Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to data search techniques, and more particularly, to techniques for performing searches for television content and channels and other items.
Description of Related Art
User interfaces for finding television content in early television systems were relatively simple. Television viewers could tune to a channel to locate desired content by entering a channel number or clicking channel navigation (up/down) buttons on the television or on a remote control device. User interfaces have evolved over time to more complex and elaborate interfaces such as interactive EPGs (Electronic Program Guides) now commonly used for browsing and searching for television content.
There has been significant recent proliferation in content choices for television viewers. The increase in content choices has resulted largely from channel proliferation, content disaggregation, and an increase in content source options. With this proliferation of content choices, conventional user interfaces, particularly EPGs, have proven inadequate in helping users quickly and easily find channels and content of interest.
The number of television channels available to television viewers, e.g., subscribers of satellite and cable networks, has proliferated, in many cases beyond double digits and approaching triple digits. This has made it particularly difficult for users to remember the channels by their numbers. Users are more likely to forget the number assigned to a channel than the symbolic name assigned to the channel (e.g., CNN, NBC, PBS etc.). Moreover, when a user is mobile, i.e., not at his or her usual home, and desires to view a given channel, e.g., CNN, his or her memory of the channel number may not be useful since CNN would typically be assigned a different channel number by different operators. Additionally, the growth in the number of channels has also made use of conventional two dimensional grid-based EPG interfaces tedious in finding particular programs of interest and channels.
Early VCRs (video cassette recorders) enabled users to time-shift programs so that the programs could be watched whenever desired. The advent of PVRs (Personal Video Recorders) has, however, immensely catalyzed this disaggregation of programs, further diminishing the value of the channel paradigm. A direct consequence of this phenomenon is the proliferation of available content that can be viewed at any given time.
Additionally, there has been a significant increase in content source options for viewers. As the bandwidth for data transmission to homes has increased, new sources of content such as VOD (video-on-demand) and IPTV (Internet Protocol TV) have become available. This has further increased the available content accessible to viewers.
The success of Google search from a desktop-based PC interface has established the fact that the simplicity of the search interface combined with the correct relevance ordering of results in a flat linear space are important for the ubiquitous adoption of a search engine. Television, PDA devices and other devices with limited input capabilities and display constraints (the display space on a television is insufficient given the large fonts needed to be visible at a distance) pose a challenge to create an easy interface like the desktop-based search, where text entry can be done using a QWERTY keyboard. Text input limitations for television-based search makes it important to facilitate reduced text entry. Furthermore support for dynamic retrieval of results for each character entered is important for increasing the likelihood of a user arriving at desired result without having to enter the full search text. The relevance ordering of results during dynamic results retrieval for each character entered should be such that the user sees the desired results with the entry of the first few characters.
This problem is even more challenging when designing a non-intrusive search interface for television where the results display cannot accommodate more than a few results at any point in time, in order to remain non-intrusive. The correct relevance of ordering is important in this case to avoid the user from having to scroll down to see additional results. The display space constraint increases the importance of personalizing the results retrieval so that the user can get to the results with significantly reduced effort.
A method and system in accordance with one or more embodiments of the invention are provided for performing incremental searches with text entry reduced to delimited prefix substrings or acronyms where the relevance ordering of results is computed as a function of the number of characters entered by a user, where the characters represent one or more prefixes of the input query. The search space is divided into multiple subspaces, with the applicability or non-applicability to incremental search at any given instant being dynamically computed as a function of the number of characters entered by the user at that instant. This method enables selective relevance boosting (or suppression) of subspaces via configurable parameters appropriate to the application context of the search, with the boosting (or suppression) of subspaces occurring as a function of the number of characters entered by the user. Embodiments of the present invention also describe a way to allocate display space for one or more key subspaces in the first set of pages of results, such that a broad representation of a plurality of subspaces is shown to the user to increase the likelihood of a desired match. The allocation of display space to subspaces is also a function of the number of characters entered by the user. This allocation of display space is implicitly or explicitly personalized over time.
