The described technology is directed to the field of processing and analyzing user behavior information.
It is common for the operators of a web site to analyze the behavior of users on the web site, such as to determine how to adapt the web site to the needs or interests of the visiting users, or to determine how to sell and present advertising on the web site. In some cases, web site operators request or permit a third party to do so on their behalf.
Such analysis typically begins with a source of raw data about user behavior, such as web logs produced by web servers that serve the web site, or web logs produced by web servers that monitor behavior on the web site by serving small image files that are referenced on the pages of the web site.
Unfortunately, such raw data is so unwieldy and disorganized as to be difficult and expensive to directly use for such analysis. While intermediate data structures are sometimes constructed from the raw data for use in the analysis, conventional intermediate data structures are similarly laborious to build and/or analyze.
In view of the foregoing, a representation of user behavior information that is efficient to generate and analyze would have significant utility.
A software facility for representing user behavior information (“the facility”) is provided. In some embodiments, the facility constructs, maintains, stores, and/or analyzes a sparse matrix representation of user behavior information (“the representation”).
The representation includes a fact table containing user behavior facts, such as a particular user's performance of a particular action with respect to a subject web site, such as using a loan calculator tool. In some embodiments, each fact identifies a particular action typo, a user performing an action of that type, a time interval during with the user performed an action of that type, and the number of times during that time interval that the user performed actions of that type.
The fact table is indexed in two or more dimensions, such as a user identity dimension and an action type dimension. For each indexed dimension, the representation includes an array having elements each corresponding to a different value of an indexed dimension. Each element contains a list of pointers to facts in the fact table relating to the indexed dimension. For example, for a user identity dimension, the array has an element for each different user identity. The element of the array for a particular user identity contains a list of pointers to facts in the fact table representing actions performed by the user.
The facility constructs and maintains the representation using user behavior information identifying actions performed by identified users. For each such action, the facility uses the index to determine whether the fact table already contains a fact for the action. If so, the facility augments the matching fact to reflect the action. Otherwise, the facility creates and indexes a new fact to reflect the action and Indexes new fact.
In order to analyze actions performed by an individual user, actions performed that are of a particular action type, or facts based upon a particular value of another indexed dimension, the facility retrieves the facts of the fact table pointed to by the list of pointers contained in the array element corresponding to that value in the array corresponding to that dimension.
By using a representation having some or all of the characteristics discussed above, the facility efficiently constructs, stores, maintains, and analyzes user behavior information. In particular, the facility facilitates common and desirable forms of analysis of user behavior information, including a variety of behavior correlating algorithms, including correlation based upon affinity, linear correlation, etc.
The information analysis functionality provided by the facility can be understood with reference to the conceptual view shown in
While the conceptual view shown in
When the facility receives this information for a particular action, accesses a pair of tables to determine how to encode this information in the representation.
After determining a local user ID and an action ID for a new action, the facility uses these two identifiers to access its representation Of user behavior information. By using these identifiers inside the representation, rather than the larger corresponding values contained in the incoming raw behavior information, the facility is able to conserve space within the representation.
In some embodiments, the facility enables a user to configure the granularity of the times attributed to the facts in the fact table. As part of configuring the granularity, a user may choose both the duration of individual time values and the starting and stopping time. For example,
In some embodiments, in order to match a fact, the action's local user ID, action ID, and time must all match those contained by the fact. For example, an action that had local user ID 0, action ID 3, and time Apr. 2, 2005 would not match the fact contained in row 643 in these embodiments, as row 643 reflects a different time. In these embodiments, the facility would create a new fact in the fact table containing these values and initialize its count to 1. When creating a new fact, the facility updates the indices by adding a fact pointer to that fact to both the fact pointer list for the fact's action ID and the fact pointer list for the fact's local user ID.
In some embodiments, the facility maintains in the fact table only the most recent fact for a particular user and action type. For example, in the case of the example discussed in the foregoing paragraph, rather than creating a new fact containing the time Apr. 2, 2005, the facility would change the time in row 643 to Apr. 12, 2005, in routine account 1 corresponding to the single Apr. 2, 2005 action of this type that has been performed by this user.
In some embodiments, the fact table further includes a deleted column 655. Alternatively, a bitmap 655 is maintained in parallel with the fact table. The contents of this column or bitmap indicate whether a row has been deleted. For example, the value in this column/bitmap for row 642 indicates that this row has been deleted. Accordingly, its contents are no longer current. In some embodiments, the facility may reuse this row of the fact table for a new fact. In other embodiments, new rows are exclusively appended to the end of the fact table, and deleted rows are not reused.
In some embodiments, the facility builds the fact table as a large table stored in permanent storage, such as on a hard disk, comprised of “chunks” of a size likely to fit into a storage device having faster write and retrieval times, such as random access memory. This enables the facility to do fast processing on a chunk while it is in memory, then page that chunk out to disk in order to do fast processing on another chunk. In some embodiments, the facility stores the entire fact table in random access memory.
