System for browsing through a music catalog using correlation metrics of a knowledge base of mediasets

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 8543575
  • Patent Number
    8,543,575
  • Date Filed
    Monday, May 21, 2012
    12 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, September 24, 2013
    11 years ago
Abstract
A system and method to navigate through a media item catalog and generate recommendations using behavioral metrics such as correlation metrics (FIGS. 1,2) from a knowledge base (400) of mediasets (FIG. 4, 1-7). One implementation uses a knowledge base comprising a collection of mediasets such as groupings of selected video items. Various metrics (Metric 1-Metric m) among media items (m1 . . . ) are considered by analyzing how the media items are grouped to form the sets in the knowledge base (400). Such metrics preferably are stored in a matrix (100) that allows the system to dynamically build appropriate navigation lists (FIG. 3) from media items that a user selects (FIG. 5).
Description
COPYRIGHT NOTICE

© 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).


TECHNICAL FIELD

This invention relates generally to systems for assisting users to navigate media item catalogs with the ultimate goal of building mediasets and/or discover media items. More specifically, the present invention pertains to computer software methods and products to enable users to interactively browse through an electronic catalog by leveraging media item association metrics.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

New technologies combining digital media item players with dedicated software, together with new media distribution channels through networks 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 can be easily detected 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 like music videos, movies, news, etc.


In general, our invention is applicable to any kind of media item that can be grouped by users forming mediasets. For example, in the music domain, these mediasets could be playlists. Users put music 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.


This invention addresses the problem of helping users navigate through a media item catalog based on a small set of selected media items. This set of selected media items can be seen as an initial set to build a starting point for the navigation experience.


Different approaches can be considered when building systems to help users navigate a media item catalog. The most commonly used is the keyword based search where the user specifies a set of keywords and the system retrieves the set of media items which contain the keywords in their descriptors. Another approach is to consider a search based on metadata. For example in the music arena, a user might be asking to retrieve rock songs from the 90s.


However, many times users do not know what they are looking for. They want to explore the catalog and find interesting items. This observation is especially relevant for media item catalogs with a clear entertainment focus.


Various approaches can be adopted to 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 need remains for improved methods and systems to assist users in navigating through media item catalogs with the ultimate goal of helping them build mediasets and/or discover media items that they will enjoy.


SUMMARY OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

In one embodiment the invention comprises a system, preferably implemented in computer software, for guiding users along an interactive, personalized path through a media item catalog beginning from an initial selection by the user of one or more media items. As explained below, “media items” as used herein includes, by way of example and not limitation, music tracks or songs, albums, movies, music videos, other video “clips,” news articles, other media, including text, graphics, multi-media presentations, etc. Preferably, the media items themselves, i.e. the actual content, is not part of the present system. Rather, each media item is identified by meta data.


The system requires a knowledge base consisting of a collection of mediasets. Mediasets are sets of media items that are naturally grouped by users. The mediasets of the knowledge base define metrics among items. Such metrics indicate how correlated media items are in the mediasets of the knowledge base. For each media item of the initial set, the system generates one list of media items for each metric of the system. The media items of these lists are the ones with highest metrics with respect to the associated media item. The user can then select any of the media items of the proposed lists, and the selected list becomes part of the initial set of media items, resulting in newly generated lists being proposed to the user. The process is interactive. Advantages of such interactivity include easier and more effective browsing through the catalog and/or building a new appropriate mediaset.


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



FIG. 2 illustrates 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 a selected metric for the similarity between the media items.



FIG. 3 is simplified, conceptual diagram illustrating the generation of navigation lists from an input set of media items based on knowledge base metrics.



FIG. 4 is a simplified, conceptual diagram of a knowledge base comprising a plurality of mediasets useful to derive metric values.



FIG. 5 is a flow diagram illustrating an interactive method for guiding users through a media item catalog.





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 comprises 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 of different nature, e.g. a song, a book, a newspaper, a movie, a piece of a radio program, etc. If a mediaset is composed of the same 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. 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. 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 work, 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 the music that 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 well, in some sense, with his personal preferences. 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 l 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 represent stronger association values, or as a similarity, where larger similarity values represent stronger association values. The most immediate metric is the co-concurrency (i, j) 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) 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) indicates how many times item i and item j appear together but i after j in any of the mediasets of k. The previous defined metrics can also be considered considering 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 (only available if 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.