In addition to the different subspace biasing methods described above in embodiments of the present invention, the relevance contribution of any term (i.e., an individual word or phrase that is a part of the title, keyword or any other portion of the meta-content) to the computed relevance of any given result for a search query is governed by the information content of that term in relation to other terms describing the same content; this term relevance contribution itself varies as a function of the character count. The method in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention enables the rendering of results from multiple subspaces as a flat linear list without visible subspace partitioning, empowering the user to search and retrieve results across several subspaces without having to either explicitly specify in advance a particular subspace of interest or navigate different subspaces while viewing results. Embodiments of the present invention thus enable the user to find the desired result easily by reducing the effort involved in both the process of searching for results and subsequently navigating the results space.
In accordance with one or more embodiments of the invention, a method and system are provided for processing a search request received from a user operating a text input device. The search request is directed at identifying a desired item from a set of items. Each of the items of the set of items has one or more associated terms. The method includes receiving a query input from a user directed at identifying the desired item. The query input comprises one or more characters input by the user on the text input device. As each character of the query input is received from the user, a group of items having one or more terms matching the characters received thus far of the query input is dynamically identified. The items in this group of items are ordered based on relevance values of the terms matching the characters and on the number of characters of the query input used in identifying the group of items. Identification of the group of items as ordered is transmitted to the user to be displayed on a device operated by the user.
These and other features and advantages of the present invention will become readily apparent from the following detailed description, wherein embodiments of the invention are shown and described by way of illustration of the best mode of the invention. As will be realized, the invention is capable of other and different embodiments and its several details may be capable of modifications in various respects, all without departing from the invention. Accordingly, the drawings and description are to be regarded as illustrative in nature and not in a restrictive or limiting sense, with the scope of the application being indicated in the claims.
Although many of the examples illustrated herein concern a television viewer searching for television content items and television channels, the concepts set forth in these examples are not limited to searching for television content items and channels. In general, these concepts can apply to processing search requests in a variety of environments in which particular data items or content is sought in response to a user query.
Briefly, as will be described in further detail below, in accordance with one or more embodiments of the invention, methods and systems are provided for identifying data items (such as, e.g., a television content item or channel) desired by a person performing a search on a device (such as, e.g., a television viewer using a remote control or a user of a phone, PDA or other mobile computing device) from a set of available data items.
Television content items can include a wide variety of video/audio content including, but not limited to, television programs, movies, music videos, video-on-demand, or any other identifiable content that can be selected by a television viewer.
A user can enter into a search device having a text input interface a reduced text search entry directed at identifying the desired data item. The text can be one or more characters, which can be any alphanumeric character, symbol, space or character separator that can be entered by the user. Each data item has one or more associated descriptors, particularly names in a namespace relating to the desired data items. The descriptors specify information about the data item. If the data item is television content or channel, the information can include, e.g., information on titles, cast, directors, descriptions, and key words. The names are composed of one or more words that can be either ordered or unordered. The user's search entry comprises one or more prefix substrings that represent a name or names in the namespace. A prefix substring of a word in a name captures information from the word and can be a variable length string that contains fewer than all the characters making up the word.
In another embodiment, a search device such as a hand-held device 103 may not include local persistent storage 206. Such a hand-held device 103 would include remote connectivity 205 to submit the query to a server 101 and retrieve results from the server 101. In yet another embodiment, the search device 103 may not include remote connectivity 205. For such an embodiment, the search database may be locally resident on a local persistent storage 206. The persistent storage 206 may be a removable storage element such as SD, SmartMedia, CompactFlash card, or any of other such storage elements known in the art.
In one embodiment, a search device includes remote connectivity 205 and persistent storage 206 for search (e.g., a television 104a), and the search device may use the remote connectivity for search relevance data update, or for the case where the search database is distributed on the local storage 206 and on the server 101. In one embodiment, a television 104a may have a set-top box with a one-way link to a satellite. In this embodiment, some or all search data, including relevance updates, may be downloaded to the search device through the satellite link so that a search can be performed locally.
The final phase 505 involves ascribing a subspace-specific bias. This bias is a function of the number of characters entered. This bias causes certain subspace results to have a higher relevance than other subspaces. As is illustrated in greater detail below, a channel name subspace may have a relevance boost for the first character to ensure, e.g., that only channels appear first in the results space when only one character is entered.
As used herein, the biasing of one subspace over another refers to the relative preferential positioning of subspaces by boosting or suppression.
