This application claims priority to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/331,023 filed on Dec. 20, 2011 and entitled “Scenario-Adaptive Input Method Editor”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,378,290 on Jun. 28, 2016, the entirety of which is incorporated herein by reference.
An input method editor (IME) is a computer application that assists a user to input texts at a computing device. An IME may provide several input candidates based on received inputs from the user. The inputs and the provided texts may be the same language or different languages.
For example, the user may input one or more initial English characters of a word or phrase and an IME, based on the initial characters, provides one or more complete words or phrases for the user to select a proper one.
For another example, an IME may also assist the user to input non-Latin characters such as Chinese. The user may input Latin characters through a keyboard. The Latin characters may be a spelling of the Chinese characters. The IME returns one or more Chinese characters based on the spelling to the user to select a proper one. As the current keyboard usually only supports inputting Latin characters, the IME is useful for the user to input non-Latin characters.
The input candidate selected by the user can be inserted into various other computer applications, such as a chatting application, a document editing application, a gaming application, etc.
Typically, an IME only provides input candidates in the form of text, and a single source is typically used to identify the input candidates, regardless of the type of application with which the IME is being used.
This Summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts in a simplified form that are further described below in the Detailed Description. This Summary is not intended to identify key features or essential features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended to be used as an aid in determining the scope of the claimed subject matter. The term “techniques,” for instance, may refer to device(s), system(s), method(s) and/or computer-readable instructions as permitted by the context above and throughout the present disclosure.
An input method editor (IME) as described herein provides input candidates to a user to input into another computer application at least partly based on a scenario of the user input and the queries input by the user. The scenario of the user input may include a scenario of the computer application (e.g., chatting or emailing) and, in some embodiments, a context of the user input (e.g., a prior use history of the computing application such as chatting history).
The IME may not only provide text candidates but also rich candidates. The IME may also determine the type of input candidates, i.e. text candidates, rich candidates, or both, to be presented to the user. In one embodiment, the IME may host an engine pool including a plurality of scenario-tuned and type-specific input candidate engines, such as a chat-tuned text candidate engine and a chat-tuned rich candidate engine. The IME may use one of such specific engines to search input candidates based on the determined scenario of the user input and the type of input candidates. The engine pool may be hosted at a remote server.
The IME ranks the input candidates at least partly based on their relevancies to the scenario of the user input and presents the text candidates and/or rich candidates at one interface of the IME.
The detailed description is described with reference to the accompanying figures. In the figures, the left-most digit(s) of a reference number identifies the figure in which the reference number first appears. The same numbers are used throughout the drawings to reference like features and components.
Overview
The disclosed techniques describe an input method editor (IME) that provides input candidates to a user to input into a computer application at least partly based on a scenario of the user input and the queries input by the user. The input candidates may include not only text candidates such as non-Lain characters such as Chinese, Latin characters such as English, but also rich candidates such as multimedia to provide supplemental information to a user to enhance the user experience.
The queries are one or more texts such as characters or symbols input by the user. The queries may represent one or more expressions. For example, a query may be a series of initial characters, an abbreviation, a spelling, and/or a translation of one or more words or phrases. The queries and the expressions represented by the queries, such as words or phrases, may be in the same or different languages. The user may input the queries through a variety of input methods such as a keyboard input, a voice input, and a touch screen input.
The text candidates are the expressions represented by the queries in the form of text. The rich candidates are the expressions represented by the queries in forms other than text such as images and multimedia.
The scenario of the user input may include a scenario of the computer application (e.g., chatting or emailing). The scenario of the user input may also include a context of the user input (e.g., a prior use history of the computing application such as chatting history or contents displayed at the user interface of the computer application such as the user's prior inputs).
There may be many input candidates corresponding to the same query. The ranking of the input candidates may be different in different scenarios of the user input. There is also a different preference of type of candidates in the different scenarios of the user input. In one embodiment, the IME may provide rich candidates in some predefined scenarios of the user input (such as emailing or chatting) and not provide rich candidates in some predefined scenarios of the user input (such as document editing). In another embodiment, the IME may provide rich candidates when the probability that the rich candidates improve user experiences is calculated beyond a predefined threshold.
The IME may determine the type of input candidates to be presented to the user at least partly based on the scenario of the user input. The presented type of input candidates may be text candidates, rich candidates, both, or none.
After determining the scenario of the user input, the type of input candidates, and the queries, the IME selects a proper scenario-specific and type-specific input candidate engine to generate or identify the input candidates. Usually when the input candidates are already available at a database or a network, the proper engine is selected to identify the input candidates. Sometimes, the input candidates are not available at the database or the network, such as a rich candidate showing a map of a user's current location to a desired location. Such rich candidate may be generated by the proper input candidate engine.
The input candidates may also be ranked according to their relevancies to the scenario of the user input. In one example, such ranking may be accomplished by the input candidate engine when it provides the input candidates.
The IME is capable to present both text candidates and rich candidates at a user interface of the IME. For example, the user interface of the IME may include a web browser component capable for HTML5 rendering.
There may be various configurations of the IME to identify the input candidates. In one embodiment, the IME has an engine pool that includes a plurality of preset engines that are each capable to produce scenario-specific text or rich candidates. For example, a preset scenario-tuned text candidate engine, such as a chatting-tuned text candidate engine, may be preset with language models and lexicons tied to the chatting scenario to identify the text candidates suitable in the chatting scenario. The preset scenario-tuned rich candidate engine may use web services to identify or generate the rich candidates. The web services may include, for example, web search, video search, image search, dictionary and encyclopedia search, address book information such as from Microsoft Exchange Server, and/or information from social networking web services.
In another embodiment, one engine may provide both text candidates and rich candidates. For example, the engine may not be preset for the specific scenario but may be adjusted to the specific scenario at real-time after identification of the scenario.
There may also be various configurations for the deployment of the IME. In one embodiment, all components of the IME are located at a client device. In another embodiment, the IME is implemented in a client-server architecture in which some components are located at the client device and some components are located at the remote server relative to the client device. For example, the engine pool may be located at the remote server, and the user interface of the IME may be located at the client device.