A matrix representation of metric M, (FIG. 1) for a given knowledge base K can be defined as a bidimensional matrix (100) where the element M(i, j) (106) is the value of the metric between the media item i (102) and media item j (104).


A graph representation for a given knowledge base k, (FIG. 2) is a graph (200) where nodes represent media items (202, 204), and edges (206, 208) 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.


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. 4, which shows a simplified conceptual illustration of a knowledge base 400. In FIG. 4, the knowledge base 400 includes a collection 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 four items. The presence of media items within a given mediaset creates an association among them.


The present invention requires a knowledge base of mediasets, or at least access to metrics derived from a knowledge base. A knowledge base can be analyzed based on any selected metric. In general, for present purposes, such metrics reflect and indeed quantify some association between pairs of media items in a given knowledge base. The analysis process is described by way of example using the co-concurrency metric mentioned earlier. A similar process can be used for other metrics. Referring still to FIG. 4, for each item in a mediaset (in the knowledge base), 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. 4, one pair in mediaset 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. 1, 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. 1, the values are normalized to a range of zero to one, but other normalization is merely a design choice.


Referring now to FIG. 3, the user selects an initial set of items from the catalog (301). For each of the items in this initial set (302, 303), the system generates (307, 308) one list for each metric. Hence, for an initial set (301) of n items and a system with m metrics, the system generates n*m lists. The ordered list with respect to item i and metric M (304) contains the k items (305, 306, 307) with the highest metric M with respect to item i.


The system displays or otherwise communicates the generated lists to the user, and from these the user can select any item. Referring now to FIG. 5, a flow diagram illustrates one example of this process. Initially, the software system receives or reads setup parameters 502. These may pertain to the selection of metrics, user login, length of lists, time limits, or other operational parameters. Then the system or the user selects a catalog for browsing 504. The system also obtains access to a collection of metrics derived from an associated knowledge base. Next, as noted, the user selects one or more media items from the catalog 506 to form an initial input mediaset. The system receives that input, and then generates in 508 an initial output list of media items we call a navigation list, preferably in the manner described above with reference to FIG. 3.


Continuing with reference to FIG. 5, the system receives further feedback from the user, which may be an instruction to exit from the process 510, in which case it may terminate 511. (The exit may occur at any time; this flowchart is merely illustrative.) If the user continues, he makes a selection 514 of one or more of the media items on the navigation list to add or delete. The system then adds (or deletes) the user selection(s) to the initial input mediaset 516, thus forming a new input set. New navigational lists are then generated based on the new input set 518. The new navigation lists are communicated to the user, 520. The process loops as indicated at 522.


In this way, the user is interactively guided through the catalog as he or she continues to add new items. The user may edit the navigation set at any moment by deleting items from, or adding items to, the generated lists. Every time the users interacts with the navigation set, its associated lists are updated as the system reacts to each edit of the navigation set. The previously described process has various advantageous uses, including assisting users to (a) navigate through a media item catalog, or (b) create new mediasets in a convenient way. A new mediaset can be saved by storing the current input set, or any navigation list, at any time during the interaction.


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 item catalog system, it should be understood that the inventive system could be used in any system that implements a catalog for items that can be grouped by users following some selected criteria. Although specific terms are employed herein, there are used in a generic and descriptive sense only and not for purposes of limitation.


