be supported simultaneously, adversely impact airline and other travel service provider computer systems and networks on which they are connected.
To illustrate this,
Hence, with the current architecture of a large travel system as depicted in
Moreover, each TSE (140) must get the availability information through individual availability servers (160) accessing the pool of airline availability servers (110) mentioned above. Because the same travel request (i.e.: for a same destination and for the same travel dates) is submitted from many TSEs the airline availability servers are interrogated several times with the same inputs thus contributing to generate traffic and consuming uselessly their computing and communication resources.
It is therefore a broad object of the invention to overcome the drawbacks, here above mentioned, of the background art.
It is more specifically an object of the invention to disclose a GDS organization that allows to drastically reduce the overall level of transactions required when answering to end-user requests.
It is also an object of the invention to build up an expertise by tracking completed travel deals in order to only interrogate those of the travel vendor databases that are relevant when processing end-user requests; thus, contributing to further reduce the overall level of transactions and saving on computing and communication resources.
Further objects, features and advantages of the present invention will become apparent to the ones skilled in the art upon examination of the following description in reference to the accompanying drawings. It is intended that any additional advantages be incorporated herein.
A global distribution system (GDS) organized for searching travel deals from a plurality of travel vendor fare databases is described. The GDS includes a travel multi-vendor search engine (TMVSE) operating on any one of the plurality of travel vendor fare databases it has access to. A travel deal tracker (TDT) is associated to the TMVSE. The TDT provides directions to the TMVSE to limit the number of required transactions needed to obtain the searched travel deals. The TDT is interrogated by the TMVSE each time a request from a travel comparison website is received. For each received request, directions are obtained under the form of a short list of travel vendor from where searching must be conducted.
The following detailed description of the invention refers to the accompanying drawings. While the description includes exemplary embodiments, other embodiments are possible, and changes may be made to the embodiments described without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
Although the invention is here after described through a particular example based on the airline industry it will be understood by those skilled in the art that the invention can apply as well to other areas, especially, to all forms of travel service providers. This includes, but is not limited to, travel products such as hotel rooms, rented cars, seats in trains, boats etc.
As with previous GDS organization shown in
To this end, TDT includes a travel deal expert (372) in relation with a deal expert memory (376). The deal expert memory is used to build up the TDT expertise on the basis of the deals already processed by the GDS (380). It is organized to gather information mainly on the low fare transactions processed by the GDS and on a per travel vendor basis. Also, it is organized by travel market so that the travel deal expert can retrieve directly the relevant travel vendors for a given travel request. A travel market is defined on the basis of certain characteristics, often including geographic characteristics, shared by a group of potential customers. For example, the three-star hotels of a certain resort area may constitute a travel market. With the particular example used to describe the invention, which is based on the airline industry, a travel market must be understood as the set of solutions offered by all airline service providers between two cities or two groups of cities. As an example, a travel market is the one between NICE, France and LONDON, UK. This would include potentially all best opportunities to fly between those two cities taking into consideration that several airports may have to be considered too. A broader market definition could consider all travel solutions between the east coast of the North American continent and the western part of Europe.
The travel deal vendor database (374) is designed to reference all the travel vendor of the travel markets considered by a GDS. It contains general information on the specificities of travel vendors, for example, their geographical localization. This information is cross-referenced with the content of the deal expert memory in order to retain only the travel vendors that are relevant for responding to an end-user request. For instance, it would not be pertinent to consider deals proposed by a local Japanese travel vendor for a traveler in the European community.
The deal acquiring expert (378) is the component in charge of acquiring the information needed to build and maintain TDT expertise. It is used to feed the deal expert memory (376) mentioned above. To acquire this expertise GDS traffic (380) is scanned. Because a GDS typically processes several millions of transactions a day a statistical sampling of the GDS production traffic is rather performed. Each transaction examined by the deal acquiring expert is first checked to determine its level of pertinence. Only significant transactions are kept; especially, those that have a too specific context are rejected. It is for example the case of transactions processed under specific deal agreements (e.g., the agreements sometime negotiated with some airline carriers by large corporations for their employees) or transactions performed for a specific type of passengers. In such cases, the deal observed has no significance for the regular ‘average’ end-user. Therefore, significant transactions are used to feed the deal expert memory and keep it updated. Each significant transaction which is retained is associated with a pertinence factor. For example, the observed frequency of occurrences of a deal is the key factor used to decide if it is worth entering it in the deal expert memory.
Then, each deal offered by each travel vendor of the short list is possibly gone through (410). This includes the step of checking the actual availability of the deals (415) by interrogating the airline availability servers shown in
The checking steps that follow are used to loop through the deals of the short list of travel vendors. Looping ends when enough deals have been gathered (422). This occurs, e.g., when a predetermined number of deals has been reached (this can be set as a result of information contained in the input request or it is a default or configurable parameter of the system). In this case looping ends and a response with the best available deals, destined for the end-user, is formatted (435).
If more travel solutions exist (426) for the current travel deal and more deals need to be gathered (421) they must be examined by going back to step (415). If not (427), and if there are deals left to be examined (432), process of input request returns to step (410) described here above. However, if none is left (431), a response must be formatted (435) with what was gathered. This takes care of the initialization phase of the process, when few deals have been collected yet, or if few deals actually exist for the current input request and the predetermined level of deals cannot be reached.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/EP07/52469 | 3/15/2007 | WO | 00 | 11/6/2009 |