Recommender system for identifying a new set of media items responsive to an input set of media items and knowledge base metrics

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 8312017
  • Patent Number
    8,312,017
  • Date Filed
    Monday, January 11, 2010
    14 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, November 13, 2012
    12 years ago
Abstract
Systems and methods are disclosed for identifying a new set of media items in response to an input set (or “query set”) of media items and knowledge base metrics. The system uses a knowledge base consisting of a collection of mediasets. Various metrics among media items are considered by analyzing how the media items are grouped to form the mediasets in the knowledge base. Such association or “similarity” metrics are preferably stored in a matrix form that allows the system to efficiently identify a new set of media items that complements the input set of media items.
Description
TECHNICAL FIELD

This invention relates generally to systems and methods for recommending media items to a user in a personalized manner. It particularly relates to “recommender” computer software systems for media items which are grouped by end users to define mediasets.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

New technologies combining digital media item players with dedicated software, together with new media distribution channels through computer networks (e.g., the Internet) are quickly changing the way people organize and play media items. As a direct consequence of such evolution in the media industry, users are faced with a huge volume of available choices that clearly overwhelm them when choosing what item to play in a certain moment.


This overwhelming effect is apparent in the music arena, where people are faced with the problem of selecting music from very large collections of songs. However, in the future, we might detect similar effects in other domains such as music videos, movies, news items, etc.


In general, our invention is applicable to any kind of media item that can be grouped by users to define mediasets. For example, in the music domain, these mediasets are called playlists. Users put songs together in playlists to overcome the problem of being overwhelmed when choosing a song from a large collection, or just to enjoy a set of songs in particular situations. For example, one might be interested in having a playlist for running, another for cooking, etc.


Different approaches can be adopted to help users choose the right options with personalized recommendations. One kind of approach is about using human expertise to classify the media items and then use these classifications to infer recommendations to users based on an input mediaset. For instance, if in the input mediaset the item x appears and x belongs to the same classification as y, then a system could recommend item y based on the fact that both items are classified in a similar cluster. However, this approach requires an incredibly huge amount of human work and expertise. Another approach is to analyze the data of the items (audio signal for songs, video signal for video, etc) and then try to match users preferences with the extracted analysis. This class of approaches is yet to be shown effective from a technical point of view.


Hosken (U.S. Pat. No. 6,438,579) describes a system and method for recommending media items responsive to query media items based on the explicit and implicit user characterizations of the content of the media items. Dunning, et. al. (U.S. Patent Application Pubs 2002/0082901 and 2003/0229537) disclose a system and method for discovering relationships between media items based on explicit and implicit user associations between said items. The present invention differs from Hosken and Dunning, et. al. in that it provides an automatic way to discover relationships between media items without requiring any user rating or any other knowledge from the user.


Lazarus et. al. (U.S. Pat. No. 6,134,532) describe a system and method for providing individually targeted advertising items to users based on observations of user behavior as quantified by representations for important content words in text-bearing materials accessed by a user. Advertising items responsive to the observed behavior of a user are identified by explicitly characterizing content words in the advertisement and by further characterizing candidate responsive items selected in this manner based on observations of user responses to them. Behrens et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 6,615,208) describe a method for associating textual materials similar to that of Lazarus et. al. for recommending items for purchase to a user based on the observed purchasing behavior of the user. The present invention differs from Lazarus et. al. and Behrens et. al. in that it is not based on user behavior other than how users in general associate items to form mediasets. Furthermore, Lazarus et al. and Behrens et. al. use standard methods for analyzing textual materials and the associated vector-space techniques as the basis for quantifying associations between textual representations of user behavior and textual content of advertising items while the present invention uses novel variants of associational methods for media items as the basis for associating media items.


Aggarwal and Yu (U.S. Pat. No. 6,487,539) describe a system for providing product recommendations to users based on extracting characterizations of products from textual descriptive materials about product features. Users are clustered with others users based on observed purchasing behaviors and the extracted descriptions of products purchased by a cluster of users are matched to extracted descriptions of other products and most similar products recommended to a user that is associated with that cluster of users. The present invention differs from Aggarwal and Yu in that the associations among media items are not based on characterizations of the items themselves, but rather on how they are grouped together.


Robinson (U.S. Pat. No. 5,918,014) describes a system and a process for presenting users of the World Wide Web with targeted advertising. Users are clustered based on observed web browsing of sites and purchasing activities while advertisements of probable interest to the users in a cluster are identified by presenting ads to users identified with the cluster and observing the interest of users in the advertisement as expressed by exploration of the ad and purchasing activity. Ads are selected for presentation to a specific user by first associating the user with an identified community, and then selecting from the ads associated with that community those, which conform more closely to the specific characteristics of the user, utilized to associate the user with the community. The present invention differs from Robinson in that media items are not identified for potential presentation based on the acceptance of the media item in response to random presentation to a group of users representative of the user, media items for presentation are instead affirmatively identified by the media items they contain.