A user 102, via a user interface 104 of an input method editor (IME), inputs one or more objects 106 into a user interface of a computer application 108. Both the user interface 104 of the IME and the user interface of the computer application 108 present at a user interface of a client device 110 at a same time. There may be two or more computer applications (not shown in
In the example of
The input window 114 includes input objects 116 that are to be input as the objects into the chatting window 112. In the example of
The user 102 may use the user interface 104 of the IME to input the input objects 116. In the example of
The query 120 and the text candidates 122 may be any kind of text such as Latin characters (e.g. English), non-Latin characters (e.g. Chinese), symbols, numbers, or a mix of different kinds of texts. The query 120 and the text candidates 122 may be the same language or different languages. For example, the query 120 may represent a series of initial characters, an abbreviation, a spelling, and/or a translation of the text candidates 122.
The rich candidates 124 may include pictures, maps, videos, and/or other forms of representations in addition to texts. The rich candidates 124 may include, for example, pictures, maps, videos, or other forms of representations that provide supplemental information to the user 102 in addition to the text candidates 122.
To assist in determining the input candidates to present, the IME may collect data relating to the scenario of the user input. For example, the scenario of the user input includes the scenario of the computer application 108, i.e. chatting in
The IME may also determine a type of candidates to be presented, i.e., the text candidates 122, the rich candidates 124, both, or none, at least partly based on the scenario of the user input. The IME then selects one or more input candidate engines (not shown in
The selection and ranking of the text candidates 122 and/or the rich candidates 124 may be based on their relevancies to the scenario of the user input. For example, the text candidates 122 or rich candidates 124 with higher relativity with the scenario of the computer application 108 may be ranked with a higher priority to be presented to the user 102.
In the example of
The query 120 in the example of
The text candidate window 128 displays the identified text candidates 122. In the example of
The text candidate window 128 may display more text candidates 122 if the user 102 clicks the button 132 for more text candidates 122.
The rich candidate window 130 displays the identified or generated rich candidates 124. In the example of
IN one embodiment, the web services are online services, such as Bing® map, that do not require a registration of the user 102 to use. The IMT may directly use the query 120 and/or determined scenario of user input as input parameters to request the web service to return the rich candidates 124. In another embodiment, the web service (not shown in
The user 102 may select one or more of the text candidates 122 and/or the rich candidates 124 as the input objects 116 to be inserted at the input indication 118.
Example methods for performing techniques described herein are discussed in detail below. These example methods can be described in the general context of computer executable instructions. Generally, computer executable instructions can include routines, programs, objects, components, data structures, procedures, modules, functions, and the like that perform particular functions or implement particular abstract data types. The methods can also be practiced in a distributed computing environment where functions are performed by remote processing devices that are linked through a communication network or a communication cloud. In a distributed computing environment, computer executable instructions may be located both in local and remote memories.
The example methods are sometimes illustrated as a collection of blocks in a logical flow graph representing a sequence of operations that can be implemented in hardware, software, firmware, or a combination thereof. The order in which the methods are described is not intended to be construed as a limitation, and any number of the described method blocks can be combined in any order to implement the methods, or alternate methods. Additionally, individual operations may be omitted from the methods without departing from the spirit and scope of the subject matter described herein. In the context of software, the blocks represent computer executable instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, perform the recited operations.
Example Techniques for Generating Input Candidates
At 204, data relating to a scenario of the user input are collected. In various embodiments, the IME may collect different data relating to the scenario of the user input from one or more sources. For example, the IME may identify the computer application 108 that receives the input objects 116 among multiple computer applications opened at the interface of the client device 110. The IME may, for example, check the input indication 118 to identify the computer application 108.
After identification of the computer application 108 to receive the input objects 116, the IME may collect data relating to the scenario of the computer application 108, such as the name and version of the computer application 108. In the example of
The IME may also capture current contents displayed at the user interface of the computer application 108, such as the objects 106 in the chatting window 112 and the input objects 116 at the input window 114. For example, the IME may use screen pixel information based on visual understanding techniques such as OCR to identify the displayed contents. In the example of
The IME may also collect a previous user history of using the computer application 108. Such user history may be stored locally or remotely, and may be helpful to analyze the context of the recent inputs. For example, when the computer application 108 is Microsoft MSN®, the user history may be a chatting history of the user.
At 206, the collected data are analyzed to determine the scenario of the user input. There are various techniques to determine the scenario. For example, the name of the computer application may be compared to a list of scenarios. The list of scenarios stores the corresponding relationships between the computer applications and scenarios. For instance, the list may indicate that the computer application Microsoft MSN® corresponds to the scenario of chatting, and the computer application Microsoft Word® corresponds to the scenario of document editing. Such list of scenarios may be updated periodically to include the corresponding relationships with new computer applications and to update the corresponding relationships.
The contents displayed at the user interface of the computer application 108 and the previous user history may also be used to identify the scenario of the computer application 108. For example, based on the context of the contents displayed at the user interface of the computer application 108, the IME may determine that it is a scenario of chatting based on a pattern of chatting identified from the objects 106 in the chatting window 112.
At 208, the type of input candidates to search for is determined. The IME may determine whether the text candidates 122, the rich candidates 124, both, or none should be searched.
In one embodiment, the types of input candidates may be determined based on the query and data relating to the scenario of the user input. For example, the scenario of the computer application may be determined as a short message service (SMS). As the SMS only supports text, the IME would not request and display the rich candidates 124. The IME may also check whether the computer application supports multimedia messaging service (MMS), and may transform the rich candidates 124 into the form of images when their original forms are videos.
For another example, the IME may further determine what kind of rich candidates 124 are to be searched and presented. In the example of
At 210, the input candidates are searched at least partly based on the analyzed scenario of user input, the queries, and the determined type of input candidate.
Different techniques may be used in searching for the text candidates and/or the rich candidates. For example, one input candidate engine may be configured to search both text candidates 122 and rich candidates 124. For another example, the input candidate engine may adjust its language model and lexicon and/or web search service according to the specific scenario at real-time after the identification of the scenario is completed.
For yet another example, there may be a plurality of input candidate engines that form an engine pool. Each input candidate engine is preset for a specific scenario such as chatting, document editing, gaming, and for a specific type of candidates, i.e. text candidates or rich candidates.