It will further be apparent 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 comprising: obtaining access to metric values derived from a knowledge base of predefined mediasets, each of the predefined mediasets comprising a plurality of media items grouped together by one of a plurality of users into a playlist, wherein the metric values reflect a relative frequency within the predefined mediasets in which a first media item and second media item occur together;receiving an initial selection of at least one media item to define an initial input set of media items, wherein the at least one media item occurs within at least one mediaset in the knowledge base of predefined mediasets;generating an output media item navigation list responsive to at least one media item in the input set of media items, wherein the generating is based on the metric values derived from the knowledge base, and further wherein each media item in the output media item navigation list occurs in at least one mediaset in the knowledge base of predefined mediasets;receiving an instruction to edit the initial input set of media items responsive to the output media item navigation list;editing the initial input set of media items based on the received instruction to define an edited input set of media items;generating a new output media item navigation list responsive to at least one media item in the edited input set of media items, wherein the generating is based on the metric values; andcreating an interactive browsing session by iteratively repeating the steps of receiving an instruction to edit the initial input set, editing the initial input set, and generating a new output media iten navigation list.
  • 2. The method of claim 1 further comprising: communicating the output media item navigation list.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the metric values comprise at least one of a pre-concurrency metric, a co-concurrency metric, a post-concurrency metric, or a combination of the foregoing metrics applied transitively.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the knowledge base of predefined mediasets comprises heterogeneous mediasets.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of media items includes a plurality of music tracks and wherein the knowledge base of predefined mediasets includes a plurality of playlists created by a plurality of users.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the instruction to edit includes an instruction to add a media item from the output item navigation list to the initial input set of media items.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the instruction to edit includes an instruction to delete a media item from the initial input set of media items.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, further comprising: saving the edited input set as a new mediaset.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, further comprising: saving the new output item navigation list as a new mediaset.
  • 10. A computer implemented method comprising: obtaining access to co-concurrency metric values derived from a knowledge base of predefined mediasets, each of the predefined mediasets comprising a plurality of media items grouped together by one of a plurality of users into a playlist, wherein the co-concurrency metric values reflect a number of mediasets in the knowledge base of predefined mediasets in which a first media item and second item appear together;receiving an initial selection of at least one media item to define an initial input set of media items, wherein the at least one media item occurs within at least one mediaset in the knowledge base of predefined mediaset;generating an output media item navigation list responsive to at least one media item in the input set of media items, wherein the generating is based on the co-concurrency metric values derived from the knowledge base, and further wherein each media item in the output media item navigation list occurs in at least one mediaset in the knowledge base of predefined mediasets;receiving an instruction to edit the initial input set of media items responsive to the output media item navigation list;editing the initial input set of media items based on the received instruction to define an edited input set of media items;generating a new output media item navigation list responsive to at least one media item in the edited input set of media items, wherein the generating is based on the co- concurrency metric values; andcreating an interactive browsing section by iteratively repeating the steps of receiving an instruction to edit the initial set, editing the initial input set, and generating a new output media item navigation list.
  • 11. The method of claim 10, further comprising: prior to receiving an initial selection, pre-processing to analyze the knowledge base of predefined mediasets.
  • 12. The method of claim 10, wherein the plurality of media items includes a plurality of music tracks and wherein the knowledge base of predefined mediasets includes a plurality of playlists created by a plurality of users.
  • 13. A system comprising: a processor; anda computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to perform a method comprising: obtaining access to metric values derived from a knowledge base of mediasets, each of the mediasets comprising a plurality of items grouped together by one of a plurality of users into a playlist, wherein the metric values reflect a relative frequency within the mediasets in which a first item and a second item occur together;receiving an initial selection of at least one item to define an initial input set of items, wherein the at least one item occurs within at least one mediaset in the knowledge base of predefined mediasets;generating an output item navigation list responsive to at least one item in the initial input set of items, wherein the generating is based on the metric values derived from the knowledge base, and further wherein each media item in the output item navigation list occurs in at least one mediaset in the knowledge base of mediasets;receiving an instruction to edit the initial input set of items responsive to the output item navigation list;editing the output item navigation list based on the received instruction to define an edited input set of items;generating a new output item navigation list responsive to at least one item in the edited input set of items, wherein the generating is based on the metric values; andcreating an interactive browsing session by iteratively repeating the steps of receiving an instruction to edit the initial input set, editing the initial input set, and generating a new output media item navigation list.
  • 14. The system of claim 13, wherein an item comprises at least one of a music track, an album, a movie, a video, a news article, text, a graphic, a multi-media presentation.
  • 15. The system of claim 13, wherein a mediaset comprises metadata identifying a plurality of items.
  • 16. The system of claim 13, wherein the metric values comprise at least one of a pre-concurrency metric, a co-concurrency metric, a post-concurrency metric, or a combination of the foregoing metrics applied transitively.
  • 17. The system of claim 13, wherein the knowledge base of mediasets comprises heterogeneous mediasets.
  • 18. The system of claim 13, wherein the plurality of media items includes a plurality of music tracks and wherein the knowledge base of predefined mediasets includes a plurality of playlists created by a plurality of users.
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/106,752, filed on May 12, 2011, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/984,259, filed on Jan. 4, 2011, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,945,568, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/858,229, filed on Aug. 17, 2010, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/349,370, filed on Feb. 6, 2006, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,797,321, which claims priority from U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/649,945 filed Feb. 4, 2005, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth.