BRIEF SUMMARY OF PRESENTLY PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

This invention addresses the problem of assisting users in building their mediasets by recommending media items that go well together with an initial (or input) mediaset. The recommendation is computed using metrics among the media items of a knowledge base of the system. This knowledge base comprises collections of mediasets from a community of users. (As explained below, a mediaset is not a collection of media items or content. Rather, it is a list of such items, and may include various metadata.) Preferably, the methods of the present invention are implemented in computer software.


In commercial applications, the invention can be deployed in various ways. Recommender services can be provided, for example, to remote users of client computing machines via a network of almost any kind, wired or wireless. Here we use “computing machines” to include traditional computers, as well as cell phones, PDA's, portable music players etc. The knowledge base of the system, a database, can be local or remote from the user. It may be at one location or server, or distributed in various ways.


The invention in one aspect embodies a system for identifying a set of media items in response to an input set of media items. The system requires a knowledge base consisting of a collection of mediasets. Mediasets are sets of media items, which are naturally grouped by users. They reflect the users subjective judgments and preferences. The mediasets of the knowledge base define metrics among items. Such metrics indicate the extent of correlation among media items in the mediasets of the knowledge base.


Various different metrics between and among media items can be generated from the knowledge base of mediasets. Such metrics can include but are not limited to the follow examples:

    • a) Pre-concurrency (for ordered mediasets) between two items is computed as the number of times a given item precedes the other item in the mediasets of the knowledge base.
    • b) Post-concurrency (for ordered mediasets) between two items is computed as the number of times an item follows another item in the mediasets of the knowledge base.
    • c) Co-concurrency between two items is computed as the number of times the items appear together in a mediaset.
    • d) Metadata similarities may be computed as well by considering keywords associated with the media items such as artist, actor, date, etc.
    • e) Combinations of the previous metrics can be useful.
    • f) Combinations of the previous metrics applying transitivity.


Such metrics can be represented in an explicit form that directly associates media items with other media items. For each media item of the input set, the system retrieves n media items with highest metrics. These media items are called candidates. Then, the recommended set of media items is a subset of the candidates that maximize an optimization criterion. Such criterion can be simply defined using the metrics of the knowledge base of the system. Furthermore, such criterion can also include filters including but not limited to:

    • a) Filters that the user expresses to focus the recommendation only on a determined type of items.
    • b) Filters that the user expresses to focus the recommendations on items that meet certain keyword-based criteria, such as a specific artist's, year/s, genre/s, etc.
    • c) Filters that personalize the recommendations to the user. This kind of filtering includes recommending only items that the user knows about, or only items that the user does not know about, etc.


Additional aspects and advantages will be apparent from the following detailed description of preferred embodiments, which proceeds with reference to the accompanying drawings.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1A is a representation in matrix form of a metric describing the similarity values between collections of media items.



FIG. 1B provides a weighted graph representation for the associations within a collection of media items. Each edge between two media items is annotated with a weight representing the value of the metric for the similarity between the media items.



FIG. 2 is a block diagram of one method for selecting a set of media items corresponding to an initial set of media items in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.



FIG. 3 is a simplified, conceptual diagram of a knowledge base or database comprising a plurality of mediasets.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

Reference is now made to the figures in which like reference numerals refer to like elements. For clarity, the first digit of a reference numeral indicates the figure number in which the corresponding element is first used.


In the following description, certain specific details of programming, software modules, user selections, network transactions, database queries, database structures, etc. are omitted to avoid obscuring the invention. Those of ordinary skill in computer sciences will comprehend many ways to implement the invention in various embodiments, the details of which can be determined using known technologies.


Furthermore, the described features, structures, or characteristics may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments. In general, the methodologies of the present invention are advantageously carried out using one or more digital processors, for example the types of microprocessors that are commonly found in servers, PC's, laptops, PDA's and all manner of desktop or portable electronic appliances.


Definitions

The system preferably comprises or has access to a knowledge base which is a collection of mediasets. A mediaset is a list of media items that a user has grouped together. A media item can be almost any kind of content; audio, video, multi-media, etc., for example a song, a book, a newspaper or magazine article, a movie, a piece of a radio program, etc. Media items might also be artists or albums. If a mediaset is composed of a single type of media items it is called a homogeneous mediaset, otherwise it is called a heterogeneous mediaset. A mediaset can be ordered or unordered. An ordered mediaset implies a certain order with respect to the sequence in which the items are used1 by the user. Note again that a mediaset, in a preferred embodiment, is a list of media items, i.e. meta data, rather than the actual content of the media items. In other embodiments, the content itself may be included. Preferably, a knowledge base is stored in a machine-readable digital storage system. It can employ well-known database technologies for establishing, maintaining and querying the database. 1 Depending on the nature of the item, it will be played, viewed, read, etc.