At 212, the input candidates are returned and displayed at the user interface 104 of the input method editor. In one example, the user interface 104 of the IME presents the text candidate window 128 and/or the rich candidate window 130 when there are corresponding text candidates 122 and/or rich candidates 124. In another example, the user interface 104 of the IME may present the text candidate window 128 and the rich candidate window 130 even when there are no corresponding text candidates 122 and rich candidates 124.
When the input candidates include rich candidates 124, the IME may use various techniques to present the rich candidates 124 at the user interface 104 of the IME. For example, the rich candidates 124 may be rendered within an embedded web browser component capable of Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) rendering using JavaScript and CSS technologies. Specifically version 5 of HTML (referred to as HTML5) may be supported by this component in order to leverage advanced rendering functionality. The IME may communicate with the browser to display results by generating an HTML string in memory and loading it in the browser. The IME may retrieve the selected rich candidates 124 by catching browser events, such as navigation, and parsing out the rich candidate payload information from the navigation event arguments.
In one or more operating systems, the IME may be implemented in such a way as to not have focus. The focus indicates that a graphical user interface (GUI), such as the user interface 104 of the IME, is currently selected to receive inputs. This may present an issue when interacting with the web browser component and the rich candidates it presents. For example, an “out of process” window may be utilized to render rich candidates. In the Windows® operating systems, an “out of process” window may be invoked as an out of process Component Object Model (COM) server. To present this window properly, interfaces for communication between the user interface 104 of the IME and the COM object may be established to coordinate layout and positioning.
For another example, a particular rich candidate engine may need to have computer-executable instructions or codes registered on the client device 110 to be effective in optimally inserting the rich candidates 124 into the user interface 104 of IME. Some application program interface (API) to communicate with the rich candidate engine may be implemented.
The text candidate engine, such as the N-th scenario-tuned text candidate engine 302(N) may include a decoder 304(N), a scenario-tuned language model 306(N), and a scenario-tuned lexicon 308(N). The decoder 304(N) includes one or more algorithms that process the scenario-tuned language model 306(N) and the scenario-tuned lexicon 308(N). In one example, the decoder 304(N) may be optimized for different text candidate engines, i.e. the decoder 304(1) and the decoder 308(N) may be different. In another example, the decoder 304(N) is the same or substantially the same for some or all text candidate engines, i.e. the decoder 304(1) and the decoder 304(N) may be the same or substantially the same.
The scenario-tuned language model 306(N) and the scenario-tuned lexicon 308(N) are components that are trained on data typically seen in the target scenario, i.e. the N-th scenario. In other words, different scenario-tuned text candidate engines may have different scenario-tuned language models and/or scenario-tuned lexicon.
In one embodiment, the lexicon may be a set of expressions such as words, phrases, and/or sentences. In another embodiment, the lexicon may be a set of expressions, such as words, phrases, and/or sentences, assigned with rankings/probabilities of how they are commonly used. The language model assigns a probability to the sequence of the expressions by means of a probability distribution. If the expressions in the lexicon are already assigned with rankings/probabilities, the language model may adjust the rankings/probabilities according to the scenario. The scenario-tuned language models and scenario-tuned lexicon are pre-configured according to the scenario of the user input. For instance, expressions in the chatting scenario are much more informal than those in the document editing-scenario. A chatting-tuned language lexicon may have more informal expressions compared with a document editing-tuned lexicon, and a chatting-tuned language model ranks the informal expressions higher than those in the document editing-tuned language model.
The engine pool 300 may also include a plurality of rich candidate engines. Each of the rich candidate engines is tuned to a specific scenario, such as chatting, document editing, and gaming. Each of the rich candidate engines may also be a web service tuned for a specific scenario.
In the example of
Some web services may rely on account information of the user 102 that the user 102 registers with such web services. For example, the engine pool 300 may allow remote calls to be made securely and potentially on behalf of the user 102 to use authentication techniques to connect with user services like micro blogging accounts.
Alternatively, some web services may not rely on whether the user has registered services. For example, such services may include web search related services, such as image search, mapping services, and video search.
The search engine pool 300 may add, delete, or modify a text candidate engine or rich candidate engine corresponding to a new or an existing scenario. The isolation of different engines also helps to improve the flexibility and robustness of the search engine pool 300 in which failure or removal of one input candidate engine would not affect another.
In one embodiment, the engine pool 300 may also include a default text candidate engine, such as the N-th scenario text candidate engine 302(N) and a default rich candidate engine, such as web service for M-th scenario 314(M) to provide input candidates when the scenario of the computer application cannot be determined or there is no input candidate engine in the engine pool 300 tuned for the scenario of the computer application.
When an appropriate scenario-specific engine cannot be found, the default engine for a particular request type, such as the N-th scenario text candidate engine 302(N) and web service for M-th scenario 314(M) may be selected to identify the input candidates.
In one example, the default text candidate engine or the default rich candidate engine is not pre-configured to a specific scenario. For instance, the default rich candidate engine is tuned to a general scenario such as using the search engine such as Bing® service to return rich candidates based on the query without limiting the scenario of the user input.
In another example, the default text candidate engine or the default rich candidate engine may be a designated text candidate engine tuned for a specific scenario, such as document-editing, and a designated rich candidate engine tuned for a specific scenario, such as chatting. If the scenario of the computer application cannot be determined, then such default designated text candidate engine or rich candidate engine is selected.
In another embodiment, when the types of input candidates to be searched cannot be determined, the IME may only choose the default text candidate engine to identify the text candidates without using any rich candidate engine. This may avoid generating unnecessary rich candidates that distract the attention of the user 102 and lengthening the time to identify input candidates.
In yet another embodiment, when an appropriate scenario-specific engine cannot be found, the IME may return an error message to display on the user interface 104 of the IME to indicate to the user 102 that no input candidates can be offered.
Referring back to 208, it is determined that the type of input candidates to be searched is text candidates.
At 402, a message including the user-submitted query, the request type of text candidates, and the scenario of user input is received by the IME. For example, the scenario of user input and other information may be in the form of a text string.
At 404, a selection component of the IME determines whether there is a scenario-tuned text candidate engine in the engine pool that corresponds to the scenario indicated in the request.
At 406, in an event that the result of the determination is positive, the message is transmitted to the scenario-tuned text candidate engine to identify the text candidates.