One advantage of a user-entered character count based subspace relevance biasing in accordance with one or more embodiments of the invention is described further below:
Consider an example in which the user enters a prefix string P=C1, C2, C3, . . . Ci . . . CN. where 1<i<N. One or more of the characters Ci (1<i<N), could be a word separator (e.g., space character)—the query string could thus be a multi-prefix query string. Let Pi denote a multi-prefix string where 1<i<N. Let the subspaces be S1, S2, . . . SM and the initial bias of the subspaces be Simin>Sjmax, 1<i,j<M, i.e., the lowest relevance element in Si has a higher relevance than the most relevant element in Sj. Consider the display space size to be Dmax. The user would have to scroll down if the number of results exceeds Dmax.
Case 1: Pi (1<i<N) has a no match (Match[Pi,Sj]=Ø, 1<j<K−1) with strings from subspaces S1, . . . SK−1 (1<K<M) but Pi+1 has a match (Match[Pi+1,SK]={mK1, mK2 . . . mKr} where 1<r<n(SK) (with n standing for the cardinality of SK, 1<i<N), with strings from subspace SK, 1<K<M. In this case “the character count based subspace biasing” system offers no distinct advantage in comparison to a static character count independent biasing of subspaces.
Case 2: Pi (1<i<N) has a match with strings from subspaces S1, . . . SK−1 (Match[Pi,Sj]={mj1, mj2 . . . mjr} where 1<r<n(Sj), n standing for the cardinality of Sj, and 1<j<K−1) and Pi+1 has a match with strings from Subspace SK (Match[Pi+1,SK]={mK1, mK2 . . . mKr} where 1<r<n(SK), n standing for the cardinality of SK). In this case if Σ n(Match[Pi,Sj])>Dmax (1<j<K−1), then the result from SK would be occluded by the matched elements from the subspace S1, . . . SK−1 (note it may be occluded even for a value of j<K−1, if multiple results from a subspace match). The user would have to scroll down to view the result from SK. It is this occlusion that character count based biasing in accordance with one or more embodiments of the invention addresses. The biasing allows for selective occlusion for a certain number of initial characters, and then makes the relevance space a level playing field for all subspaces gradually as the entered character count increases. By modifying the subspace biasing for each character, in this case, by increasing the bias of SK, the result of SK has some likelihood of showing up within the top Dmax results. This promotion to the display list, might have happened at the exclusion of a result from one of the subspaces S1, . . . SK−1. This may be a preferred behavior, i.e., no result is allowed to hold on to the precious display estate beyond a particular character count. As the subspaces are all made equal with the increase in character count, preference could be given for the results from the new subspaces, since the others would have been monopolizing the display space in this scenario. Also note that an excluded result that fell from its position in the top displayed set, would work its way back again into view if sufficient characters that form a larger prefix of that result is entered. This reclamation of lost position will naturally occur, with the entry of more characters−the uniqueness of the string would help bring it back up.
The other two cases, (1) both Pi and Pi+1 having no match with subspaces and (2) Pi (1<i<N) has a match with strings from subspaces S1, . . . SK−1 but Pi+1 has no match, are not examined since they are uninteresting boundary cases offering no more information than the cases described above.
Methods of processing search queries from users in accordance with various embodiments of the invention are preferably implemented in software, and accordingly one of the preferred implementations is as a set of instructions (program code) in a code module resident in the random access memory of a computer. Until required by the computer, the set of instructions may be stored in another computer memory, e.g., in a hard disk drive, or in a removable memory such as an optical disk (for eventual use in a CD ROM) or floppy disk (for eventual use in a floppy disk drive), or downloaded via the Internet or some other computer network. In addition, although the various methods described are conveniently implemented in a general purpose computer selectively activated or reconfigured by software, one of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize that such methods may be carried out in hardware, in firmware, or in more specialized apparatus constructed to perform the specified method steps.
The invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from the spirit or essential characteristics thereof. The present embodiments are therefore to be considered in respects as illustrative and not restrictive, the scope of the invention being indicated by the appended claims rather than by the foregoing description, and all changes which come within the meaning and range of the equivalency of the claims are therefore intended to be embraced therein. Method claims set forth below having steps that are numbered or designated by letters should not be considered to be necessarily limited to the particular order in which the steps are recited.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/398,904, filed on Feb. 17, 2012, which a continuation of prior U.S. application Ser. No. 11/246,432, filed Oct. 7, 2005, entitled Method and System for Incremental Search with Reduced Text Entry Where the Relevance of Results is a Dynamically Computed Function of User Input Search String Character Count, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,122,034, which claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/695,463 filed Jun. 30, 2005, entitled Method And System For Incremental Search With Minimal Text Entry On Television Where The Relevance Of Results Is A Dynamically Computed Function Of User Input Search String Character Count, the contents of all of which are incorporated by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1261167 | Russell | Apr 1918 | A |
4760528 | Levin | Jul 1988 | A |
4893238 | Venema | Jan 1990 | A |
5224060 | Ma | Jun 1993 | A |
5337347 | Halstead-Nussloch et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5369605 | Parks | Nov 1994 | A |
5408417 | Wilder | Apr 1995 | A |
5410344 | Graves | Apr 1995 | A |
5487616 | Ichbiah | Jan 1996 | A |
5623406 | Ichbiah | Apr 1997 | A |
5635989 | Rothmuller | Jun 1997 | A |
5805155 | Allibhoy et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5818437 | Grover et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5828420 | Marshall et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5828991 | Skiena et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5859662 | Cragun et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5880768 | Lemmons et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5912664 | Eick et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5937422 | Nelson et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5945928 | Kushler et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5953541 | King et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
6002394 | Schein | Dec 1999 | A |
6005565 | Legall et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6005597 | Barrett et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6006225 | Bowman et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6011554 | King et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6012053 | Pant et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6075526 | Rothmuller | Jun 2000 | A |
6133909 | Schein et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6184877 | Dodson et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6189002 | Roitblat | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6260050 | Yost et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6266048 | Carau, Sr. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6266814 | Lemmons et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6269361 | Davis et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6286064 | King et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6307548 | Flinchem et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6307549 | King et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6438579 | Hosken | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6466933 | Huang et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6480837 | Dutta | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6516337 | Tripp | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6529903 | Smith et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6564213 | Ortega et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6594657 | Livowsky | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6600496 | Wagner et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6614455 | Cuijpers et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6615248 | Smith | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6662177 | Martino | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6704931 | Schaffer | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6711585 | Copperman et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6718324 | Edlund et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6721954 | Nickum | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6732369 | Schein et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6757906 | Look et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6772147 | Wang | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6785671 | Bailey et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6839702 | Patel et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6839705 | Grooters | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6845374 | Oliver et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6850693 | Young et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6865575 | Smith et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6907273 | Smethers | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6965374 | Villet et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
7013304 | Schuetze et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7028323 | Franken | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7039635 | Morgan et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7136854 | Smith et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7225180 | Donaldson et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7225184 | Carrasco et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7225455 | Bennington et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7266551 | Kravets | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7293231 | Gunn et al. | Nov 2007 | B1 |
7424510 | Gross et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7885963 | Sanders | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7890526 | Brewer et al. | Feb 2011 | B1 |
8051450 | Robarts et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
20020032682 | Kobayashi | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020042791 | Smith et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020083448 | Johnson | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020103798 | Abrol et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020129368 | Schlack | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020133481 | Smith et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020199194 | Ali | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030011573 | Villet et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014753 | Beach et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030023976 | Kamen et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030033603 | Mori | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030046698 | Kamen et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030066079 | Suga | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030101449 | Bentolila | May 2003 | A1 |