In general, mediasets are based on the assumption that users group media items together following some logic or reasoning, which may be purely subjective, or not. For example, in the music domain, a user may be selecting a set of songs for driving, hence that is a homogeneous mediaset of songs. In this invention, we also consider other kinds of media items such as books, movies, newspapers, and so on. For example, if we consider books, a user may have a list of books for the summer, a list of books for bus riding, and another list of books for the weekends. A user may be interested in expressing a heterogeneous mediaset with a mix of books and music, expressing (impliedly) that the listed music goes well with certain books.


A set of media items is not considered the same as a mediaset. The difference is mainly about the intention of the user in grouping the items together. In the case of a mediaset the user is expressing that the items in the mediaset go together well, in some sense, according to her personal preferences. A common example of a music mediaset is a playlist. On the other hand, a set of media items does not express necessarily the preferences of a user. We use the term set of media items to refer to the input of the system of the invention as well as to the output of the system.


A metric M between a pair of media items i and j for a given knowledge base k expresses some degree of relation between i and j with respect to k. A metric may be expressed as a “distance,” where smaller distance values (proximity) represent stronger association values, or as a similarity, where larger similarity values represent stronger association values. These are functionally equivalent, but the mathematics are complementary. The most immediate metric is the co-concurrency (i, j, k) that indicates how many times item i and item j appear together in any of the mediasets of k. The metric pre-concurrency (i, j, k) indicates how many times item i and item j appear together but i before j in any of the mediasets of k. The metric post-concurrency (i, j, k) indicates how many times item i and item j appear together but only i after j in any of the mediasets of k. The previous defined metrics can also be applied to considering the immediate sequence of i and j. So, the system might be considering co/pre/post-concurrencies metrics but only if items i and j are consecutive in the mediasets (i.e., the mediasets are ordered). Other metrics can be considered and also new ones can be defined by combining the previous ones.


A metric may be computed based on any of the above metrics and applying transitivity. For instance, consider co-concurrency between item i and j, co(i,j), and between j and k, co(j,k), and consider that co(i,k)=0. We could create another metric to include transitivity, for example d(i,k)=1/co(i,j)+1/co(j,k). These type of transitivity metrics may be efficiently computed using standard branch and bound search algorithms. This metric reveals an association between items i and k notwithstanding that i and k do not appear within any one mediaset in K.


A matrix representation of metric M, for a given knowledge base K can be defined as a bidimensional matrix where the element M(i,j) is the value of the metric between the media item i and media item j.


A graph representation for a given knowledge base k, is a graph where nodes represent media items, and edges are between pairs of media items. Pairs of media items i, j are linked by labeled directed edges, where the label indicates the value of the similarity or distance metric M(i,j) for the edge with head media item i and tail media item j.


PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION

One embodiment of the invention is illustrated by the flow diagram shown in FIG. 2. This method accepts an input set 301 of media items. Usually, this is a partial mediaset, i.e. a set of media items (at lease one item) that a user grouped together as a starting point with the goal of building a mediaset. A first collection of candidate media items most similar to the input media items is generated by process 302 as follows.


As a preliminary matter, in a presently preferred embodiment, a pre-processing step is carried out to analyze the contents of an existing knowledge base. This can be done in advance of receiving any input items. As noted above, the knowledge base comprises an existing collection of mediasets. This is illustrated in FIG. 3, which shows a simplified conceptual illustration of a knowledge base 400. In FIG. 3, the knowledge base 400 includes a plurality of mediasets, delineated by rectangles [or ovals] and numbered 1 through 7. Each mediaset comprises at least two media items. For example, mediaset 2 has three items, while mediaset 7 has five items. The presence of media items within a given mediaset creates an association among them.


Pre-processing analysis of a knowledge base can be conducted for any selected metric. In general, the metrics reflect and indeed quantify the association between pairs of media items in a given knowledge base. The process is described by way of example using the co-concurrency metric mentioned earlier. For each item in a mediaset, the process identifies every other item in the same mediaset, thereby defining all of the pairs of items in that mediaset. For example, in FIG. 3, one pair in set 1 is the pair M(1,1)+M(1,3). Three pairs are defined that include M(1,1). This process is repeated for every mediaset in the knowledge base, thus every pair of items that appears in any mediaset throughout the knowledge base is defined.


Next, for each pair of media items, a co-concurrency metric is incremented for each additional occurrence of the same pair of items in the same knowledge base. For example, if a pair of media items, say the song “Uptown Girl” by Billy Joel and “Hallelujah” by Jeff Buckley, appear together in 42 different mediasets in the knowledge base (not necessarily adjacent one another), then the co-concurrency metric might be 42 (or some other figure depending on the scaling selected, normalization, etc. In some embodiments, this figure or co-concurrency “weight” may be normalized to a number between zero and one.