US Referenced Citations (335)
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 et al. Dec 1996 A
5613097 Bates et al. Mar 1997 A
5724521 Dedrick Mar 1998 A
5749081 Whiteis May 1998 A
5752031 Cutler et al. May 1998 A
5754939 Herz May 1998 A
5758257 Herz May 1998 A
5765144 Larche Jun 1998 A
5848421 Brichta et al. Dec 1998 A
5890152 Rapaport Mar 1999 A
5918014 Robinson Jun 1999 A
5950176 Keiser Sep 1999 A
5963746 Barker et al. Oct 1999 A
6000044 Chrysos Dec 1999 A
6041311 Chislenko et al. Mar 2000 A
6047311 Ueno Apr 2000 A
6072481 Matsushita et al. Jun 2000 A
6076091 Fohn et al. Jun 2000 A
6112186 Bergh Aug 2000 A
6134532 Lazarus Oct 2000 A
6266649 Linden et al. Jul 2001 B1
6345288 Reed Feb 2002 B1
6346951 Mastronardi Feb 2002 B1
6347313 Ma Feb 2002 B1
6349339 Williams Feb 2002 B1
6381575 Martin et al. Apr 2002 B1
6430539 Lazarus Aug 2002 B1
6434621 Pezzillo Aug 2002 B1
6438579 Hosken Aug 2002 B1
6480855 Siefert Nov 2002 B1
6487539 Aggarwal Nov 2002 B1
6505046 Baker Jan 2003 B1
6526411 Ward Feb 2003 B1
6532469 Feldman et al. Mar 2003 B1
6577716 Minter Jun 2003 B1
6578030 Wilmsen et al. Jun 2003 B1
6587127 Leeke Jul 2003 B1
6615208 Behrens Sep 2003 B1
6647371 Shinohara Nov 2003 B2
6687696 Hofmann et al. Feb 2004 B2
6690918 Evans Feb 2004 B2
6704576 Brachman Mar 2004 B1
6727914 Gutta Apr 2004 B1
6728729 Jawa et al. Apr 2004 B1
6748395 Picker Jun 2004 B1
6751574 Shinohara Jun 2004 B2
6763345 Hempleman et al. Jul 2004 B1
6766363 Rothschild Jul 2004 B1
6785688 Abajjan 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
6938209 Ogawa et al. Aug 2005 B2
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 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 Oct 2006 B2
7136866 Springer, Jr. Nov 2006 B2
7139723 Conkwright Nov 2006 B2
7159174 Johnson et al. Jan 2007 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
7200627 Stickler Apr 2007 B2
7224282 Terauchi et al. May 2007 B2
7236941 Conkwright Jun 2007 B2
7246041 Fukuda Jul 2007 B2
7246104 Stickler Jul 2007 B2
7256341 Plastina Aug 2007 B2
7277870 Mourad et al. 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 et al. 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 et al. Aug 2009 B2
7574422 Guan Aug 2009 B2
7574434 Galuten Aug 2009 B2
7574513 Dunning Aug 2009 B2
7580932 Plastina Aug 2009 B2
7599847 Block 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
7712113 Yoon et al. May 2010 B2
7720871 Rogers et al. May 2010 B2
7725494 Rogers et al. May 2010 B2
7734569 Martin Jun 2010 B2
7743009 Hangartner Jun 2010 B2
7797321 Martin Sep 2010 B2
7826444 Irvin Nov 2010 B2
7831199 Ng Nov 2010 B2
7840570 Cervera et al. Nov 2010 B2
7844498 Robbin Nov 2010 B2
7853712 Amidon et al. Dec 2010 B2
7875788 Benyamin Jan 2011 B2
7889724 Irvin Feb 2011 B2
20010007099 Rau Jul 2001 A1
20010021914 Jacobi et al. Sep 2001 A1
20010056434 Kaplan Dec 2001 A1
20020002899 Gjerdingen et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020042912 Iilima Apr 2002 A1
20020059094 Hosea May 2002 A1
20020082901 Dunning et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020129002 Alberts et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020138481 Aggarwal et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020147628 Specter et al. Oct 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
20030051095 Artigalas et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030055516 Gang et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030055689 Block Mar 2003 A1
20030097379 Ireton May 2003 A1
20030120630 Tunkelang Jun 2003 A1
20030130991 Reijerse et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030163211 Van Der Meulen Aug 2003 A1
