The present disclosure relates to the field of computers, and specifically to the use of computers in managing data. Still more particularly, the present disclosure relates to sorting and categorizing data.
Data are values of variables, which typically belong to a set of items. Examples of data include numbers and characters, which may describe a quantity or quality of a subject. Other data can be processed to generate a picture or other depiction of the subject. Data management is the development and execution of architectures, policies, practices and procedures that manage the data lifecycle needs of an enterprise. Examples of data management include storing data in a manner that allows for efficient future data retrieval of the stored data.
A computer system includes one or more processors, one or more computer readable memories, one or more computer readable storage mediums, and program instructions stored on at least one of the one or more storage mediums for execution by at least one of the one or more processors via at least one of the one or more memories. The stored program instructions include, but are not limited to: program instructions to convert raw data into a first logical address and first payload data, wherein the first logical address describes metadata about the first payload data; program instructions to compare the first logical address to a second logical address to derive a Hamming distance between the first and second logical addresses, wherein the second logical address is for a second payload data; program instructions to create a data vector for the second payload data, wherein the data vector comprises the Hamming distance between the first and second logical addresses; program instructions to sort data vectors into specific data gravity wells on a data gravity wells membrane according to the Hamming distance stored in the data vector, wherein the data gravity wells membrane is a mathematical framework that 1) performs to provide a virtual environment in which multiple context-based data gravity wells exist; 2) populates the multiple context-based data gravity wells with synthetic context-based objects; and 3) performs to display the multiple context-based data gravity wells on a display; program instructions to apply a context object to a non-contextual data object, wherein the non-contextual data object is a component of the raw data, wherein the non-contextual data object ambiguously relates to multiple subject-matters, and wherein the context object provides a context that identifies a specific subject-matter, from the multiple subject-matters, of the non-contextual data object; program instructions to incorporate the context object and the non-contextual data object into the data vector for the second payload data; and program instructions to sort the second payload data into specific data gravity wells on the data gravity wells membrane according to the context objects and the non-contextual data objects.
As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, aspects of the present invention may be embodied as a system, method or computer program product. Accordingly, aspects of the present invention may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment (including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.) or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects that may all generally be referred to herein as a “circuit,” “module” or “system.” Furthermore, aspects of the present invention may take the form of a computer program product embodied in one or more computer readable medium(s) having computer readable program code embodied thereon.
Any combination of one or more computer readable medium(s) may be utilized. The computer readable medium may be a computer readable signal medium or a computer readable storage medium. A computer readable storage medium may be, for example, but not limited to, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. More specific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of the computer readable storage medium would include the following: an electrical connection having one or more wires, a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), an optical fiber, a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. In the context of this document, a computer readable storage medium may be any tangible medium that can contain, or store a program for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. A computer readable signal medium may include a propagated data signal with computer readable program code embodied therein, for example, in baseband or as part of a carrier wave. Such a propagated signal may take any of a variety of forms, including, but not limited to, electro-magnetic, optical, or any suitable combination thereof. A computer readable signal medium may be any computer readable medium that is not a computer readable storage medium and that can communicate, propagate, or transport a program for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.
Program code embodied on a computer readable medium may be transmitted using any appropriate medium, including, but not limited to, wireless, wireline, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any suitable combination of the foregoing.
In one embodiment, instructions are stored on a computer readable storage device (e.g., a CD-ROM), which does not include propagation media.
Computer program code for carrying out operations for aspects of the present invention may be written in any combination of one or more programming languages, including an object oriented programming language such as Java, Smalltalk, C++ or the like and conventional procedural programming languages, such as the “C” programming language or similar programming languages. The program code may execute entirely on the user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external computer (for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider).
Aspects of the present invention are described below with reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems) and computer program products according to embodiments of the present invention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, create means for implementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer readable medium that can direct a computer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer readable medium produce an article of manufacture including instructions which implement the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, other programmable apparatus or other devices to produce a computer implemented process such that the instructions which execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus provide processes for implementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
With reference now to the figures, and in particular to
Exemplary computer 102 includes a processor 104 that is coupled to a system bus 106. Processor 104 may utilize one or more processors, each of which has one or more processor cores. A video adapter 108, which drives/supports a display 110, is also coupled to system bus 106. System bus 106 is coupled via a bus bridge 112 to an input/output (I/O) bus 114. An I/O interface 116 is coupled to I/O bus 114. I/O interface 116 affords communication with various I/O devices, including a keyboard 118, a mouse 120, a media tray 122 (which may include storage devices such as CD-ROM drives, multi-media interfaces, etc.), a printer 124, and external USB port(s) 126. While the format of the ports connected to I/O interface 116 may be any known to those skilled in the art of computer architecture, in one embodiment some or all of these ports are universal serial bus (USB) ports.
As depicted, computer 102 is able to communicate with a software deploying server 150, using a network interface 130. Network interface 130 is a hardware network interface, such as a network interface card (NIC), etc. Network 128 may be an external network such as the Internet, or an internal network such as an Ethernet or a virtual private network (VPN).
A hard drive interface 132 is also coupled to system bus 106. Hard drive interface 132 interfaces with a hard drive 134. In one embodiment, hard drive 134 populates a system memory 136, which is also coupled to system bus 106. System memory is defined as a lowest level of volatile memory in computer 102. This volatile memory includes additional higher levels of volatile memory (not shown), including, but not limited to, cache memory, registers and buffers. Data that populates system memory 136 includes computer 102's operating system (OS) 138 and application programs 144.