Referring now to FIG. 1A, matrix 100 illustrates a useful method for storing the metric values or weights for any particular metric. Here, individual media items in the knowledge base, say m1, m2, m3 . . . mk are assigned corresponding rows and columns in the matrix. In the matrix, the selected metric weight for every pair of items is entered at row, column location x,y corresponding to the two media items defining the pair. In FIG. 1A, the values are normalized.


Now we assume an input set of media items is received. Referring again to process step 302, a collection of “candidate media items” most similar to the input media items is generated, based on a metric matrix like matrix 100 of FIG. 1A. For instance, for each media item, say (item m2) in the input set 301, process 302 could add to a candidate collection of media items every media item (m1, m3 . . . mk in FIG. 1A) that has a non-zero similarity value, or exceeds a predetermined threshold value, in the corresponding row 102 of metric matrix 100 for the media item m2, labeling each added media item with the corresponding metric value (0.7, 0.4 and 0.1, respectively). See the edges in FIG. 1B. For each media item in the input set of size m, process 302 selects n media items as candidates; thus the aggregation of all the candidates produces a set of at most m*n media items.


Process 303 receives the candidate set from process 302 which contains at the most m*n media items. This component selects p elements from the m*n items of the candidate set. This selection can be done according to various criteria. For example, the system may consider that the candidates should be selected according to the media item distribution that generated the candidate set. This distribution policy may be used to avoid having many candidates coming from very few media items. Also, the system may consider the popularity of the media items in the candidate set. The popularity of a media item with respect to a knowledge base indicates the frequency of such media item in the mediasets of the knowledge base.


Finally, from the second collection of [p] media items, a third and final output set 305 of some specified number of media items is selected that satisfy any additional desired external constraints by a filter process 304. For instance, this step could ensure that the final set of media items is balanced with respect to the metrics among the media sets of the final set. For example, the system may maximize the sum of the metrics among each pair of media items in the resulting set. Sometimes, the system may be using optimization techniques when computation would otherwise be too expensive. Filtering criteria such as personalization or other preferences expressed by the user may also be considered in this step. In some applications, because of some possible computational constraints, these filtering steps may be done in the process 303 instead of 304. Filtering in other embodiments might include genre, decade or year of creation, vendor, etc. Also, filtering can be used to demote, rather then remove a candidate output item.


In another embodiment or aspect of the invention, explicit associations including similarity values between a subset of the full set of media items known to the system, as shown in graph form in FIG. 1B, may be used. To illustrate, if the similarity value between a first media item 202, generally denoted below by the index i, and a second media item, say 214, generally denoted below by the index j, is not explicitly specified, an implicit similarity value can instead be derived by following a directed path such as that represented by edges 210 and 212 from the first media item to an intermediate item, and finally to the second media item of interest, in this example item mp. Any number of intermediate items can be traversed in this manner, which we call a transitive technique. The list of similarity values M(i, i+1), M(i+1, i+2), M(i+k, j) between pairs of media items along this path through the graph are combined in a manner such that the resulting value satisfies a definition of similarity between media item i and media item j appropriate for the application. For example, the similarity M(i,j) might be computed as:

M(i,j)=min{M(i,i+1),M(i,i+2), . . . , M(i+k,j)}
or
M(i,j)=M(i,i+1)*M(i,i+2)* . . . *M(i+k,j)


Other methods for computing a similarity value M(i,j) for the path between a first media item i and a second, non-adjacent media item j where the edges are labeled with the sequence of similarity values M(i, i+1), M(i+1, i+2), . . . , M(i+k, j) can be used. From the user standpoint, this corresponds to determining an association metric for a pair of items that do not appear within the same mediaset.


Many modifications and other embodiments of the invention will come to mind to one skilled in the art to which this invention pertains having the benefit of the teachings presented in the foregoing descriptions and the associated drawings. Therefore, it is to be understood that the invention is not to be limited to the specific embodiments disclosed and that modifications and other embodiments are intended to be included within the scope of the appended claims. For example, one of ordinary skill in the art will understand that, while the above system and methods were described as embodied in a media recommendation system, it should be understood that the inventive system could be used in any system for recommending other items that can be grouped by users following some criterion. Although specific terms are employed herein, there are used in a generic and descriptive sense only and not for purposes of limitation.


It will be obvious to those having skill in the art that many changes may be made to the details of the above-described embodiments without departing from the underlying principles of the invention. The scope of the present invention should, therefore, be determined only by the following claims.