20030208763 | McElhatten | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030208767 | Williamson | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030212996 | Wolzien | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030237096 | Barrett et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040018857 | Asokan | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040021691 | Dostie et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040031931 | Muller et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040046744 | Rafii et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040049783 | Lemmons et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040073926 | Nakamura et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040078815 | Lemmons et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040078816 | Johnson | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040078820 | Nickum | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040093616 | Johnson | May 2004 | A1 |
20040111745 | Schein et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040128686 | Boyer et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040143569 | Gross et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040163032 | Guo et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040194141 | Sanders | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040204820 | Diaz | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040216160 | Lemmons et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040261021 | Mittal et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040267815 | De Mes | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050015366 | Carrasco et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050071874 | Elcock et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050086234 | Tosey | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050086691 | Dudkiewicz et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050086692 | Dudkiewicz et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050120004 | Stata et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050192944 | Flinchem | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050210020 | Gunn et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050210402 | Gunn et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050223308 | Gunn et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050240580 | Zamir | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050256846 | Zigmond | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050267994 | Wong et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050272413 | Bourne | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283468 | Kamvar | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050289394 | Arrouye | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060059044 | Chan et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060075429 | Istvan et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060101499 | Aravamudan et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060101503 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060101504 | Aravamudan et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060112162 | Marot et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060163337 | Unruh | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060167676 | Plumb | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060167859 | Verbeck Sibley et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060190436 | Richardson et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060195435 | Laird-McConnell et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060206454 | Forstall et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060206912 | Klarfeld | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060212900 | Ismail | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060256078 | Flinchem et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060274051 | Longe et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070005563 | Aravamudan et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070027852 | Howard et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070050337 | Venkataraman et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070061321 | Venkataraman et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070061754 | Ardhanari et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070088681 | Aravamudan et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070130128 | Garg et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070143567 | Gorobets | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070150606 | Flinchem et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070219984 | Aravamudan et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070219985 | Aravamudan et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070255693 | Ramaswamy et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070260703 | Ardhanari et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070266021 | Aravamudan et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070266026 | Aravamudan et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070266406 | Aravamudan et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070271205 | Aravamudan et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070276773 | Aravamudan et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070276821 | Aravamudan et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070276859 | Aravamudan et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070288456 | Aravamudan et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070288457 | Aravamudan et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080040329 | Cussen | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080040388 | Petri | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080071771 | Venkataraman et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080086704 | Aravamudan | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080092155 | Ferrone | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080114743 | Venkataraman et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080209229 | Ramakrishnan et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080307356 | Kawauchi | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080307461 | Tanikawa | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20120159543 | Jin | Jun 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1143691 | Oct 2001 | EP |
WO 2004010323 | Jan 2004 | WO |
WO-2004031931 | Apr 2004 | WO |
WO-2005033967 | Apr 2005 | WO |