20030182254 Plastina et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030182270 Kuno et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030182315 Plastina et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030204620 Cheng Oct 2003 A1
20030212710 Guy Nov 2003 A1
20030220894 Russon Nov 2003 A1
20030229537 Dunning et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040002993 Toussaint Jan 2004 A1
20040003392 Trajkovic Jan 2004 A1
20040068552 Kotz Apr 2004 A1
20040070538 Horie et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040073924 Pendakur Apr 2004 A1
20040122656 Abir Jun 2004 A1
20040128286 Yasushita Jul 2004 A1
20040139064 Chevallier et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040148424 Berkson Jul 2004 A1
20040158860 Crow Aug 2004 A1
20040162738 Sanders Aug 2004 A1
20040167895 Carro Aug 2004 A1
20040194128 McIntyre Sep 2004 A1
20040210600 Chand Oct 2004 A1
20040215657 Drucker et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040255340 Logan Dec 2004 A1
20040263337 Terauchi et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040267715 Polson Dec 2004 A1
20050005246 Card et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050021470 Martin Jan 2005 A1
20050027687 Nowitz et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050050079 Plastina et al. Mar 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
20050198075 Plastina et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050203807 Bezos Sep 2005 A1
20050210009 Tran Sep 2005 A1
20050210101 Janik Sep 2005 A1
20050216855 Kopra et al. 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
20050251440 Bednarek Nov 2005 A1
20050256867 Walther Nov 2005 A1
20050276570 Reed Dec 2005 A1
20060015571 Fukuda Jan 2006 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 Raghaven Feb 2006 A1
20060032363 Platt Feb 2006 A1
20060053077 Mourad Mar 2006 A1
20060062094 Nathan Mar 2006 A1
20060067296 Bershad Mar 2006 A1
20060074750 Clark Apr 2006 A1
20060080251 Fried Apr 2006 A1
20060080356 Burges et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060091203 Bakker May 2006 A1
20060095516 Wijeratne May 2006 A1
20060100978 Heller May 2006 A1
20060112098 Renshaw et al. May 2006 A1
20060123052 Robbin et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060136344 Jones Jun 2006 A1
20060143236 Wu Jun 2006 A1
20060165571 Seon et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060168616 Candelore Jul 2006 A1
20060173910 McLaughlin Aug 2006 A1
20060173916 Verbeck Sibley et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060174008 Abanami Aug 2006 A1
20060179414 Martin et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060184558 Martin et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060195438 Galuten Aug 2006 A1
20060195462 Rogers Aug 2006 A1
20060195512 Rogers et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060195513 Rogers Aug 2006 A1
20060195514 Rogers et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060195515 Beaupre et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060195516 Beaupre Aug 2006 A1
20060195521 New Aug 2006 A1
20060195789 Rogers Aug 2006 A1
20060195790 Beaupre Aug 2006 A1
20060206478 Glaser Sep 2006 A1
20060206811 Dowdy Sep 2006 A1
20060212494 Ito Sep 2006 A1
20060224259 Buil et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060253874 Stark et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060259889 Crosetto 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
20060288044 Kashiwagi Dec 2006 A1
20060288367 Swix et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070016507 Tzara Jan 2007 A1
20070043829 Dua Feb 2007 A1