Claims
  • 1. A computer-implemented method for dynamically generating an output set of media items responsive to an input set of media items comprising: receiving an input set comprising at least one input media item;accessing a knowledge base comprising a plurality of collected mediasets, each knowledge base mediaset comprising at least one media item;for an input media item, computing a corresponding value of a selected metric relative to each one of a plurality of media items in the knowledge base, wherein computing comprises computing a corresponding metric value for each input item relative to each one of a plurality of media items in the knowledge base by applying a co-concurrency metric responsive to a number of times that the respective input media item appears together with the corresponding media item in the same mediaset in the knowledge base;responsive to the computed metric values, selecting at least one of the knowledge base media items as a candidate output media item;selecting among the candidate output media items to form the output set of media items, wherein selecting a media item for which the computed metric value exceeds a predetermined threshold metric value; anddelivering the output set of media items to a user.
  • 2. The method according to claim 1 wherein the input set of media items comprises first meta data identifying songs.
  • 3. The method according to claim 2 wherein the output set of media items comprises second meta data identifying songs.
  • 4. The method according to claim 1 wherein: selecting among the candidate output media items to form the output set of media items comprises applying a predetermined selection criterion responsive to the media item distribution from which the candidate output media items were selected.
  • 5. The method according to claim 1 wherein: the input set of media items comprises first meta data identifying songs;the knowledge base comprises a plurality of collected mediasets of songs; andthe output set of media items comprises second meta data identifying songs.
  • 6. The method according to claim 5 wherein delivering the output set of media items to a user comprises displaying or transmitting the second meta data to the user.
  • 7. The method according to claim 6 and further comprising filtering the selected candidate output media items to apply a predetermined additional external constraint to form the output set of media items.
  • 8. The method according to claim 7 wherein filtering comprises maximizing the sum of the selected metric values among each pair of media items included in selecting the output set.
  • 9. The method according to claim 7 wherein filtering comprises applying a predetermined preference or criterion selected by the user.
  • 10. A method for dynamically generating an output set of media items responsive to an input set of media items comprising: receiving an input set comprising at least one input media item;accessing a knowledge base comprising a plurality of collected mediasets, each knowledge base mediaset comprising at least one media item;for an input media item, computing a corresponding value of a selected metric relative to each one of a plurality of media items in the knowledge base, wherein computing comprises computing a corresponding metric value for each input item relative to each one of a plurality of media items in the knowledge base by applying a co-concurrency metric responsive to a number of times that the respective input media item appears together with the corresponding media item in the same mediaset in the knowledge base;selecting among the knowledge base media items the items having the highest computed metric values as candidate output media items, wherein selecting a media item for which the computed metric value exceeds a predetermined threshold metric value; andselecting among the candidate output media items to form the output set of media items.
  • 11. The method according to claim 10 wherein the selected metric comprises one of pre-concurrency metric, a post-concurrency metric and a co-concurrency metric.
  • 12. The method according to claim 10 wherein: the input set of media items comprises first meta data identifying songs;the knowledge base comprises a plurality of collected mediasets of songs; andthe output set of media items comprises second meta data identifying songs.
  • 13. The method according to claim 12 and further comprising filtering the selected candidate output media items to form the output set of media items.
  • 14. The method according to claim 13 wherein filtering applies a filter selected by a user to limit the output set of media items to a determined type of items.
  • 15. The method according to claim 13 wherein filtering applies a filter selected by a user to limit the output set of media items to items that meet defined keyword-based meta data criteria, thereby personalizing the recommendations.
  • 16. A computer-implemented method for dynamically generating an output set of media items responsive to an input set of media items comprising: receiving an input set comprising at least one input media item from a first user;accessing a knowledge base comprising a plurality of collected mediasets from a plurality of other users, each knowledge base mediaset comprising at least one media item;for an input media item, computing a corresponding value of a selected metric relative to each one of a plurality of media items in the knowledge base, wherein computing comprises computing a corresponding metric value for each input item relative to each one of a plurality of media items in the knowledge base by applying a co-concurrency metric responsive to a number of times that the respective input media item appears together with the corresponding media item in the same mediaset in the knowledge base;responsive to the computed metric values, selecting at least one of the knowledge base media items as a candidate output media item;selecting among the candidate output media items to form the output set of media items, wherein selecting a media item for which the computed metric value exceeds a predetermined threshold metric value; anddelivering the output set of media items to the first user.
  • 17. A computer-implemented method for dynamically generating an output set of media items responsive to an input set of media items comprising: receiving an input set comprising at least one input media item;accessing an ordered knowledge base comprising a plurality of collected mediasets, each knowledge base mediaset comprising at least one media item;for an input media item, computing a corresponding value of a selected metric relative to each one of a plurality of media items in the knowledge base, wherein the step of computing includes computing a corresponding metric value for each input item relative to each one of a plurality of media items in the knowledge base by applying at least one of a pre-concurrency metric and post-concurrency metric;responsive to the computed metric values, selecting at least one of the knowledge base media items as a candidate output media item;selecting among the candidate output media items to form the output set of media items, wherein selecting a candidate output media item comprises selecting a media item for which the computed metric value exceeds a predetermined threshold metric value; anddelivering the output set of media items to a user.
  • 18. A method for dynamically generating an output set of media items responsive to an input set of media items comprising: receiving an input set comprising at least one input media item;accessing an ordered knowledge base comprising a plurality of collected mediasets, each knowledge base mediaset comprising at least one media item;for an input media item, computing a corresponding value of a selected metric relative to each one of a plurality of media items in the knowledge base, wherein the step of computing includes computing a corresponding metric value for each input item relative to each one of a plurality of media items in the knowledge base by applying at least one of a pre-concurrency metric and post-concurrency metric;selecting among the knowledge base media items the items having the highest computed metric values as candidate output media items, wherein selecting a candidate output media item comprises selecting a media item for which the computed metric value exceeds a predetermined threshold metric value; andselecting among the candidate output media items to form the output set of media items.
RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims priority from pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/346,818, filed Feb. 3, 2006, which claims benefit from U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/649,987 filed Feb. 3, 2005, all of which is incorporated herein by this reference. © 2005-2006 MusicStrands, Inc. A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material that is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever. 37 CFR §1.71(d).