At 408, in an event that the result of the determination is negative, an error message is generated and may be presented at the user interface 104 of the IME. Alternatively, the message may be transmitted to a default scenario-tuned text candidate engine to identify the text candidates.
At 504, a selection component of the IME determines whether there is a scenario-tuned rich candidate engine in the engine pool that corresponds to the scenario.
At 506, in an event that the result of the determination is positive, the message is transmitted to the scenario-tuned rich candidate engine such as a web service to identify the rich candidates. For example, the scenario-tuned rich candidate engine may be preset with a plurality of parameters tuned to the scenario. In a chatting scenario, for example, the query is “haha,” which represents the sound of a laugh. The chatting-tuned rich candidate engine may, for example, search images and multimedia by using the query “haha” and limiting the type to cartoon images and multimedia.
At 508, an HTML string containing the rich candidates is identified or generated. The HTML string may, for example, srefer to JavaScript or cascading style sheets (CSS) resources files locally stored at the client device 110. The string may also refer to external resources like photos or video files available over a network such as the internet or intranet.
At 510, the HTML, string is loaded into memory of the client device 110 to present at the user interface 104 of the IME. For example, an embedded web browser may be used for the rich candidate window.
At 512, in an event that the result of the determination at 504 is negative, the selection component of the IME also determines whether there exists a default text candidate engine and/or a default rich candidate engine. At 514, in an event that the result of the determination at 512 is positive, the selection component of the IME transmits the message to the default text candidate engine and/or the default rich candidate engine. The operations continue to 508.
At 516, in an event that the result of the determination at 512 is negative, an error message is generated and may be presented at the user interface 104 of the IME.
Example Application Scenarios
The techniques below are described in the context of different scenarios. However, the techniques described herein are not limited to implementation of the specific described scenarios. Unless specified otherwise, one of ordinary skill in the art can apply or extend the techniques described in one scenario to another.
In both
In
In view of the scenario of document editing, a text candidate engine tuned to the document editing scenario is selected. The text candidates 608 are identified at least partly based on the scenario and the query 602.
In the example of
The first Chinese term, , means “complicated” in English. The second Chinese term, , means “nonetheless” in English. The third Chinese term, , means “house” in English. The user 102 may select more Chinese terms by clicking the button 610.
Based on the scenario of the user input including the context of the user input, i.e. input objects 612 already presented at the user interface of the computer application 604, the Chinese terms are ranked according to their relevancies to the scenario. The Chinese term, , which means “complicated” in English, ranks first in
In
In view of the scenario of chatting at least partly based on the name of the computer application 614, a chat-tuned text candidate engine that is tuned to the chatting scenario is selected. The text candidates 618 are identified at least partly based on the chatting scenario and the query 602.
In the example of
The first Chinese term, , means “horrible” in English. The second Chinese term, , means “capsulation” in English. The third Chinese term, , means “crazy guy” in English. The user 102 may select more Chinese terms by clicking the button 620.
Based on the determined scenario of the user input including the context of the user input, i.e. the input objects 622 already presented at the user interface of the computer application 614, the Chinese terms are ranked according to their relativities to the scenario. The Chinese term, , which means “horrible” in English ranks first in
Thus, as illustrated in
To generate or identify the rich candidates 702 like the map in
However, the rich candidates 702 may further include another map (not shown in
The rich candidate engine (not shown in
In the example of
The selection component of the IME may choose the chat-tuned rich candidate engine to identify the rich candidates 804 based on the fact that the scenario is chatting. Image candidates are appropriate in an informal chatting scenario; however in another scenario like formal document editing, it may be preset as inappropriate in some embodiments. Therefore, for a different scenario, the type of input candidate may not include rich candidates, and thus the rich candidates would not be searched and presented.
To trigger a rich candidate engine to generate or identify rich candidates such as video candidates, the scenario of the user input is important. For example, if the queries match a movie name and the scenario is chatting, the IME may determine a video rich candidate is proper. However when the user is authoring a formal document, such as a high school research report on a film maker's work, an embedded video would not be warranted and the video rich candidate may not be presented.
In the example of
The chat-tuned rich candidate engine may use web video search services, such as those found on web search engines like Microsoft Bing®, to search for videos relating to the “” to enhance the richness of the user's input to aid in productivity. The rich candidates 908 include three videos from different websites such as “Ku6” and “tudou,” and each have different parameters such as different video lengths.
Depending on the capability of the chat application 902, the integration could include embedding the rich candidates 906 in the form of video in varying degrees of fidelity into the chat stream. For example, if the chat application 902 does not allow for video itself to be directly embedded, but an animated gif is supported, the IME could use a web service to convert the video to an animated image such as an animated GIF format to provide an optimal integration. Another fallback is a still image of the video, such as the one found in the thumbnail representation on video search engines. The final fall back would be a hyperlink alone, pointing to the video online.
In the example of
The rich candidates 1008 include detailed contact information of a person named “Wangli Chao.” The rich candidate engine tuned to the mail scenario may use an address book service, which may be available, for example, through a local mail service application such as Microsoft Outlook® or a remote address book service, such as Microsoft Exchange® server.
The computing application 1102 is an email application. If the user 102 has subscribed to multiple address book services, the address book services will be ranked according to their relevancies to the current scenario. In the example of
The item 1104 is ranked first as it is more appropriate to the current scenario compared to the items 1106 and 1108. For example, it is determined that the queries 1104 match the name of an address book entry in Microsoft Outlook® and the computer application 1102 is Microsoft Outlook® and the source of Microsoft Outlook® ranks first based on the scenario of the computer application 1102.
The rich candidate view presents address book entries from multiple sources in one user interface of the IME and is easier for the user 102 to switch between different sources to select a desired address book entry.
In the example of
The user 102 thus needs not to open the application 1206 in another session to conduct operations. Such operations to launch the application 1206 can all be done through and within the user interface of the IME.
A user-selected rich candidate 1302 is inserted in an optimal format under the scenario of the computer application 1304. The computer application 1304 is an email application. In the case of inserting an email address, if the computer application 1304 supports email hyperlinks, the rich candidate 1302 would be specially formatted as an email hyperlink according to the format supported by the computer application 1304.