OS 138 includes a shell 140, for providing transparent user access to resources such as application programs 144. Generally, shell 140 is a program that provides an interpreter and an interface between the user and the operating system. More specifically, shell 140 executes commands that are entered into a command line user interface or from a file. Thus, shell 140, also called a command processor, is generally the highest level of the operating system software hierarchy and serves as a command interpreter. The shell provides a system prompt, interprets commands entered by keyboard, mouse, or other user input media, and sends the interpreted command(s) to the appropriate lower levels of the operating system (e.g., a kernel 142) for processing. Note that while shell 140 is a text-based, line-oriented user interface, the present invention will equally well support other user interface modes, such as graphical, voice, gestural, etc.
As depicted, OS 138 also includes kernel 142, which includes lower levels of functionality for OS 138, including providing essential services required by other parts of OS 138 and application programs 144, including memory management, process and task management, disk management, and mouse and keyboard management.
Application programs 144 include a renderer, shown in exemplary manner as a browser 146. Browser 146 includes program modules and instructions enabling a world wide web (WWW) client (i.e., computer 102) to send and receive network messages to the Internet using hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) messaging, thus enabling communication with software deploying server 150 and other computer systems.
Application programs 144 in computer 102's system memory (as well as software deploying server 150's system memory) also include a Hamming distance and context-based data gravity well logic (HDCBDGWL) 148. HDCBDGWL 148 includes code for implementing the processes described below, including those described in
Note that the hardware elements depicted in computer 102 are not intended to be exhaustive, but rather are representative to highlight essential components required by the present invention. For instance, computer 102 may include alternate memory storage devices such as magnetic cassettes, digital versatile disks (DVDs), Bernoulli cartridges, and the like. These and other variations are intended to be within the spirit and scope of the present invention.
In one embodiment, the present invention sorts and stores data according to the Hamming distance from one data vector's address to another data vector's address. That is, as described in further detail below, two data units are stored at two different data addresses. These data addresses are hashed to provide description information about the data stored at a particular location. Each data address is made up of ones and zeros at bit locations in the data address. The total difference between these bits, at their particular locations, is known as a “Hamming distance”. For example “0100” and “0111” are separated by a Hamming distance of “2”, since the penultimate and last bits are different, while “0100” and “1100” are separated by a Hamming distance of “1”, since only the first bit is different when “0100” and “1100” are compared to one another.
With reference then to
Physical instance 204 is made up primarily of hardware devices, such as elements 212, 214, 216, 220, and 226 depicted in
As depicted within logical instance 202, raw data 206 is first sent to a hashing logic 208. Note that while hashing logic 208 is shown as part of the logical instance 202, and thus is executed in software, in one embodiment hashing logic 208 is a dedicated hardware logic, which may be part of the physical instance 204.
The raw data 206 is data that is received from a data generator or a data source. For example, raw data 206 may be a physical measurement of heat, wind, radiation, etc.; or medical data such as medical laboratory values; or sales figures for a particular store; or sociological data describing a particular population; etc. Initially, the raw data 206 is merely a combination of characters (i.e., letters and/or numbers and/or other symbols). The hashing logic 208, however, receives information about the raw data from a data descriptor 209. Data descriptor 209 is data that describes the raw data 206. In one embodiment, data descriptor 209 is generated by the entity that generated the raw data 206. For example, if the raw data 206 are readings from a mass spectrometer in a laboratory, logic in the mass spectrometer includes self-awareness information, such as the type of raw data that this particular model of mass spectrometer generates, what the raw data represents, what format/scale is used for the raw data, etc. In another embodiment, data mining logic analyzes the raw data 206 to determine the nature of the raw data 206. For example, data mining and/or data analysis logic may examine the format of the data, the time that the data was generated, the amount of fluctuation between the current raw data and other raw data that was generated within some predefined past period (e.g., within the past 30 seconds), the format/scale of the raw data (e.g., miles per hour), and ultimately determine that the raw data is describing wind speed and direction from an electronic weather vane.
However the data descriptor 209 is derived, its purpose is to provide meaningful context to the raw data. For example, the raw data 206 may be “90”. The data descriptor 209 may be “wind speed”. Thus, the context of the raw data 206 is now “hurricane strength wind”.
The hashing logic 208 utilizes the data descriptor 209 to generate a logical address at which the payload data from the raw data 206 will be stored. That is, using the data descriptor 209, the hashing logic generates a meaningful logical address that, in and of itself, describes the nature of the payload data (i.e., the raw data 206). For example, the logical address “01010101” may be reserved for hurricane strength wind readings. Thus, any data stored at an address that has “01010101” at some predefined position within the logical address (which may or may not be at the beginning of the logical address) is identified as being related to “hurricane strength wind readings”.
As shown in
The logical address 218 is then sent to an exclusive OR (XOR) unit 220. XOR unit 220 is hardware logic that compares two vectors (i.e., strings of characters), and then presents a total count of how many bits at particular bit locations are different. For example, (0101) XOR (1010)=4, since the bit in each of the four bit locations is different. Similarly, (0101) XOR (0111)=1, since only the bit at the third bit location in the two vectors is different. These generated values (i.e., 4, 1) are known as “Hamming distances”, which is defined as the total number of bit differences for all of the bit locations in a vector. Thus, the Hamming distance from “0101” to “1010” is 4; the Hamming distance from “0101” to “0111” is 1; the Hamming distance from “0101” to “0010” is 3; etc. Note that it is not the total number of “1”s or “0”s that is counted. Rather, it is the total number of different bits at the same bit location within the vector that is counted. That is, “0101” and “1010” have the same number of “1”s (2), but the Hamming distance between these two vectors is 4, as explained above.