US Referenced Citations (258)
Number Name Date Kind
4996642 Hey Feb 1991 A
5355302 Martin Oct 1994 A
5375235 Berry Dec 1994 A
5464946 Lewis Nov 1995 A
5483278 Strubbe Jan 1996 A
5583763 Atcheson Dec 1996 A
5724521 Dedrick Mar 1998 A
5754939 Herz May 1998 A
5758257 Herz May 1998 A
5765144 Larche Jun 1998 A
5890152 Rapaport Mar 1999 A
5918014 Robinson Jun 1999 A
5926624 Katz et al. Jul 1999 A
5950176 Keiser Sep 1999 A
6000044 Chrysos Dec 1999 A
6047311 Ueno Apr 2000 A
6112186 Bergh Aug 2000 A
6134532 Lazarus Oct 2000 A
6345288 Reed Feb 2002 B1
6346951 Mastronardi Feb 2002 B1
6347313 Ma Feb 2002 B1
6349339 Williams Feb 2002 B1
6381575 Martin Apr 2002 B1
6430539 Lazarus Aug 2002 B1
6434621 Pezzillo Aug 2002 B1
6438579 Hosken Aug 2002 B1
6487539 Aggarwal Nov 2002 B1
6526411 Ward Feb 2003 B1
6532469 Feldman Mar 2003 B1
6577716 Minter Jun 2003 B1
6587127 Leeke Jul 2003 B1
6615208 Behrens Sep 2003 B1
6647371 Shinohara Nov 2003 B2
6687696 Hofmann Feb 2004 B2
6690918 Evans Feb 2004 B2
6704576 Brachman Mar 2004 B1
6727914 Gutta Apr 2004 B1
6748395 Picker Jun 2004 B1
6751574 Shinohara Jun 2004 B2
6785688 Abajian Aug 2004 B2
6842761 Diamond Jan 2005 B2
6850252 Hoffberg Feb 2005 B1
6914891 Ha Jul 2005 B2
6931454 Deshpande Aug 2005 B2
6933433 Porteus Aug 2005 B1
6941324 Plastina Sep 2005 B2
6947922 Glance Sep 2005 B1
6950804 Strietzel Sep 2005 B2
6987221 Platt Jan 2006 B2
6990497 O'Rourke Jan 2006 B2
6993532 Platt et al. Jan 2006 B1
7013238 Weare Mar 2006 B1
7020637 Bratton Mar 2006 B2
7021836 Anderson Apr 2006 B2
7043479 Ireton May 2006 B2
7051352 Schaffer May 2006 B1
7072846 Robinson Jul 2006 B1
7082407 Bezos Jul 2006 B1
7096234 Plastina Aug 2006 B2
7111240 Crow Sep 2006 B2
7113917 Jacobi Sep 2006 B2
7113999 Pestoni Sep 2006 B2
7120619 Drucker Oct 2006 B2
7127143 Elkins, II Oct 2006 B2
7136866 Springer, Jr. Nov 2006 B2
7139723 Conkwright Nov 2006 B2
7174126 McElhatten Feb 2007 B2
7180473 Horie Feb 2007 B2
7194421 Conkwright Mar 2007 B2
7196258 Platt Mar 2007 B2
7197472 Conkwright Mar 2007 B2
7224282 Terauchi May 2007 B2
7236941 Conkwright Jun 2007 B2
7246041 Fukuda Jul 2007 B2
7256341 Plastina Aug 2007 B2
7277870 Mourad Oct 2007 B2
7302419 Conkwright Nov 2007 B2
7302468 Wijeratne Nov 2007 B2
7358434 Plastina Apr 2008 B2
7363314 Picker Apr 2008 B2
7392212 Hancock Jun 2008 B2
7403769 Kopra Jul 2008 B2
7415181 Greenwood Aug 2008 B2
7434247 Dudkiewicz Oct 2008 B2
7457852 O'Rourke et al. Nov 2008 B2
7457862 Hepworth Nov 2008 B2
7478323 Dowdy Jan 2009 B2
7487107 Blanchard et al. Feb 2009 B2
7490775 Biderman Feb 2009 B2
7493572 Card Feb 2009 B2
7499630 Koch Mar 2009 B2
7505959 Kaiser Mar 2009 B2
7546254 Bednarek Jun 2009 B2
7568213 Carhart Jul 2009 B2
7571121 Bezos Aug 2009 B2
7571183 Renshaw Aug 2009 B2
7574422 Guan Aug 2009 B2
7574513 Dunning Aug 2009 B2
7580932 Plastina Aug 2009 B2
7599847 Block et al. Oct 2009 B2
7599906 Kashiwagi Oct 2009 B2
7599950 Walther Oct 2009 B2
7644077 Picker Jan 2010 B2
7647613 Drakoulis Jan 2010 B2
7650570 Torrens et al. Jan 2010 B2
7657224 Goldberg Feb 2010 B2
7657493 Meijer Feb 2010 B2
7680849 Heller Mar 2010 B2
7680959 Svendsen Mar 2010 B2
7685204 Rogers Mar 2010 B2
7693887 McLaughlin Apr 2010 B2