The social networking applications such as Facebook® or social micro-blogging services like Twitter® or Sina Weibo® are currently very popular. The IME may receive and store the authentication credentials, such as user names and passwords, for the services the user 102 likes to use, such as the social network applications, through the input of the user 102. The IME would then be able to provide social networking relevant rich candidate results in specific scenarios.
In the example of
The IME then suggests user names based on a search of a query 1406 from the accessed contract information of the user 102 at the computer application 1402.
Text candidates 1408 shows three Chinese terms corresponding to the English spelling “Huang” as the query 1406. Rich candidates 1410 show three user names, which are “Huang Xianjun,” “Huang Yi,” and “Huang Yu” respectively retrieved from the.
The rich candidates 1410 are retrieved from the accessed account information and contract information of the user 102 stored at the computer application 1402. The rich candidates 1410 represent full names of users by using the query 1406 and may include useful reference information such as the “status” information of the corresponding users and picture.
An Exemplary Computing System
There may be various configurations of the IME. In one embodiment, as shown in
The client device 110 may, but need not, be used to implement the techniques described herein. The client device 110 is only one example and is not intended to suggest any limitation as to the scope of use or functionality of the computer and network architectures.
The components of the client device 110 include one or more processors 1504, and memory 1506. Memory 1506 may include volatile memory, non-volatile memory, removable memory, non-removable memory, and/or a combination of any of the foregoing. Generally, memory 1506 contains computer executable instructions that are accessible and executable by the one or more processors 1504.
The memory 1506 is an example of computer-readable media. Computer-readable media includes at least two types of computer-readable media, namely computer storage media and communications media.
Computer storage media includes volatile and non-volatile, removable and non-removable media implemented in any method or technology for storage of information such as computer readable instructions, data structures, program modules, or other data. Computer storage media includes, but is not limited to, phase change memory (PRAM), static random-access memory (SRAM), dynamic random-access memory (DRAM), other types of random-access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), flash memory or other memory technology, compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM), digital versatile disks (DVD) or other optical storage, magnetic cassettes, magnetic tape, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other non-transmission medium that can be used to store information for access by a computing device.
In contrast, communication media may embody computer readable instructions, data structures, program modules, or other data in a modulated data signal, such as a carrier wave, or other transmission mechanism. As defined herein, computer storage media does not include communication media.
Any number of program modules, applications, or components can be stored in the memory 1506, including by way of example, an operating system 1508, one or more computer applications such as the input method editor 1502, a chatting application 1510, a document-editing application 1512, a gaming application 1514, and an email application 1516, other program modules, program data, computer executable instructions.
The input method editor 1502 includes a user interface 1518, a collection component 1520, an analysis component 1522, a selection component 1524, an engine pool 1526, and a presentation component 1528.
The user interface 1518 receives queries from the user 102 and presents the returned text candidates and/or rich candidates. The collection component 1520 collects data relating to the scenario of the user input and the queries. The analysis component 1522 analyzes the collected data and determines a type of input candidates to request and the scenario of the user input. The selection component 1524 selects a scenario-tuned and type-specific input candidate engine from the engine pool 1526 based on the queries, the scenario of the user input, and the determined type of input candidates.
The engine pool 1526 includes a plurality of input candidate engines, each of which may be designed for a specific type and scenario. The engine pool 1526 may also include a default text candidate engine and/or a default rich candidate engine to generate and/or identify input candidates when the scenario cannot be determined or there is no input candidate engine tuned to the specific type and scenario.
The presentation component 1528 displays the returned input candidates including the text candidates and/or rich candidates at the user interface 1518.
Some modules of the IME 1502 may be implemented as separate systems and their processing results can be used by the IME 1502.
For the sake of convenient description, the above IME is functionally divided into various modules which are separately described. When implementing the disclosed system, the functions of various modules may be implemented in one or more instances of software and/or hardware.
The IME 1502 may be used in an environment or in a configuration of universal or specialized computer systems. Examples include a personal computer, a server computer, a handheld device or a portable device, a tablet device, a multi-processor system, a microprocessor-based system, a set-up box, a programmable customer electronic device, a network PC, and a distributed computing environment including any system or device above.
In the distributed computing environment, a task is executed by remote processing devices which are connected through a communication network. In the distributed computing environment, the modules may be located in storage media (which include data storage devices) of local and remote computers.
In another embodiment, as shown in
In the example of
In the example of
There may be other configurations of an IME in the client-server architecture. In another example the selection component 1524 may be located at the client device 110. In yet another example, the components that are located at the client device 110 and the server 1530 may be different from those in
Conclusion
Although the subject matter has been described in language specific to structural features and/or methodological acts, it is to be understood that the subject matter defined in the appended claims is not necessarily limited to the specific features or acts described. Rather, the specific features and acts are disclosed as exemplary forms of implementing the claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4559604 | Ichikawa et al. | Dec 1985 | A |
5796866 | Sakurai et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5873107 | Borovoy et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5987415 | Breese et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5995928 | Nguyen et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6014638 | Burge et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6076056 | Huang et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6085160 | D'hoore et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6092044 | Baker et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6236964 | Tamura et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6247043 | Bates et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6363342 | Shaw et al. | Mar 2002 | B2 |
6377965 | Hachamovitch et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6408266 | Oon | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6460015 | Hetherington et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6731307 | Strubbe et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6732074 | Kuroda | May 2004 | B1 |
6801893 | Backfried et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6941267 | Matsumoto | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6963841 | Handal et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
7069254 | Foulger et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7089504 | Froloff | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7099876 | Hetherington et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7107204 | Liu et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7165032 | Bellegarda | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7194538 | Rabe et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7224346 | Sheng | May 2007 | B2 |
7277029 | Thiesson et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7308439 | Baird et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7353247 | Hough et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7360151 | Froloff | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7370275 | Haluptzok et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