XOR unit 220 then compares the logical address 218 (which was generated for the raw data 206 as just described) with an other logical address 222, in order to generate the Hamming distance 224 between these two logical addresses. That is, the logical address of a baseline data (e.g., the logical address that was generated for raw data 206) is compared to the logical address of another data in order to generate the Hamming distance between their respective logical addresses. For example, assume that raw data 206 is data that describes snow. Thus, a logical address (e.g., “S”) is generated for raw data 206 that identifies this data as being related to snow. Another logical address 222 (e.g., “R”) is then generated for data related to rain, and another logical address (e.g., “F”) is generated for data related to fog. The Hamming distances between “S” and “R” and “F” are then used to determine how closely related these various data are to one another.
Thus, in
These Hamming distances 224a-224b are then combined with the logical address (e.g., other logical addresses 222) and the data itself (e.g., other payload data 228) and sent to a data vector generator 226 in order to create one or more data vectors 230a-n. Additional detail of data vector 230a is shown in
As described in
For example, consider two logical addresses that are each 1,000 bits long. Out of these 1,000 bits, only a small percentage of the bit (e.g., 4 bits out of the 1,000) are “significant bits”. The term “significant bits” is defined as those bits at specific bit locations in a logical address that provide a description, such as metadata, that describes a feature of the event represented by the payload data stored at that logical address. For example, in the logical address vector 302 shown in
In order to filter out logical addresses that are unrelated, different approaches can be used. One approach is to simply mask in only those addresses that contain the “significant bits”. This allows a precise collection of related data, but is relatively slow.
Another approach to determining which logical addresses are actually related is to develop a cutoff value for the Hamming distance based on historical experience. That is, this cutoff value is a maximum Hamming distance that, if exceeded, indicates that a difference in the type of two data payload objects exceeds some predetermined limit. This historical experience is used to examine past collections of data, from which the Hamming distance between every pair of logical addresses (which were generated by the hashing logic 208 shown in
Once the cutoff value for the Hamming distance between two logical addresses is determined (using statistics, historical experience, etc.), the probability that two logical addresses are actually related can be fine-tuned using a Bayesian probability formula. For example, assume that A represents the event that two logical addresses both contain the same significant bits that describe a same attribute of payload data stored at the two logical addresses, and B represents the event that the Hamming distance between two logical addresses is less than a predetermined number (of bit differences), as predetermined using past experience, etc. This results in the Bayesian probability formula of:
where:
For example, assume that either brute force number crunching (i.e., examining thousands/millions of logical addresses) and/or statistical analysis (e.g., using a cumulative distribution formula, a continuous distribution formula, a stochastic distribution statistical formula, etc.) has revealed that there is a 95% probability that two logical addresses that are less than 500 Hamming bits apart will contain the same significant bits (i.e., (P(B|A)=0.95). Assume also that similar brute force number crunching and/or statistical analysis reveals that in a large sample, there is a 99.99% probability that at least two logical addresses will both contain the same significant bits regardless of any other information (i.e., P(A)=0.9999). Finally, assume that similar brute force number crunching and/or statistical analysis reveals that two particular logical addresses are less than 500 bits apart regardless of any other information (i.e., P(B)=0.98). In this scenario, the probability that two logical addresses both contain the same significant bits, which describe a same attribute of payload data stored at the two logical addresses given that that the Hamming distance between two logical addresses is less than a predetermined number (i.e., P(A|B)) is 97%:
However, assume now that such brute force number crunching and/or statistical analysis reveals that there is only an 80% probability that two logical addresses that are less than 500 Hamming bits apart will contain the same significant bits (i.e., (P(B|A)=0.80). Assuming all other values remain the same (i.e., P(A)=0.9999 and P(B)=0.98), then probability that two logical addresses both contain the same significant bits, which describe a same attribute of payload data stored at the two logical addresses given that that the Hamming distance between two logical addresses is less than a predetermined number (i.e., P(A|B)), is now 81%:
Note the following features of this analysis. First, due to the large number of data entries (i.e., thousands or millions or more), use cases and/or statistical analyses show that the probability that two logical addresses will both contain the same significant bits is high (e.g., 99.99%). Second, due to random matching (i.e., two bits randomly matching) combined with controlled matching (i.e., two bits match since they both describe a same attribute of the payload data), the probability that any two logical addresses are less than 500 bits apart is also high (e.g., 98%). However, because of these factors, P(A) is higher than P(B); thus P(A|B) will be higher than P(B|A).