7707603 Abanami Apr 2010 B2
7734569 Martin Jun 2010 B2
7743009 Hangartner Jun 2010 B2
7797321 Martin Sep 2010 B2
7826444 Irvin Nov 2010 B2
7853712 Amidon Dec 2010 B2
7875788 Benyamin Jan 2011 B2
7889724 Irvin Feb 2011 B2
20010007099 Rau Jul 2001 A1
20010056434 Kaplan Dec 2001 A1
20020002899 Gjerdingen Jan 2002 A1
20020042912 Iijima Apr 2002 A1
20020059094 Hosea May 2002 A1
20020082901 Dunning Jun 2002 A1
20020152117 Cristofalo Oct 2002 A1
20020178223 Bushkin Nov 2002 A1
20020178276 McCartney Nov 2002 A1
20020194215 Cantrell Dec 2002 A1
20030022953 Zampini et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030033321 Schrempp Feb 2003 A1
20030097379 Ireton May 2003 A1
20030120630 Tunkelang Jun 2003 A1
20030212710 Guy Nov 2003 A1
20030221541 Platt Dec 2003 A1
20030229537 Dunning Dec 2003 A1
20040002993 Toussaint Jan 2004 A1
20040003392 Trajkovic Jan 2004 A1
20040068552 Kotz Apr 2004 A1
20040073924 Pendakur Apr 2004 A1
20040128286 Yasushi et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040139064 Chevallier Jul 2004 A1
20040148424 Berkson Jul 2004 A1
20040158860 Crow Aug 2004 A1
20040162738 Sanders Aug 2004 A1
20040194128 McIntyre Sep 2004 A1
20040267715 Polson Dec 2004 A1
20050021470 Martin Jan 2005 A1
20050060350 Baum Mar 2005 A1
20050075908 Stevens Apr 2005 A1
20050091146 Levinson Apr 2005 A1
20050102610 Jie May 2005 A1
20050114357 Chengalvarayan May 2005 A1
20050131752 Gracie Jun 2005 A1
20050141709 Bratton Jun 2005 A1
20050154608 Paulson Jul 2005 A1
20050160458 Baumgartner Jul 2005 A1
20050193014 Prince Sep 2005 A1
20050193054 Wilson Sep 2005 A1
20050195696 Rekimoto Sep 2005 A1
20050210009 Tran Sep 2005 A1
20050210101 Janik Sep 2005 A1
20050216859 Paek Sep 2005 A1
20050222989 Haveliwala Oct 2005 A1
20050223039 Kim Oct 2005 A1
20050234891 Walther Oct 2005 A1
20050235811 Dukane Oct 2005 A1
20050256867 Walther Nov 2005 A1
20050276570 Reed, Jr. Dec 2005 A1
20060015904 Marcus Jan 2006 A1
20060018208 Nathan Jan 2006 A1
20060018209 Drakoulis et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060020062 Bloom Jan 2006 A1
20060020662 Robinson Jan 2006 A1
20060026263 Raghavan Feb 2006 A1
20060062094 Nathan Mar 2006 A1
20060067296 Bershad Mar 2006 A1
20060074750 Clark Apr 2006 A1
20060080251 Fried Apr 2006 A1
20060080356 Burges Apr 2006 A1
20060091203 Bakker May 2006 A1
20060123052 Robbin Jun 2006 A1
20060136344 Jones Jun 2006 A1
20060143236 Wu Jun 2006 A1
20060156239 Jobs et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060165571 Seon et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060168340 Heller et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060168616 Candelore Jul 2006 A1
20060173916 Verbeck Sibley Aug 2006 A1
20060174000 Abanami Aug 2006 A1
20060195513 Rogers Aug 2006 A1
20060195514 Rogers Aug 2006 A1
20060195516 Beaupre Aug 2006 A1
20060195521 New et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060195581 Vaman et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060195789 Rogers Aug 2006 A1
20060195790 Beaupre Aug 2006 A1
20060206478 Glaser Sep 2006 A1
20060253874 Stark Nov 2006 A1
20060265421 Ranasinghe et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060277098 Chung Dec 2006 A1