20070061487 Moore et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070073596 Alexander et al. 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
20070214133 Liberty et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070244880 Martin Oct 2007 A1
20070250402 Blanchard et al. 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
20070288310 Boos Dec 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
20080033897 Lloyd Feb 2008 A1
20080040326 Chang et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080046317 Christianson Feb 2008 A1
20080065471 Reynolds et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080065659 Watanabe et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080071136 Oohashi et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080077264 Irvin Mar 2008 A1
20080082467 Meijer Apr 2008 A1
20080109378 Papadimitriou May 2008 A1
20080120339 Guan et al. May 2008 A1
20080127121 Fenton et al. May 2008 A1
20080133601 Cerera 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 Cervera 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 Jun 2010 A1
20100169328 Hangartner Jul 2010 A1
20110119127 Hangartner May 2011 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (24)
Number Date Country
1 050 833 Aug 2000 EP
1 231 788 Aug 2002 EP
1420388 May 2004 EP
1 548 741 Jun 2005 EP
11-052965 Feb 1999 JP
2002-108351 Apr 2002 JP
2002-320203 Oct 2002 JP
2003-255958 Sep 2003 JP
2004-221999 Aug 2004 JP
2005-027337 Jan 2005 JP
2002-025579 Apr 2002 KR
WO 03036541 May 2003 WO
WO03051051 Jun 2003 WO
WO2004070538 Aug 2004 WO
WO2005013114 Feb 2005 WO
WO 2005115107 Dec 2005 WO
WO2006052837 May 2006 WO
WO2006075032 Jul 2006 WO
WO2006114451 Nov 2006 WO
WO 2007038806 Apr 2007 WO
WO2007134193 May 2007 WO
WO2007075622 Jul 2007 WO
WO2007092053 Aug 2007 WO
WO2009149046 Dec 2009 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (118)
Entry
Canada—Examiner's Report for App. No. 2713507 mailed on Sep. 21, 2011.
Extended European Search Report in EP 06 82 5435 dated Nov. 2, 2009.
UK Search Examination Report, App. No. GB1014954.0, mailed Dec. 16, 2010.
“Communication from the Examining Division dated Jul. 22, 2011”, European Patent Application No. 09169573.4 (8 pages).
“Final Office Action dated Jan. 1, 2012”, U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,728 (15 pages).
“Final Office Action dated Nov. 10, 2011”, U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,768 (10 pages).
“Non-Final Office Action dated Feb. 16, 2012”, U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,758.
“Non-Final Office Action dated Feb. 9, 2012”, U.S. Appl. No. 12/646,916 (13 pages).
“Non-Final Office Action dated Jan. 9, 2012”, U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,735 (12 pages).
“PCT International Search Report dated Jan. 12, 2006”, PCT Application No. PCT/US2005/000213, Jan. 12, 2006.
NA, , Australia Examiner's 1st Report on patent application No. 2010212503 mailed Jun. 27, 2011.
NA, , EP Search, App. No. EP 10175868.8, mailed.
NA, , “PCT/US 10/47955 International Search Report”, mailed Nov. 8, 2010.
Torrens, M et al., “Visualizing and Exploring Personal Music Libraries”, Torrens, M. et al.: “Visualizing and Exploring Personal Music Libraries” Proceedings Annual International Symposium on Music Information Retrieval, XX, XX; Oct. 10, 2004; whole document.
PCT/US2006/034218; International Search Authority; PCT International Search Report Feb. 9, 2007; 3 pages.
PCT/US06/38769; International Search Report Mar. 25, 2008.
PCT/US06/48330; International Bureau; PCT Search Report and Written Opinion; Mar. 20, 2008; 10 pages.
PCT/US09/42002; Filed Apr. 28, 2009; International Search Report and Written Opinion; Jun. 2009.
