The subject matter regarded as the invention is particularly pointed out and distinctly claimed in the concluding portion of the specification. The invention, both as to organization and method of operation, together with objects, features, and advantages thereof, may best be understood by reference to the following detailed description when read with the accompanying drawings in which:
Rating systems are provided for users to record their rating of something that they have used or experienced in order to provide an indication to other users of the standard of the experience. The types of things that may be rated are wide ranging from goods to services to experiences. With the advent of the Internet many rating systems are provided on-line, enabling anyone to contribute their rating. Ratings submitted by users are stored in a database referencing the rated item or service with the time that the rating was submitted and, optionally, the name or another indication of the user submitting it.
Items and services which have rating systems may take many different forms. Documents on the Internet in the form of items within web pages are one form of item for which a rating system is very useful. This example, is used to explain the invention further, although it should be appreciated that the rating system could be applied to many types of items and services whether read, downloaded, hired, sold, or otherwise used or experienced.
Referring to
The user's rating together with other users' ratings are stored in a rating system 106. A controller 108 controls the rating system 106. In the described system, the controller 108 has access to user directories 110 which can determine a type or group of the user 102. For example, the user directory 110 may be a business employee directory providing details of the user's occupation, or it may be a user directory for a web site providing user's previously submitted details. The controller 108 can determine a type for a user 102 using the user's name, email address or other identifying means.
The controller 108 determines a type or group within which the user 102 can be categorized and adds this type to the user's rating stored in the rating system 106 together with a timestamp of the rating.
A graphical user interface 112 is provided for displaying the contents of the rating system 106 to users to provide guidance on the value of the rated items or services. In
The graphical user interface 112 can display the results of the ratings of particular items or services against a time line to show how the ratings have varied over time. Furthermore, the graphical user interface 112 can display the results of the ratings according to the type of user in order to show the value of the item or service to a particular user type. A user can interrogate the graphical user interface 112 of the rating system 106 to show the types of users he is interested in over a time scale of interest.
The graphical user interface 112 allows a user to switch between bar, line and pie charts, and allows a user to view the graphs for any of the other groups monitored, and not just their own.
In one embodiment, the graphical user interface 112 may be a web page viewable by a user via a web browser.
As an example default, the system may display a highest rating group of users, a middle rating group of users, and a lowest rating group of users.
Alternatively, the user may select 303 the user groups of interest to him, either the same type as himself or one or more other types. The user may also select 304 the time scale of interest. A representation of the ratings is displayed 305 for the user groups over the time scale of interest.
In one embodiment, a rating system that applies to a document is considered. For example, the document could be a web feed such as an RSS (Really Simple Syndication) feed.
When a user reads a document, he will have the option to rate it on how relevant he found it. This rating will be stored in a database as in conventional system with the time the rating was submitted. A controller then consults the company's employee directory (or user directory for a web site, etc.) to find the user's occupation, for example, a software engineer or a business consultant. This occupation is stored alongside the submitted rating. For example, the user may be a software engineer who gave a page of a web site a rating of 5 out of 10 on the 29 Nov. 2005.
When another user searches for a document that matches the one rated above, the system may check the profession of the new user. The system may then retrieve the ratings given to the returned documents by other users of the same profession and build a graph of the rating given by these individuals over time. This may be represented in a graphical user interface as a graph with three lines, the highest rating group, the lowest rating group, and the middle rating group.
It is possible that a software engineer might want to look at documents that are relevant to business consultants. Therefore, the graphical user interface enables this to be specified.
This system provides a way to distinguish between the users that are giving the system ratings. The user are not necessarily using a search engine to locate documents, so the context of what the user is looking for cannot be determined from the search arguments.
In
In this graph, it can be seen that for a business consultant, the document was never really of any use, and for a software developer, it can be seen that its relevance at May 2006 is fading fast, but maybe useful to a user if he is working with code that originated back in January 2006.
This could be extended and customized so that users are not grouped by profession but by team. So a group who are writing documentation can see how relevant the documents they produce are to their target audience, while their target audience can easily tell which documents are relevant to them. As the documents become less relevant, the group who wrote them originally, would be able to see that it is time to review and update them.
The system does not try to determine which is the best document for a user to read and does not recommend anything to the user. The system takes the information it has regarding the ratings given to it by users of the same profession or type and displays this back to the user in form of a graph over time. Thereafter, it is up to the user whether or not they decide to follow the evaluations.
Although the graphical representation shows the user a document's relevance to them over time, indicating that, for example, it is not as relevant now as it was when it was written, that does not necessarily mean that the document is now irrelevant to the user. Its very possible that a user would want a document, for example, for an older version of code. Its relevance at the present time might be very low, but if it had high ratings at the time of the old version the user wants, then this could be exactly what they are looking for. The system could be set up so that a user could search for a document of high relevance in a given time frame. The ratings are never lost, and the relevance over a time frame is easy to calculate.
Also, there is no restriction on the user type that a user can search for. So, if a user is a technical employee but needs a business case for a new project that they are be working on, they may want to find documents useful to business analysts on the same subject, documents that would normally be well outside the user's area of interest or expertise.
The system, compiles ratings for a document from a group of users of a given type, uses this information to build a graphic model of the relevance to a user of a given type and displays this information to the user. Ratings may never be dropped, allowing the user to find ratings of relevance to them from far into the past.
In another embodiment, the rating system could be applied to an on-line service, such as an on-line banking service or on-line store. Users can be grouped according to types such as business, private individuals, or according to geographic location, etc. The rating of the service over time can then be evaluated for a type of user. This can provide valuable information to the service provider who can see if a service is improving in rating or not for a particular group of customers. This information is also useful to other users who may be considering using the service and can see if it has a high rating for their particular type.
A rating system may be provided as a service to a customer over a network.
The invention can take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment, or an embodiment containing both hardware and software elements. In a preferred embodiment, the invention is implemented in software, which includes but is not limited to firmware, resident software, microcode, etc.
The invention can take the form of a computer program product accessible from a computer-usable or computer-readable medium providing program code for use by or in connection with a computer or any instruction execution system. For the purposes of this description, a computer usable or computer readable medium can be any apparatus that can contain, store, communicate, propagate, or transport the program for use by or in connection with the instruction execution system, apparatus or device.
The medium can be an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system (or apparatus or device) or a propagation medium. Examples of a computer-readable medium include a semiconductor or solid state memory, magnetic tape, a removable computer diskette, a random access memory (RAM), a read only memory (ROM), a rigid magnetic disk and an optical disk. Current examples of optical disks include compact disk read only memory (CD-ROM), compact disk read/write (CD-R/W), and DVD.
Improvements and modifications can be made to the foregoing without departing from the scope of the present invention.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
GB0615503.0 | Aug 2006 | GB | national |