20060282304 Bedard et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060282311 Jiang Dec 2006 A1
20060288367 Swix Dec 2006 A1
20070016507 Tzara Jan 2007 A1
20070043829 Dua Feb 2007 A1
20070073596 Alexander Mar 2007 A1
20070100690 Hopkins May 2007 A1
20070101373 Bodlanender et al. May 2007 A1
20070118546 Acharya May 2007 A1
20070136264 Tran Jun 2007 A1
20070156677 Szabo Jul 2007 A1
20070156732 Surendran et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070161402 Ng Jul 2007 A1
20070162546 McLaughlin Jul 2007 A1
20070203790 Torrens Aug 2007 A1
20070244880 Martin Oct 2007 A1
20070250429 Walser Oct 2007 A1
20070250761 Bradley Oct 2007 A1
20070265979 Hangartner Nov 2007 A1
20070271286 Purang Nov 2007 A1
20070271287 Acharya et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070294096 Randall Dec 2007 A1
20080004948 Flake Jan 2008 A1
20080004990 Flake Jan 2008 A1
20080021851 Alcalde Jan 2008 A1
20080027881 Bisse Jan 2008 A1
20080040326 Chang et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080046317 Christianson Feb 2008 A1
20080065659 Watanabe et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080077264 Irvin Mar 2008 A1
20080109378 Papadimitriou May 2008 A1
20080133601 Cervera Jun 2008 A1
20080154942 Tsai et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080155057 Khedouri Jun 2008 A1
20080155588 Roberts Jun 2008 A1
20080195438 Manfredi Aug 2008 A1
20080215173 Hicken Sep 2008 A1
20080220855 Chen Sep 2008 A1
20080256106 Whitman Oct 2008 A1
20080270221 Clemens Oct 2008 A1
20090006353 Vignoli Jan 2009 A1
20090024504 Lerman Jan 2009 A1
20090024510 Chen Jan 2009 A1
20090048957 Celano Feb 2009 A1
20090070267 Hangartner Mar 2009 A9
20090073174 Berg Mar 2009 A1
20090076939 Berg Mar 2009 A1
20090076974 Berg Mar 2009 A1
20090083307 Martin Cervera et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090089222 Ferreira De Castro et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090106085 Raimbeault Apr 2009 A1
20090164641 Rogers Jun 2009 A1
20090210415 Martin Aug 2009 A1
20090276368 Martin Nov 2009 A1
20100161595 Martin et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100169328 Hangartner Jul 2010 A1
20110119127 Hangartner May 2011 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (26)
Number Date Country
1 050 833 Aug 2000 EP
1 231 788 Aug 2002 EP
1420388 Apr 2004 EP
1 548 741 Jun 2005 EP
11-052965 Feb 1999 JP
2002-108351 Apr 2002 JP
2002-320203 Oct 2002 JP
2003-022958 Sep 2003 JP
2003255958 Sep 2003 JP
2004-221999 Aug 2004 JP
2005027337 Jan 2005 JP
2002025579 Apr 2002 KR
WO 03036541 May 2003 WO
03051051 Jun 2003 WO
2004070538 Aug 2004 WO
2005013114 Feb 2005 WO
WO 2005115107 Dec 2005 WO
2006052837 May 2006 WO
2006075032 Jul 2006 WO
2006034218 Aug 2006 WO
2006114451 Nov 2006 WO
WO 2007038806 Apr 2007 WO
2007134193 May 2007 WO
2007075622 Jul 2007 WO
2007092053 Aug 2007 WO
2009149046 Dec 2009 WO
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20100161595 A1 Jun 2010 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60649987 Feb 2005 US
Continuations (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 11346818 Feb 2006 US
Child 12685639 US