With reference now to
For example, in the example shown in
Context-based data gravity wells membrane 412 supports multiple context-based data gravity well frameworks. For example, consider context-based data gravity well framework 402. A context-based data gravity well framework is defined as a construct that includes the capability of pulling data objects from a streaming data flow, such as data vectors 410, and storing same if a particular parsed synthetic context-based object contains a particular Hamming distance 403a and/or particular non-contextual data object 404a and/or a particular context object 412a (where non-contextual data object 404a and context object 412a and Hamming distance 403a are defined herein). Note that context-based data gravity well framework 402 is not yet populated with any data vectors, and thus is not yet a context-based data gravity well. However, context-based data gravity well framework 406 is populated with data vectors 408, and thus has been transformed into a context-based data gravity well 410. This transformation occurred when context-based data gravity well framework 406, which contains (i.e., logically includes and/or points to) a non-contextual data object 404b and/or a context object 412b and/or Hamming distances 403b-403c, all (or at least a predetermined percentage) of which are part of each of the synthetic context-based objects 408 (e.g., data vectors that, when parsed into their components form parsed synthetic context-based objects 414a), are populated with one or more parsed synthetic context-based objects. That is, parsed synthetic context-based object 414a is an object that has been parsed (split up) to reveal 1) a particular Hamming distance from a logical address in a particular data vector to a logical address of some predefined/predetermined base data vector, 2) a particular non-contextual data object, and/or 3) a particular context object.
In order to understand what is meant by non-contextual data objects and context objects, reference is now made to
Within system 500 is a synthetic context-based object database 502, which contains multiple synthetic context-based objects 504a-504n (thus indicating an “n” quantity of objects, where “n” is an integer). Each of the synthetic context-based objects 504a-504n is defined by at least one non-contextual data object and at least one context object. That is, at least one non-contextual data object is associated with at least one context object to define one or more of the synthetic context-based objects 504a-504n. The non-contextual data object ambiguously relates to multiple subject-matters, and the context object provides a context that identifies a specific subj ect-matter, from the multiple subj ect-matters, of the non-contextual data object.
Note that the non-contextual data objects contain data that has no meaning in and of itself. That is, the data in the context objects are not merely attributes or descriptors of the data/objects described by the non-contextual data objects. Rather, the context objects provide additional information about the non-contextual data objects in order to give these non-contextual data objects meaning. Thus, the context objects do not merely describe something, but rather they define what something is. Without the context objects, the non-contextual data objects contain data that is meaningless; with the context objects, the non-contextual data objects become meaningful.
For example, assume that a non-contextual data object database 506 includes multiple non-contextual data objects 508r-508t (thus indicating a “t” quantity of objects, where “t” is an integer). However, data within each of these non-contextual data objects 508r-508t by itself is ambiguous, since it has no context. That is, the data within each of the non-contextual data objects 508r-508t is data that, standing alone, has no meaning, and thus is ambiguous with regards to its subject-matter. In order to give the data within each of the non-contextual data objects 508r-508t meaning, they are given context, which is provided by data contained within one or more of the context objects 510x-510z (thus indicating a “z” quantity of objects, where “z” is an integer) stored within a context object database 512. For example, if a pointer 514a points the non-contextual data object 508r to the synthetic context-based object 504a, while a pointer 516a points the context object 510x to the synthetic context-based object 504a, thus associating the non-contextual data object 508r and the context object 510x with the synthetic context-based object 504a (e.g., storing or otherwise associating the data within the non-contextual data object 508r and the context object 510x in the synthetic context-based object 504a), the data within the non-contextual data object 508r now has been given unambiguous meaning by the data within the context object 510x. This contextual meaning is thus stored within (or otherwise associated with) the synthetic context-based object 504a.
Similarly, if a pointer 514b associates data within the non-contextual data object 508s with the synthetic context-based object 504b, while the pointer 516c associates data within the context object 510z with the synthetic context-based object 504b, then the data within the non-contextual data object 508s is now given meaning by the data in the context object 510z. This contextual meaning is thus stored within (or otherwise associated with) the synthetic context-based object 504b.
Note that more than one context object can give meaning to a particular non-contextual data object. For example, both context object 510x and context object 510y can point to the synthetic context-based object 504a, thus providing compound context meaning to the non-contextual data object 508r shown in
Note also that while the pointers 514a-514b and 516a-516c are logically shown pointing toward one or more of the synthetic context-based objects 504a-504n, in one embodiment the synthetic context-based objects 504a-504n actually point to the non-contextual data objects 508r-508t and the context objects 510x-510z. That is, in one embodiment the synthetic context-based objects 504a-504n locate the non-contextual data objects 508r-508t and the context objects 510x-510z through the use of the pointers 514a-514b and 516a-516c.
Consider now an exemplary case depicted in
In the example shown in
In order to give contextual meaning to the word “purchase” (i.e., define the term “purchase”) in the context of “land”, context object 610x, which contains the context datum “land”, is associated with (e.g., stored in or associated by a look-up table, etc.) the synthetic context-based object 604a. Associated with the synthetic context-based object 604b is a context object 610y, which provides the context/datum of “clothes” to the term “purchase” provided by the non-contextual data object 608r. Thus, the synthetic context-based object 604b defines “purchase” as that which is related to the subject-matter “clothing receipt”, including electronic, e-mail, and paper evidence of a clothing sale. Associated with the synthetic context-based object 604n is a context object 610z, which provides the context/datum of “air travel” to the term “purchase” provided by the non-contextual data object 608r. Thus, the synthetic context-based object 604n defines “purchase” as that which is related to the subject-matter “airline ticket”, including electronic, e-mail, and paper evidence of a person's right to board a particular airline flight.