7389223 | Atkin et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7447627 | Jessee et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7451152 | Kraft et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7490033 | Chen et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7505954 | Heidloff et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7512904 | Matthews et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7555713 | Yang | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7562082 | Zhou | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7565157 | Ortega et al. | Jul 2009 | B1 |
7599915 | Hill et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7676517 | Hurst-Hiller et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7689412 | Wu et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7725318 | Gavalda et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7728735 | Aaron et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7752034 | Brockett et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7844599 | Kasperski | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7881934 | Endo et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7917355 | Wu | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7917488 | Niu et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7930676 | Thomas | Apr 2011 | B1 |
7953730 | Bleckner et al. | May 2011 | B1 |
7957955 | Christie et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7957969 | Alewine et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7983910 | Subramanian et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8161073 | Connor | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8230336 | Morrill | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8285745 | Li | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8498864 | Liang et al. | Jul 2013 | B1 |
8539359 | Rapaport et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8564684 | Bai | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8597031 | Cohen et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8762356 | Kogan | Jun 2014 | B1 |
8996356 | Yang et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
20020005784 | Balkin et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020045463 | Chen et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020188603 | Baird | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030041147 | van den Oord et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030160830 | DeGross | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030179229 | Van Erlach et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030220917 | Copperman et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040128122 | Privault et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040220925 | Liu et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040243415 | Commarford et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050144162 | Liang | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050203738 | Hwang | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050216253 | Brockett | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060026147 | Cone et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060167857 | Kraft | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060190822 | Basson et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060204142 | West et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060206324 | Skilling et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060242608 | Garside et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060248074 | Carmel et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070016422 | Mori et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070033269 | Atkinson et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070050339 | Kasperski | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070052868 | Chou et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070088686 | Hurst-Hiller | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070089125 | Claassen | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070124132 | Takeuchi | May 2007 | A1 |
20070150279 | Gandhi et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070162281 | Saitoh et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070167689 | Ramadas et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070192710 | Platz et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070208738 | Morgan | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070213983 | Ramsey | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070214164 | MacLennan et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070233692 | Lisa et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070255567 | Bangalore et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080046405 | Olds | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080115046 | Yamaguchi | May 2008 | A1 |
20080167858 | Christie et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080171555 | Oh et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080189628 | Liesche et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080195645 | Lapstun et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080195980 | Morris | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080208567 | Brockett et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080221893 | Kaiser | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080288474 | Chin et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080294982 | Leung et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080312910 | Zhang | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090002178 | Guday et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090043584 | Philips | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090043741 | Kim | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090077464 | Goldsmith et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090106224 | Roulland et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090128567 | Shuster et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090154795 | Tan et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090187515 | Andrew et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090187824 | Hinckley et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090210214 | Qian | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090216690 | Badger | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090222437 | Niu et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090249198 | Davis et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090300546 | Kwok et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090313239 | Wen et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100005086 | Wang | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100122155 | Monsarrat | May 2010 | A1 |
20100125811 | Moore et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100138210 | Seo et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100146407 | Bokor et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100169770 | Hong et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100180199 | Wu | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100217581 | Hong | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100217795 | Hong | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100231523 | Chou | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100245251 | Yuan et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100251304 | Donoghue et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100306139 | Wu et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100306248 | Bao et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100309137 | Lee | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110014952 | Minton | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110041077 | Reiner | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110060761 | Fouts | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110066431 | Ju et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110087483 | Hsieh et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110107265 | Buchanan et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110131642 | Hamura et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110137635 | Chalabi et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110161080 | Ballinger et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110161311 | Mishne | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110173172 | Hong et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110178981 | Bowen et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110184723 | Huang et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110188756 | Lee et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110191321 | Gade | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110201387 | Paek et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110202836 | Badger et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110202876 | Badger et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110219299 | Scalosub | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110258535 | Adler, III et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110282903 | Zhang | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110289105 | Hershowitz | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110296324 | Goossens et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120016678 | Gruber | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120019446 | Wu | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120022853 | Ballinger et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120023103 | Soderberg et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120029902 | Lu et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120035932 | Jitkoff | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120036468 | Colley | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120041752 | Wang et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120060113 | Sejnoha et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120060147 | Hong et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120078611 | Soltani et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120113011 | Wu et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120117506 | Koch et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120143897 | Wei et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120173222 | Wang et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120222056 | Donoghue et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120297294 | Scott et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120297332 | Changuion et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120311480 | Cohen | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130016113 | Adhikari et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130054617 | Colman | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130091409 | Jeffery | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130132359 | Lee | May 2013 | A1 |
20130159920 | Scott et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130298030 | Nahumi et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130346872 | Scott et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140040238 | Scott et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20150081369 | Sarrazin et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150088927 | Sarrazin et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150106702 | Scott et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150121291 | Scott et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150127748 | Buryak | May 2015 | A1 |
20150161126 | Wang et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150370833 | Fey et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160196150 | Jing et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1609764 | Apr 2005 | CN |
1851617 | Oct 2006 | CN |
1908863 | Feb 2007 | CN |
101183355 | May 2008 | CN |
101276245 | Oct 2008 | CN |
101286092 | Oct 2008 | CN |
101286093 | Oct 2008 | CN |
101286094 | Oct 2008 | CN |
101587471 | Nov 2009 | CN |
101661474 | Mar 2010 | CN |
102012748 | Apr 2011 | CN |
102144228 | Aug 2011 | CN |
102193643 | Sep 2011 | CN |
102314441 | Jan 2012 | CN |
102314461 | Jan 2012 | CN |
2000148748 | May 2000 | JP |
2011507099 | Mar 2011 | JP |
2012008874 | Jan 2012 | JP |
2012094156 | May 2012 | JP |
WO2010105440 | Sep 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
U.S. Appl. No. 12/960,258, filed Dec. 3, 2010, Wei, et al., “Wild Card Auto Completion,” 74 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/109,021, filed May 17, 2011, Matthew Robert Scott, “Network Search for Writing Assistance,” 43 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/331,023, filed Dec. 20, 2011,Tony Hou, Weipeng Liu, Weijiang Xu, and Xi Chen, “Scenario-Adaptive Input Method Editor,” 57 pages. |
Ben-Haim, et al., “Improving Web-based Image Search via Content Based Clustering”, Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshop (CVPRW '06), IEEE, Jun. 17, 2006, 6 pages. |
Berg, et al., “Animals on the Web”, Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR '06), vol. 2, IEEE, Jun. 17, 2006, pp. 1463-1470. |
Ciccolini, “Baidu IME More Literate in Chinese Input,” Published Sep. 15, 2011, available at: «http://www.itnews-blog.com/it/81630.html», 4 pages. |
Damper, “Self-Learning and Connectionist Approaches to Text-Phoneme Conversion”, retrieved on May 26, 2010 at «http://ftp.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/pub/joe/newbull.ps», UCL Press, Connectionist Models of Memory and Language, 1995, pp. 117-144. |
“Database”, Microsoft Computer Dictionary, Fifth Edition, retrieved on May 13, 2011, available at: «http://academic.safar/booksonline.com/book/communications/0735614954», Microsoft Press, May 1, 2002, 2 pages. |
Dinamik-Bot, et al., “Input method”, retrieved on May 6, 2015, available at «http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Input_method&oldid=496631911», Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Jun. 8, 2012, 4 pages. |
Engkoo Pinyin Redefines Chinese Input, Published on: May 13, 2013, available at: «http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/news/features/engkoopinyinime-051313.aspx», 3 pages. |
“English Assistant”, Published on: Apr. 19, 2013, available at: <<http://bing.msn.cn/pinyin/>>, 2 pages. |
The European Office Action dated Oct. 8, 2015 for European patent application No. 12879804.8, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/586,267, 9 pages. |
The European Office Action dated Nov. 27, 2015 for European patent application No. 128801495, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,219, 10 pages. |
The European Office Action dated Mar. 1, 2016 for European Patent Application No. 12883902.4, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/701,008, 8 pages. |
The European Office Action dated Jun. 18, 2015 for European patent application No. 12879676.0, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,306, 5 pages. |
The Supplementary European Search Report dated May 20, 2015 for European Patent Application No. 12879676.0, 3 pages. |
The Partial Supplemenary European Search Report dated Oct. 26, 2015 for European patent application No. 12883902.4, 7 pages. |
The Supplementary European Search Report dated Nov. 12, 2015 for European patent application No. 12880149.5, 7 pages. |
The European Search Report dated Feb. 18, 2016 for European patent application No. 12883902.4, 7 pages. |
The Supplemenary European Search Report dated Jul. 16, 2015 for European patent application No. 12880149.5, 5 pages. |
The Supplemenary European Search Report dated Sep. 14, 2015 for European patent application No. 12879804.8, 5 pages. |
“File”, Microsoft Computer Dictionary, Fifth Edition, retrieved on May 13, 2011, at «http://academic.safaribooksonline.com/book/communications/0735614954», Microsoft Press, May 1, 2002, 2 pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/109,021, dated Jan. 11, 2013, Scott et al., “Network Search for Writing Assistance”, 16 pages. |
Gamon et al., “Using Statistical Techniques and Web Search to Correct ESL Errors,” Published 2009, retrieved from «http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/81312/Calico_published.pdf», CALICO Journal, vol. 26, No. 3, 2009, 21 pages. |
Lenssen, Philipp, “Google Releases Pinyin Converter,” Published Apr. 4, 2007 http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2007-04-04-n49.html. |
“Google Scribe,” retrieved on: Feb. 3, 2011, available at: «http://www.scribe.googlelabs.com/», 1 page. |
Guo et al., “NaXi Pictographs Input Method and WEFT”, Journal of Computers, vol. 5, No. 1, Jan. 2010, pp. 117-124. |
“Innovative Chinese Engine”, Published on: May 2, 2013, available at: «http://bing.msn.cn/pinyin/help.shtml», 6 pages. |
“Input Method (IME)”, Retrieved on: Jul. 3, 2013, available at: «http://www.google.co.in/inputtools/cloud/features/input-method.html», 6 pages. |
International Search Report & Written Opinion for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/CN2013/081156, dated May 5, 2014; filed Aug. 9, 2013, 14 pages. |
Komasu et al., “Corpus-based Predictive Text Input”, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Active Media Technology, May 2005, 6 pages. |
Kumar, “Google launched Input Method editor—type anywhere in your language”, retrieved at http://shoutingwords.com/google-launched-input-method-editor.html, Mar. 2010, 12 pages. |
Lenssen, “Google Releases Pinyin Converter”, Retrieved at http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2007-04-04- n49.htm, Apr. 4, 2007, 3 pages. |
Lo, et al., “Cross platform CJK input Method Engine,” IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybemetics, Oct. 6, 2002, retrieved at «http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1175680», pp. 1-6. |
“Microsoft Research ESL Assistant,” retrieved at «http://www.eslassistant.com/», retrieved date Feb. 3, 2011, 1 page. |
Miessler, “7 Essential Firefox Quicksearches”, Retrieved from «https:danielmiessler.com/blog/7-essential-firefox-quicksearches/», Published Aug. 19, 2007, 2 pages. |
Millward, “Baidu Japan Acquires Simeji Mobile App Team, For added Japanese Typing Fun”, May 23, 2012, 3 pages. |