WO-2005084235 | Sep 2005 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Dalianis, Improving Search Engine Retrieval Using a Compound Splitier for Swedish, Abstract of Presentation At Nodalida 2005-15th Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics, Joensuu Finland, May 21-22, 2005. Retrieved Jan. 5, 2006 From http://phon.joensuu.fi/nodalida/abstracts/03.shtml. |
Digital Video Broadcasting, http://www.dvb.org (Oct. 12, 2007). |
Gadd T.N., Phonix: The Algorithm, Program 24(4), Oct. 1990, pp. 363-369. |
Good, N. et al., Combining Collaborative Filtering with Personal Agents for Better Recommendations, in Proc. of the 16th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 439-446, Orlando, Florida, Jul. 18-22, 1999. |
International Search Report, International Application No. PCT/US06/25249, dated Jan. 29, 2008 (2 pages). |
International Search Report, International Application No. PCT/US06/33204, dated Sep. 21, 2007 (2 pages). |
International Search Report, International Application No. PCT/US06/40005, dated Jul. 3, 2007 (4 Pages). |
International Search Report, International Application No. PCT/US07/65703, dated Jan. 25, 2008 (2 pages). |
International Search Report, International Application No. PCT/US07/67100, dated Mar. 7, 2008 (2 pages). |
Mackenzie et al., Letierwise: Prefix-Based Disambiguation for Mobile Text Input, Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology—UIST 2001, pp. 111-120. |
Matthom, “Text Highlighting in Search Results”, Jul. 22, 2005. Available at www.matthom.com/archive/2005/07/22/text-highlighting-in-search-results; retrieved Jun. 23, 2006. (4 pages). |
Mokotoff, Soundexing and Genealogy, Available at http://www.avotaynu.com/soundex.html, retrieved Mar. 19, 2008, last updated Sep. 8, 2007 (6 pages). |
Press Release From Tegic Communications, Tegic Communications Is Awarded Patent for Japanese T9(R) Text Input Software From the Japan Patent Office, Oct. 12, 2004. Retrieved Nov. 18, 2005 From http://www.tegic.com/press view.html ?Release Num=55254242. |
Review of Personalization Technologies: Collaborative Filtering vs. ChoiceStream's Attributized Bayesian Choice Modeling, Technology Brief, ChoiceStream Technologies, Cambridge, MA. |
Silfverberg et al., Predicting Text Entry Speed on Mobile Phones, Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems⋅ CHI2000. pp. 9-16. |
Talbot, David. “Soul of a New Mobile Machine.” Technology Review: The Design Issue May/Jun. 2007. (pp. 46-53). |
Wikipedia's entry for Levenshtein distance (n.d.). Retrieved Nov. 15, 2006 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levenshtein distance. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, International Application No. PCT/US06/25249, dated Jan. 29, 2008 (4 pages). |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, International Application No. PCT/US06/33204, dated Sep. 21, 2007 (3 pages). |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, International Application No. PCT/US06/40005, dated Jul. 3, 2007 (4 Pages). |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, International Application No. PCT/US07/65703, dated Jan. 25, 2008 (4 pages). |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, International Application No. PCT/US07/67100, dated Mar. 7, 2008 (3 pages). |
Rovi Guides et al. v. Comcast Corp. et al, Case No. 2:16-CV-321, Complaint for Patent Infringement, dated Apr. 1, 2016, 174 pages. |
Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, v. VEVEO, Inc. in the United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board, IPR2017-00932 Feb. 22, 2017 (70 pages). |
Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, v. VEVEO, Inc. in the United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board, IPR2017-00933 Feb. 22, 2017 (65 pages). |
Ricardo Baeza-Yates & Berthier Ribeiro-Neto, Modern Information Retrieval (1999) (234 pages). |
Declaration of Edward A. Fox Ph.D. in support of Petition 2 IPR2017-009933 Feb. 14, 2017 (134 pages). |
Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 622 (10th ed. 1993) IPR2017-009933, Exhibit 1113 (4 pages). |
Declaration of Edward A. Fox Ph.D. in support of Petition 2 IPR2017-009932 Feb. 15, 2017 (146 pages). |
Comcast Corporation et al., v. Rovi Corporation et al. (Civil Action No. 16-cv-3852, Southern District of New York), “Amended Complaint,” dated May 26, 2016 (42 pages). |
Comcast Corporation et al., v. Rovi Corporation et al. (Civil Action No. 16-cv-3852, Southern District of New York), “Complaint,” dated May 23, 2016 (42 pages). |
Rovi Guides, Inc. et al. v. Comcast Corporation et al. (Case No. 2:16-cv-321, Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division), “Joint Stipulated Motion for Dismissal of Plaintiff's Claims Against Technicolor SA,” dated Aug. 3, 2016 (314 pages). |
Rovi Guides, Inc. et al. v. Comcast Corporation et al. (Case No. 2:16-cv-321, Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division), “Arris Defendants' Answer to First Amended Complaint,” dated Jun. 3, 2016 (71 pages). |
Rovi Guides, Inc. et al. v. Comcast Corporation et al. (Case No. 2:16-cv-321, Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division), “Comcast Defendants' Answer to First Amended Complaint,” dated Jun. 3, 2016 (91 pages). |
Rovi Guides, Inc. et al. v. Comcast Corporation et al. (Case No. 2:16-cv-321, Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division), “Defendant Technicolor USA, Inc.'s and Technicolor Connected Home USA LLC's Answer and Defenses to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint,” dated Jun. 3, 2016 (205 pages). |
Rovi Guides, Inc. et al. v. Comcast Corporation et al. (Case No. 2:16-cv-321, Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division), “Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions,” dated Jun. 16, 2016 (5 pages). |
Rovi Guides, Inc. et al. v. Comcast Corporation et al. (Case No. 2:16-cv-321, Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division), “Exhibit F—Claim Chart for Infringement of 8,122,034” dated Jun. 16, 2016 (56 pages). |
Rovi Guides, Inc. et al. v. Comcast Corporation et al. (Case No. 2:16-cv-321, Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division), “Exhibit F.1—Claim Chart for Infringement of 8,122,034” dated Jun. 16, 2016 (57 pages). |
Rovi Guides, Inc. et al. v. Comcast Corporation et al. (Case No. 2:16-cv-321, Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division), “First Amended Complaint for Patent Infringement,” dated Apr. 25, 2016 (178 pages). |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/246,432, filed Oct. 7, 2005, U.S. Pat. No. 8,122,034. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/398,904, filed Feb. 17, 2010, U.S. Pat. No. 9,031,962. |
Rovi Guides, Inc. v. Comcast Corporation et al.; Case No. Case No. 2:16-cv-321; United States District Court Eastern District of Texas, Complaint filed Apr. 1, 2016. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150269173 A1 | Sep 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60695463 | Jun 2005 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13398904 | Feb 2012 | US |
Child | 14685372 | US | |
Parent | 11246432 | Oct 2005 | US |
Child | 13398904 | US |