In one embodiment, the data within a non-contextual data object is even more meaningless if it is merely a combination of numbers and/or letters. For example, consider the scenario in which data “10” were to be contained within a non-contextual data object 608r depicted in
Referring back again now to
Consider now context-based data gravity well 416. Note that context-based data gravity well 416 includes two context objects 412c-412d and a non-contextual data object 404c and a single Hamming distance (object) 403d. The presence of context objects 412c-412d (which in one embodiment are graphically depicted on the walls of the context-based data gravity well 416) and non-contextual data object 404c and Hamming distance 403d within context-based data gravity well 416 causes synthetic context-based objects such as parsed synthetic context-based object 414b to be pulled into context-based data gravity well 416. Note further that context-based data gravity well 416 is depicted as being larger than context-based data gravity well 410, since there are more synthetic context-based objects (418) in context-based data gravity well 416 than there are in context-based data gravity well 410.
Note that, in one embodiment, the context-based data gravity wells depicted in
Note that in one embodiment, it is the quantity of synthetic context-based objects that have been pulled into a particular context-based data gravity well that determines the size and shape of that particular context-based data gravity well. That is, the fact that context-based data gravity well 416 has two context objects 412c-412d while context-based data gravity well 410 has only one context object 412b has no bearing on the size of context-based data gravity well 416. Rather, the size and shape of context-based data gravity well 416 in this embodiment is based solely on the quantity of synthetic context-based objects such as parsed synthetic context-based object 414b (each of which contain a Hamming distance 403d from its logical address to the logical address of a base data object, a non-contextual data object 404c and/or context objects 412c-412d) that are pulled into context-based data gravity well 416. For example, context-based data gravity well 420 has a single non-contextual data object 404d and a single context object 412e, just as context-based data gravity well 410 has a single non-contextual data object 404b and a single context object 412b. However, because context-based data gravity well 420 is populated with only one parsed synthetic context-based object 414c, it is smaller than context-based data gravity well 410, which is populated with four synthetic context-based objects 408 (e.g., four instances of the parsed synthetic context-based object 414a).
In one embodiment, the context-based data gravity well frameworks and/or context-based data gravity wells described in
Thus, as depicted and described in
With reference now to
As described in block 706, a hardware exclusive OR (XOR) unit then compares a first address vector (i.e., a string of characters used as an address) for the first logical address to a second address vector for a second logical address to derive a Hamming distance between the two logical addresses. This comparison enables a determination of how similar two data are to one another based on how similar their logical addresses (created at block 704) are to one another. Note that, in one embodiment, this Hamming distance between the first logical address (of a base predefined data object) and the second logical address (or another data object) is derived by a hardware XOR unit.
As described in block 708, the Hamming distance from the logical address of each data object to the logical address of the predefined/predetermined base object is appended to each data vector for each data object.
As described in block 710, and illustrated in
As depicted in query block 718, if all of the data objects are pulled into one of the data gravity wells, the process ends (terminator block 722). Otherwise, those data objects that are not pulled into any of the data gravity wells on the data gravity wells membrane are trapped (block 720), thus prompting an alert describing which data objects were not pulled into any of the data gravity wells on that data gravity wells membrane. In this scenario, the untrapped data objects may be sent to another gravity wells membrane that has other data gravity wells.
Note that in one embodiment, a processor calculates a virtual mass of each of the parsed synthetic context-based objects. In one embodiment, the virtual mass of the parsed synthetic context-based object is derived from a formula (P(C)+P(S))×Wt(S), where P(C) is the probability that the non-contextual data object has been associated with the correct context object, P(S) is the probability that the Hamming distance has been associated with the correct synthetic context-based object, and Wt(S) is the weighting factor of importance of the synthetic context-based object. As described herein, in one embodiment the weighting factor of importance of the synthetic context-based object is based on how important the synthetic context-based object is to a particular project.
The flowchart and block diagrams in the figures illustrate the architecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementations of systems, methods and computer program products according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. In this regard, each block in the flowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portion of code, which comprises one or more executable instructions for implementing the specified logical function(s). It should also be noted that, in some alternative implementations, the functions noted in the block may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, two blocks shown in succession may, in fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be noted that each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, and combinations of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-based systems that perform the specified functions or acts, or combinations of special purpose hardware and computer instructions.
The terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only and is not intended to be limiting of the present invention. As used herein, the singular forms “a”, “an” and “the” are intended to include the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. It will be further understood that the terms “comprises” and/or “comprising,” when used in this specification, specify the presence of stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements, and/or components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements, components, and/or groups thereof.
The corresponding structures, materials, acts, and equivalents of all means or step plus function elements in the claims below are intended to include any structure, material, or act for performing the function in combination with other claimed elements as specifically claimed. The description of various embodiments of the present invention has been presented for purposes of illustration and description, but is not intended to be exhaustive or limited to the present invention in the form disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the present invention. The embodiment was chosen and described in order to best explain the principles of the present invention and the practical application, and to enable others of ordinary skill in the art to understand the present invention for various embodiments with various modifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated.
Note further that any methods described in the present disclosure may be implemented through the use of a VHDL (VHSIC Hardware Description Language) program and a VHDL chip. VHDL is an exemplary design-entry language for Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), and other similar electronic devices. Thus, any software-implemented method described herein may be emulated by a hardware-based VHDL program, which is then applied to a VHDL chip, such as a FPGA.