Mohan et al., “Input Method Configuration Overview,” Jun. 3, 2011, available at: «http://gameware.autodesk.com/documents/gfx_4.0_ime.pdf», pp. 1-9. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/567,305, dated Jan. 30, 2014, Scott, et al., “Business Intelligent In-Document Suggestions”, 14 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/315,047, dated Feb. 12, 2014, Liu, et al., “Sentiment Aware User Interface Customization”, 14 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/109,021, dated Mar. 11, 2014, Dyer, A.R., “Network Search for Writing Assistance,” 18 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/586,267, dated Jan. 2, 2015, Scott et al., “Input Method Editor Application Platform”, 19 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/693,316, dated Oct. 16, 2014, Huang, et al., “Phonetic Suggestion Engine”, 24 pages. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/315,047, dated Oct. 2, 2014, Weipeng Liu, “Sentiment Aware User Interface Customization”, 12 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/693,316, dated Oct. 30, 2013, Huang, et al., “Phonetic Suggestion Engine”, 24 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/331,023 dated Nov. 20, 2015, Scott et al., “Scenario-Adaptive Input Method Editor”, 25 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/586,267 dated Nov. 6, 2015, Scott et al., “Input Method Editor Application Platform”, 22 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/331,023, dated Feb. 12, 2015, Scott et al, “Scenario-Adaptive Input Method Editor”, 20 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,306, dated Feb. 25, 2016, Scott et al., “Input Method Editor”, 29 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,219, dated Mar. 13, 2015, Scott et al., “Cross-Lingual Input Method Editor”, 21 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/701,008, dated Mar. 17, 2016, Wang et al., “Feature-Based Candidate Selection”, 13 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,219, dated Mar. 24, 2016, Scott et al., “Cross-Lingual Input Method Editor”, 29 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,306, dated Mar. 27, 2015, Scott et al., “Input Method Editor”, 18 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/315,047, dated Apr. 24, 2014, Liu et al., “Sentiment Aware User Interface Customization”, 13 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/315,047, dated Apr. 28, 2015, Liu et al., “Sentiment Aware User Interface Customization”, 12 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/701,008, dated May 12, 2015, Wang et al., “Feature-Based Candidate Selection”, 12 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/693,316, dated May 19, 2014, Huang et al., “Phonetic Suggestion Engine”, 22 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/586,267, dated May 8, 2015, Scott et al., “Input Method Editor Application Platform”, 18 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/701,008, dated Jun. 15, 2015, Wang et al., “Feature-Based Candidate Selection”, 17 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/693,316, dated Jun. 19, 2013, Huang et al., “Phonetic Suggestion Engine”, 20 pages. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/109,021, dated Jun. 19, 2014, Dyer, A.R., “Network Search for Writing Assistance,” 42 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/331,023, dated Jun. 26, 2015, Scott et al, “Scenario-Adaptive Input Method Editor”, 23 paegs. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/586,267, dated Jul. 31, 2014, Scott et al., “Input Method Editor Application Platform”, 20 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,306, dated Aug. 14, 2015, Scott et al., “Input Method Editor”, 26 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/109,021, dated Aug. 21, 2012, Scott et al., “Network Search for Writing Assistance”, 19 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/331,023, dated Aug. 4, 2014, Scott et al., “Scenario-Adaptive Input Method Editor”, 20 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/315,047, dated Sep. 24, 2015, Liu et al., “Sentiment Aware User Interface Customization”, 12 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/109,021, dated Sep. 25, 2013, Scott et al., “Network Search for Writing Assistance”, 18 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,219, dated Sep. 29, 2015, Scott et al., “Cross-Lingual Input Method Editor”, 14 page. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/109,021, dated Sep. 30, 2014, Dyer, A.R., “Network Search for Writing Assistance,” 17 pages. |
International Search Report & Written Opinion for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2013/053321, dated Oct. 1, 2013, Filed Date: Aug. 2, 2013, 9 Pages. |
PCT International Preliminary Report on Patentability dated Feb. 18, 2016 for PCT Application No. PCT/CN2013/081156, 8 pages. |
PCT International Preliminary Report on Patentability dated Mar. 12, 2015 for PCT Application No. PCT/CN2012/080749, 8 pages. |
“Prose”, Dictionary.com, Jun. 19, 2014, 2 pgs. |
Scott, et al., “Engkoo: Mining theWeb for Language Learning”, In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies: Systems Demonstrations, Jun. 21, 2011, 6 pages. |
“Search Engine”, Microsoft Computer Dictionary, Mar. 2002 , Fifth Edition, pp. 589. |
Sowmya, et al., “Transliteration Based Text Input Methods for Telugu”, available at: «http://content.imamu.edu.sa/Scholars/it/VisualBasic/2009_53.pdf», Proceedings of 22nd International Conference on Computer Processing of Oriental Languages. Language Technology for the Knowledge-based Economy (ICCPOL), Mar. 2009, pp. 122-132. |
Suematsu et al., “Network-Based Context-Aware Input Method Editor,” Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Networking and Services (ICNS), Mar. 7, 2010, available at: «http:ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5460679», pp. 1-6. |
Suzuki et al., “A Comparative Study on Language Model Adaptation Techniques using New Evaluation Metrics,” Proceedings: HLT/EMNLP, Vancouver, Oct. 6-8, 2005, available at «http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/H/H05/H05-1034.pdf», 8 pages. |
Wikipedia, “Selection Based Search”, retrieved Mar. 23, 2012, available at «http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selection based search», 3 pgs. |
Wikipedia, “Soundex”, retrieved on Jan. 20, 2010 available at: «http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/soundex», 3 pgs. |
Windows XP Chinese Pinyin Setup, published Apr. 15, 2006, available at: «http://www.pinyinjoe.com/pinyin/pinyin_setup.htm», pp. 1-10. |
The Chinese Office Action dated Jan. 3, 2017 for Chinese patent application No. 201280074383.6, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,306. |
The European Office Action dated Dec. 22, 2016 for European patent application No. 12880149.5, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,219, 11 pages. |
The Japanese Office Action dated Oct. 31, 2016 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2015-528828, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/701,008. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,219, dated Nov. 14, 2016, Scott et al., “Cross-Lingual Input Method Editor”, 27 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/701,008, dated Nov. 30, 2016, Wang et al., “Feature-Based Candidate Selection”, 21 pages. |
The Chinese Office Action dated Feb. 3, 2017 for Chinese patent application No. 201280074382.1, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,219. |
The Chinese Office Action dated Mar. 24, 2017 for Chinese Patent Application No. 201280074281.4, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/586,267. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,306, dated Feb. 25, 2017, Scott et al., “Input Method Editor”, 23 pages. |
The European Office Action dated Jul. 19, 2016 for European Patent Application No. 13891201.9, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 14/911,247, 7 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,306, dated Jul. 28, 2016, Scott et al., “Input Method Editor”, 24 pages. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,219, dated Aug. 10, 2016, Scott et al., “Cross-Lingual Input Method Editor”, 29 pages. |
The Chinese Office Action dated Jun. 28, 2016 for Chinese Patent Application No. 201280074281.4, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/586,267. |
Translated Chinese Office Action dated Jun. 3, 2016 for Chinese Patent Application No. 201280074382.1, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,219, 18 pages. |
The European Office Action dated Jul. 19, 2016 for European patent application No. 12880149.5, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/635,219, 7 pages. |
The Supplementary European Search Report dated Jul. 6, 2016 for European patent application No. 13891201.9, 4 pages. |
Translated Japanese Office Action dated May 24, 2016 for Japanese patent application No. 2015-528828, a counterpart foreign application of U.S. Appl. No. 13/701,008, 17 pages. |
Office action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/586,267, dated Jun. 7, 2016, Scott et al., “Input Method Editor Pplication Platform”, 24 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160299984 A1 | Oct 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13331023 | Dec 2011 | US |
Child | 15189777 | US |