In some embodiments, rather than maintaining a fact table separate from the list of fact pointers to contain fact information, the fact information is stored directly in the lists of fact pointers.
While the table and data structure diagrams discussed below show table or data structure contents and organization in a way designed to make them more comprehensible by a human reader, those skilled in the art will appreciate that actual structures used by the facility to store this information may differ from those shown, in that they, for example, may be organized in a different manner; may contain more or less information than shown; may be compressed and/or encrypted; etc.
It will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that the above-described facility may be straightforwardly adapted or extended in various ways. For example, the facility may be used to analyze a wide variety of kinds of user behavior, including web browsing behavior, television or other video-watching behavior, radio or other audio-listening behavior, reading behavior, etc. The facility may store a variety of information about user actions as part of the facts that it creates. The facility may maintain indices on a different set of fact dimensions, as well as a different number of fad dimensions. While the foregoing description makes reference to particular embodiments, the scope of the invention is defined solely by the claims that follow and the elements recited therein.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/874,090, filed Sept. 1, 2010, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/294,756, filed Dec. 6, 2005, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/107,409, filed Apr. 14, 2005, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference herein in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5530939 | Mansfield, Jr et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5721831 | Waits et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5742806 | Reiner et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5870746 | Knutson et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
6003036 | Martin | Dec 1999 | A |
6061658 | Chou et al. | May 2000 | A |
6078891 | Riordan et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6112186 | Bergh et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6272472 | Danneels et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6374263 | Bunger et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6377993 | Brandt et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6430539 | Lazarus et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6609131 | Zait et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6615258 | Barry et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6629102 | Malloy et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6694322 | Warren et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6785666 | Nareddy et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6839682 | Blume et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6862574 | Srikant et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6873981 | Nareddy et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6892347 | Williams et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6917972 | Basko et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
6993529 | Basko et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7003476 | Samra et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7035925 | Nareddy et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7039699 | Narin et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7058590 | Shan | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7107338 | Nareddy et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7117193 | Basko et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7120666 | McCanne et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7165037 | Lazarus et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7188334 | Sinclair | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7197517 | Farrington et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7231612 | Mani et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7246083 | Bibelnieks et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7308497 | Louviere et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7370342 | Ismail et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
7424439 | Fayyad et al. | Sep 2008 | B1 |
7464122 | Basko et al. | Dec 2008 | B1 |
7493312 | Liu et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7676467 | Kozyrczak et al. | Mar 2010 | B1 |
20020072971 | DeBusk et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020082901 | Dunning et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020095421 | Koskas | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020099691 | Lore et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20030014304 | Calvert et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030028509 | Sah et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030074348 | Sinclair et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030101451 | Bentolila et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030163438 | Barnett et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030204447 | Dalzell et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030216966 | Saenz et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040088212 | Hill | May 2004 | A1 |
20040088376 | McCanne et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040116783 | Weaver | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040117239 | Mittal et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040172400 | Zarom et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040181554 | Heckerman et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040230947 | Bales et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050015571 | Kaufman et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050033771 | Schmitter et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050086243 | Abbott et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050159996 | Lazarus et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050203888 | Woosley et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050240468 | Inman et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060041548 | Parsons et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060069719 | McCanne et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060112073 | Jensen et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060112222 | Barrall | May 2006 | A1 |
20060143684 | Morris | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060155605 | Haighton et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060190333 | Choi | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060235764 | Bamborough et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060277585 | Error et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20080097822 | Schigel et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080189232 | Dunning et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
U.S. Appl. No. 10/870,688, Kumar et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 09/613,403, Tawakol et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/408,660, filed Feb. 7, 2012, Kumer et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/912,681, filed Oct. 26, 2010, Tawakol. |
Dainow, Brandt, “Defining Unique Visitors,” iMedia Connection, 2 pages, Dec. 1, 2005. |
“H”, Microsoft® Computer Dictionary, Fifth Edition, 21 pages, May 2002. |
Maurer, W. D. et al., “Hash Table Methods,” Computing Surveys, vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 5-19, Mar. 1975. |
Novak, T. P. et al., “New Metrics For New Media: Toward the Development of Web Measurement Standards,” World Wide Web Journal, vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 213-246, 1997. |
ProQuest, “My Research,” 5 pages, 2008. |
Sen, Shahana et al., “On the Analysis of Web Site Usage Data: How Much Can We Learn About the Consumer From Web Logfiles?,” Working Paper, 28 pages, 1998. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/870,688; Non-Final Office Action, 14 pages, Sep. 22, 2008. |
Williamson, Debra Aho, “What Comes Before Search,” The Wall Street Journal, 18 pages, Sep. 2004. |
Wilson, R. Dale, “Using Web Traffic Analysis for Customer and Retention Programs in Marketing,” Services Marketing Quarterly, vol. 26, No. 2, 23 pages, 2004. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12874090 | Sep 2010 | US |
Child | 13541660 | US | |
Parent | 11294756 | Dec 2005 | US |
Child | 12874090 | US | |
Parent | 11107409 | Apr 2005 | US |
Child | 11294756 | US |