Having thus described embodiments of the present invention of the present application in detail and by reference to illustrative embodiments thereof, it will be apparent that modifications and variations are possible without departing from the scope of the present invention defined in the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5450535 | North | Sep 1995 | A |
5664179 | Tucker | Sep 1997 | A |
5689620 | Kopec et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5701460 | Kaplan et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5943663 | Mouradian | Aug 1999 | A |
5974427 | Reiter | Oct 1999 | A |
6167405 | Rosensteel | Dec 2000 | A |
6199064 | Schindler | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6269365 | Kiyoki et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6275833 | Nakamura et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6314555 | Ndumu et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6334156 | Matsuoka et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6353818 | Carino, Jr. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6381611 | Roberge et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6405162 | Segond et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6424969 | Gruenwald | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6553371 | Gutierrez-Rivas et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6633868 | Min et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6735593 | Williams | May 2004 | B1 |
6768986 | Cras et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6925470 | Sangudi et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6990480 | Burt | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7019740 | Georgalas | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7047253 | Murthy et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7058628 | Page | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7103836 | Nakamura et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7152070 | Musick et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7191183 | Goldstein | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7209923 | Cooper | Apr 2007 | B1 |
7337174 | Craig | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7441264 | Himmel et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7477165 | Fux | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7493253 | Ceusters et al. | Feb 2009 | B1 |
7503007 | Goodman et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7523118 | Friedlander et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7523123 | Yang et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7571163 | Trask | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7679534 | Kay et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7702605 | Friedlander et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7748036 | Speirs, III et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7752154 | Friedlander et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7778955 | Kuji | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7783586 | Friedlander et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7788202 | Friedlander et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7788203 | Friedlander et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7792774 | Friedlander et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7792776 | Friedlander et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7792783 | Friedlander et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7797319 | Piedmonte | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7805390 | Friedlander et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7805391 | Friedlander et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7809660 | Friedlander et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7853611 | Friedlander et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7870113 | Gruenwald | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7877682 | Aegerter | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7925610 | Elbaz et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7930262 | Friedlander et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7940959 | Rubenstein | May 2011 | B2 |
7953686 | Angell et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7970759 | Friedlander et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7996373 | Zoppas et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
7996393 | Nanno et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
8032508 | Martinez et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8046358 | Thattil | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8055603 | Angell et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8069188 | Larson et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8086614 | Novy | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8095726 | O'Connell et al. | Jan 2012 | B1 |
8145582 | Angell et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8150882 | Meek et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8155382 | Rubenstein | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8161048 | Procopiuc et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8199982 | Fueyo et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8234285 | Cohen | Jul 2012 | B1 |
8250581 | Blanding et al. | Aug 2012 | B1 |
8341626 | Gardner et al. | Dec 2012 | B1 |
8447273 | Friedlander et al. | May 2013 | B1 |
8457355 | Brown et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8489641 | Seefeld et al. | Jul 2013 | B1 |
8620958 | Adams et al. | Dec 2013 | B1 |
8799323 | Nevin, III | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8849907 | Hession et al. | Sep 2014 | B1 |
8983981 | Adams et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
20010051881 | Filler | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020091677 | Sridhar | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020111792 | Cherny | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020184401 | Kadel et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030065626 | Allen | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030088576 | Hattori et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030097589 | Syvanne | May 2003 | A1 |
20030149562 | Walther | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030149934 | Worden | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030212664 | Breining et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030212851 | Drescher et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040036716 | Jordahl | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040111410 | Burgoon et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040153461 | Brown et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040162838 | Murayama et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040249789 | Kapoor et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050050030 | Gudbjartsson et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050086243 | Abbott et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050165866 | Bohannon et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050181350 | Benja-Athon | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050188088 | Fellenstein et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050222890 | Cheng et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050273730 | Card et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283679 | Heller et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060004851 | Gold et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060036568 | Moore et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060190195 | Watanabe et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060197762 | Smith et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060200253 | Hoffberg et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060256010 | Tanygin et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060271586 | Federighi et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060290697 | Madden et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070006321 | Bantz et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070016614 | Novy | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070038651 | Bernstein et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070067343 | Mihaila et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070073734 | Doan et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070079356 | Grinstein | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070088663 | Donahue | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070130182 | Forney | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070136048 | Richardson-Bunbury et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070174840 | Sharma et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070185850 | Walters et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070239710 | Jing