Claims
- 1. A method for use in an automated text scoring process comprising:
a selection collection with general specifications which stay invariant from run to run; and one or more detailed specifications which are changed from run to run.
- 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the selection collection is obtained from a project collection.
- 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the method makes minor modifications to task specifications.
- 4. The method of claim 3, wherein the method makes use of extending tokens.
- 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the method is specified in a selection collection.
- 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the user specifies the method by clicking an item on a computer screen.
- 7. The method of claim 2, wherein the method is specified in a project collection.
- 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the method specifies a new storage structure.
- 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the method creates a new storage structure.
- 10. The method of claim 1, wherein a selection collection is stored as a script file
- 11. The method of claim 10, wherein a line in the script file specifies a task and includes:
a function of the task; a general specification for the task; and a reference to a detailed specification for the task.
- 12. The method of claim 1, wherein the automated text scoring is used to make a prediction of a population trait.
- 13. The method of claim 12, wherein a population trait is an opinion, a knowledge, an attitude, or a behavior.
- 14. The method of claim 12, wherein a prediction is of a time trend.
- 15. The method of claim 1, wherein a specification in a general specification overrides a specification in a detailed specification.
- 16. The method of claim 3, wherein the user responds to a menu item provided by a computer for the method.
- 17. The method of claim 3, wherein the user responds to a template provided by a computer for the method.
- 18. The method of claim 3, wherein the user responds to a prompt provided by a computer for the method.
- 19. The method of claim 3, wherein a selection collection is left unchanged after the method.
- 20. The method of claim 2, wherein a computer presents the user with list of tasks and general specifications corresponding to a project collection for selecting tasks and general specifications for a selection collection.
- 21. The method of claim 2, wherein a computer presents the user with information useful for modifying a general specification for an act selection writing for generating a selection collection.
- 22. The method of claim 3, wherein the method includes changing a time specification.
- 23. The method of claim 22, wherein a changed time specification is derived from a time specification in a detailed specification.
- 24. The method of claim 3, wherein a changed time specification is derived from the current time.
- 25. The method of claim 3, wherein a changed time specification is derived from the current time.
- 26. The method of claim 22, wherein times are specified so that time intervals do not overlap.
- 27. The method of claim 22, wherein times are specified so that time intervals do overlap with data from an overlap time interval automatically removed by a computer.
- 28. The method of claim 3, wherein the method is performed without user input.
- 29. A method to run tasks in an automated text scoring process, wherein running tokens are used.
- 30. The method of claim 29 wherein the automated text scoring is to make a prediction of a population trait.
- 31. The method of claim 30 wherein a population trait is an opinion, a knowledge, an attitude, or a behavior.
- 32. The method of claim 30 wherein a prediction is of a time trend.
- 33. The method of claim 29, wherein a running token specifies a range of input data for computer tasks.
- 34. A method to run tasks of an automated text scoring process, wherein tasks specified by a selection collection are run in sequence with one task finishing before the next one begins.
- 35. A method to run tasks of an automated text scoring process, wherein tasks specified by a selection collection are not run in sequence with one task finishing before the next one begins.
RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] This application claims priority to and incorporates by reference U.S. Pat. No. 4,930,077, issued May 29, 1980, entitled INFORMATION PROCESSING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR TEXT ANALYSIS AND PREDICTING PUBLIC OPINION BASED INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC; and U.S. application Ser. No. 09/563,629, filed May 2, 2000, entitled METHODS FOR ENHANCING DYNAMIC MENUS AND TEXTUAL ANALYSIS.