et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070282916 | Albahari et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070300077 | Mani et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080065655 | Chakravarthy et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080066175 | Dillaway et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080086442 | Dasdan et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080091503 | Schirmer et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080133474 | Hsiao et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080147780 | Trevor et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080159317 | Iselborn et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080172715 | Geiger et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080208813 | Friedlander et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080208838 | Friedlander et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080208901 | Friedlander et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080281801 | Larson et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080306926 | Friedlander et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090024553 | Angell et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090064300 | Bagepalli et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090080408 | Natoli et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090125546 | Iborra et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090144609 | Liang et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090164649 | Kawato | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090165110 | Becker et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090177484 | Davis et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090182707 | Kinyon et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090287676 | Dasdan | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090299988 | Hamilton, II et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090327632 | Glaizel et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100024036 | Morozov et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100030780 | Eshghi et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100070640 | Allen et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100077033 | Lowry | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100088322 | Chowdhury et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100125604 | Martinez et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100131293 | Linthicum et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100131379 | Dorais et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100169137 | Jastrebski et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100169758 | Thomsen | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100174692 | Meyer et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100179933 | Bai et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100191743 | Perronnin et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100191747 | Ji et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100241644 | Jackson et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100257198 | Cohen et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100268747 | Kern et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100274785 | Procopiuc et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20110040724 | Dircz | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110066649 | Berlyant et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110077048 | Busch | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110087678 | Frieden et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110093479 | Fuchs | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110098056 | Rhoads et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110123087 | Nie et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110137882 | Weerasinghe | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110161073 | Lesher et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110194744 | Wang et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110208688 | Ivanov et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110246483 | Darr et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110246498 | Forster | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110252045 | Garg et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110282888 | Koperski et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110299427 | Chu et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110301967 | Friedlander et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110314155 | Narayanaswamy et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120004891 | Rameau et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120005239 | Nevin, III | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120016715 | Brown et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120023141 | Holster | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120072468 | Anthony et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120079493 | Friedlander et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120109640 | Anisimovich et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120110004 | Meijer | May 2012 | A1 |
20120110016 | Phillips | May 2012 | A1 |
20120131139 | Siripurapu et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120131468 | Friedlander et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120166373 | Sweeney et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120191704 | Jones | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120209858 | Lamba et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120221439 | Sundaresan et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120233194 | Ohyu et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120239761 | Linner et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120240080 | O'Malley | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120246148 | Dror | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120259841 | Hsiao et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120278897 | Ang et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120281830 | Stewart et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120290950 | Rapaport et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120297278 | Gattani et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120311587 | Li et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120316821 | Levermore et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120330958 | Xu et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130019084 | Orchard et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130031302 | Byom et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130060696 | Martin et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130103389 | Gattani et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130124564 | Oztekin et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130173292 | Friedlander et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130173585 | Friedlander et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130191392 | Kumar et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130238667 | Carvalho et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130246562 | Chong et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130254202 | Friedlander et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130291051 | Balinsky et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130291098 | Chung et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130311473 | Motta et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20130326412 | Treiser | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20130339379 | Ferrari et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140006411 | Boldyrev et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140012884 | Bornea et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140025702 | Curtiss et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140074833 | Adams et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140074885 | Adams et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140074886 | Medelyan et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140074892 | Adams et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140081939 | Adams et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140098101 | Friedlander et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140172417 | Monk et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140188887 | Adams et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140214865 | Adams et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140214871 | Adams et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140250111 | Morton et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140344718 | Rapaport et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
101866342 | Oct 2010 | CN |
102201043 | Sep 2011 | CN |
102236701 | Nov 2011 | CN |
102385483 | Mar 2012 | CN |
1566752 | Aug 2005 | EP |
1843259 | Oct 2007 | EP |
2006086179 | Aug 2006 | WO |
2007044763 | Apr 2007 | WO |
Entry |
---|
U.S. Appl. No. 13/861,058 Non-Final Office Action Mailed April 25, 2016. |
Faulkner, Paul, “Common Patterns for Synthetic Events in Websphere Business Events,” January 15, 2011, http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/bpmjournal/1101_faulkner2/1101_faulkner2.html, pp. 1-6. |
Evaggelio Pitoura et al, “Context in Databases”, University of Ioannina, Greece, 2004, pp. 1-19. |
Avinash Kaushik, “End of Dumb Tables in Web Analytics Tools! Hello: Weighted Sort”, Sep. 7, 2010, www.kaushik.net, pp. 1-15. |
Lorenzo Alberton, “Graphs in the Database: SQL Meets Social Networks,” Techportal, Sep. 7, 2009, http://techportal.inviqa.com/2009/09/07/graphs-in-the-database-sql-meets-social-networks/, pp. 1-11. |
Visual Paradigm, “DB Visual Architect 4.0 Designer's Guide: Chapter 6—Mapping Object Model to Data Model and Vice Versa”, 2007, pp. 6-2-6-26. |
Anonymous “Fraud Detection Using Data Analytics in the Banking Industry,” ACL Services Ltd., 2010, pp. 1-9 <http://www.acl.com/pdfs/DP_Fraud_detection_BANKING.pdf>. |
W. Caid et al., “Context Vector-Based Text Retrieval”, Fair Isaac Corporation, Aug. 2003, pp. 1-20. |
K. Matterhorn, “How to Share Data Between a Host Computer & Virtual Machine,” Ehow, pp. 1-3, <http://www.ehow.com/how_7385388_share-host-computer-virtual-machine.html>, Retrieved Feb. 17, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/342,305, Friedlander et al.—Specification Filed Jan. 3, 2012. |
Richard Saling, “How to Give a Great Presentation! From the HP Learning Center”, Jul. 28, 2008, <http://rsaling.wordpress.com/2008/07/28/how-to-give-a-great-presentation/>, pp. 1-28. |
A. Birrell et al., “A design for high-performance flash disks.” ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review 41.2 (2007), pp. 88-93. |
N. Saxena et al., “Data remanence effects on memory-based entropy collection for RFID systems”, International Journal of Information Security 10.4 (2011), pp. 213-222. |
A. Jin, et al., “Biohashing: Two Factor Authentication Featuring Fingerprint Data and Tokenised Random Number,”Pattern Recognition 37, Elsevier Ltd., 2004, pp. 2245-2255. |
M. Yu, et al., “Secure and Robust Error Correction for Physical Unclonable Functions”, Verifying Physical Trustworthiness of ICS and Systems, IEEE Design & Test of Computers, IEEE, Jan./Feb. 2010, pp. 48-64. |
P. Kanerva, “What We Mean When We Say “What's the Dollar of Mexico?”: Prototypes and Mapping in Concept Space”, Quantum Informatics for Cognitive, Social, and Semantic Processes: Papers From the AAAI Fall Symposium, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, 2010, pp. 2-6. |
P. Kanerva, “Hyperdimensional Computing: An Introduction to Computing in Distributed Representation With High-Dimensional Random Vectors”, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, Cogn Comput, 1, 2009, pp. 139-159. |
M.J. Flynn, et al., “Sparse Distributed Memory Principles of Operation”, Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science, 1989, pp. 1-60. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/342,406—Non-Final Office Action Mailed Sep. 27, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/610,347—Non-Final Office Action Mailed July 19, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/610,347—Notice of Allowance Mailed August 19, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/592,905—Non-Final Office Action Mailed May 8, 2013. |
J. Cheng et al., “Context-Aware Object Connection Discovery in Large Graphs”, Data Engineering, 2009. ICDE '09. IEEE 25th International Conference on, pp. 856-867. |
R. Angles et al., “Survey of Graph Database Models”, ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 40, No. 1, Article 1, Feb. 2008, pp. 1-65. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/562,714, Robert R. Friedlander, et al.—Specification and Drawings Filed Jul. 31, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/648,801 Examiner's Answer Mailed Oct. 1, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/569,366—Non-Final Office Action mailed Jun. 30, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/733,052—Non-Final Office Action mailed Sep. 18, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/861,058—Non-Final Office Action mailed Dec. 11, 2014. |
U.S Appl. No. 13/609,710—Final Office Action mailed Jul. 24, 2014. |
“Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary”, Merriam-Webster Inc., 1991, pp. 77 and 242. |
“The American Heritage College Dictionary”, Fourth Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004, pp. 44 and 262. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/680,832—Non-Final Office Action Mailed Apr. 3, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/628,853—Notice of Allowance Mailed March 4, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/540,267—Non-Final Office Action Mailed Feb. 4, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/540,230—Non-Final Office Action Mailed Jan. 30, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/540,295—Non-Final Office Action Mailed Jan. 30, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/609,710—Non-Final Office Action Mailed Jan. 27, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/342,406—Notice of Allowance Mailed Mar. 20, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/628,853—Non-Final Office Action Mailed Nov. 7, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/593,905—Notice of Allowance Mailed Oct. 25, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/595,356—Non-Final Office Action Mailed Apr. 14, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/755,623—Notice of Allowance Mailed May 27, 2014. |
S. Alam et al., “Interoperability of Security-Enabled Internet of Things”, Springer, Wireless Personal Communication, 2011, No. 61, pp. 567-586. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/648,801—Non-Final Office Action Mailed Jul. 1, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/896,461—Specification and Drawings Filed May 17, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/610,523—Non-Final Office Action mailed Apr. 30, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/540,267—Non-Final Office Action mailed Jun. 4, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/609,710—Examiner's Answer mailed Jun. 9, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/780,779—Non-Final Office Action mailed Apr. 3, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/896,461—Non-Final Office Action mailed Apr. 21, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/755,987—Non-Final Office Action mailed Jan. 2, 2015. |
G. Begelman et al., “Automated Tag Clustering: Improving Search and Exploration in the TagSpace”, Collaborative Tagging Workshop, WWW2006, Edinburgh, Scotland, May 2006, pp. 1-29. |
U.S. Appl. No. 131621,931—Non-Final Office Action mailed Jan. 28, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/732,567—Non-Final Office Action mailed Jan. 30, 2015. |
U.S.Appl. No. 141078,135—Notice of Allowance mailed Feb. 24, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/756,051—Notice of Allowance mailed Feb. 27, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/732,567—Non-Final Office Action mailed Mar. 26, 2015. |
L. Du et al., “A Unified Object-Oriented Toolkit for Discrete Contextual Computer Vision”, IEEE, IEEE Colloquium on Pattern Recognition, Feb. 1997, pp. 3/1- 3/5. (Abstract Only). |
S. Ceri et al., “Model-Driven Development of Context-Aware Web Applications”, ACM, ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, 2007, (Abstract Only). |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/648,801—Final Office Action mailed Jan. 13, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/609,710 Decision on Appeal Mailed Nov. 4, 2016. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/733,066 Examiner's Answer Mailed Dec. 20, 2016. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/861,058 Final Office Action Mailed Dec. 29, 2016. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/648,801 Decision on Appeal Mailed Jan. 18, 2017. |
Filippova, Katja and Keith B. Hall, “Improved Video Categorization From Text Metadata and User Comments”. Proceedings of the 34th International SCM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. ACM, 2011. |
Graham Pryor, “Attitudes and Aspirations in a Diverse World: The Project Store Perspective on Scientific Repositories”. Ukoln, University of Bath, Digital Curation Center. The International Journal of Digital Curation, Issue 1, vol. 2, 2007. Nov. 2006. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/896,506 Non-Final Office Action Mailed Oct. 26, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/223,296 Notice of Allowance dated Jun. 30, 2017. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160217185 A1 | Jul 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13896506 | May 2013 | US |
Child | 15088221 | US |