PCT/US09/45911; Filed Jun. 2, 2009; International Search Report and Written Opinion.
PCT/US2007/068708; International Search Report; May 10, 2007.
Hofmann, T. “Latent Semantic Models for Collaborative Filtering”. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 22:89-115, 2004.
Lie, “The Electronic Broadsheet—All the News That Fits the Display,” MIT Master's Thesis, pp. 1-96 (Jun. 1991).
www.roweinternational.com/jukeboxes—dia.html, Web Page, Digital Internet Access Jukeboxes, Rowe International.
Jacucci, et al., Integrated Project on Interaction and Presence in Urban Environments. Feb. 9, 2007. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://ipcity.eu/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/D7.1%20-%20Demonstrator%20of%20Large-Scale%20Events%20Application.pdf> see p. 20.
PCT/US07/068708; Filed May 10, 2007; International Search Report; WO 2007/134193; Dec. 7, 2007.
Tom Bunzel, “Easy Digital Music,” QUE Publisher, Aug. 18, 2004, Chapters 5 and 8.
Chao-Ming et al. (Chao-Ming), Design and Evaluation and mProducer: a Mobile Authoring Tool for Personal Experience Computing [online], MUM 2004, College Park, Maryland, USA, Oct. 27-29, 2004 [retrieved on Dec. 17, 2010]. [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.131.2933&rep=rep1&type=pdf].
PCT/US2006/003795; International Search Report for International Application, dated May 28, 2008.
Apple: iTunes 4.2 User Guide for Windows; Dec. 2003; retrieved from the internet: URL: http://www2.austin.cc.tx.us/tcm/projects/itunes.pdf; pp. 10, 17-19.
International Search Authority/US; PCT Search Report; Date Mar. 25, 2008; 3 Pages.
PCT/US2006/003795; International Search Report and Written Opinion; May 28, 2008.
Alvear, Jose, “Risk-Free Trial Streaming Media Delivery Tools,” Streaming Media.com; www.streamingmedia.com/article.ap?id=5768, Jun. 30, 2000.
Deshpande, Mukund, et al., “Item-Based Top-N Recommendation Algoriths,” ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 22:1 (Jan. 2004), pp. 143-177.
Pachet, Francois, A Taxonomy of Musical Genres, Content-Based Multimedia Information Access Conference (RIAO), Paris, Apr. 2000, 8 pages. Not Submitted in IDS.
Platt, John C. et al., “Learning a Gaussian Process Prior for Automatically Generating Music Playlists,” Microsoft Corporation {platt, cburgess, sswenson, chriswea}@microsoft.com, alcez@cs.berkeley,edu, pp. 1-9.
Platt, John S., “Fasting Embedding of Sparse Music Similarity Graphs,” Microsoft Corporation, {jplatt@microsoft.com}.
Smart Computing, “The Scoop on File-Sharing Services,” Dec. 2000, vol. 11, Issue 12; pp. 30-33 in printed issue. Available at www.smartcomputing.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles%2F2000%Fs1112%2F08s12.asp.
www.akoo.com/Akoo/, Web Page, Akoo, Pick the Music, Waiting in the line at the Theme Park, Introducing the m-Venue™ platform.
www.axcessnews.com/modules/wfsection/article.php?articleid=8327, Web Page, Feb. 24, 2006, Maintenance Fees, Digital Music Sales Triple to $1.1 Billion in 2005.
www.bmi.com/news/200403/20040324b.asp, Web Page, BMI™ Figures Don't Lie, Mar. 24, 2004, Touch Tunes Signs License Agreement for BMI Music in Digital Jukeboxes.
www.ecastinc.com/music—licensing.html, Web Page, ECAST Network, interactive entertainment network, Music/Licensing.
www.rfidjournal.com/article/articleview/1619/1/1, Web Page, RFID brings messages to Seattle side walks on RFID system being deployed next week will send marketing and assistive information to users carrying active RFID tags, RFID Journal (pp. 1-4).
www.touchtunes.com, Web Page, Touchtunes, Turn your ROWE 100A's and 100B's into touch tunes Digital Jukeboxes—BOSE.
www.alwayson-network.com/comments.php?id=P12663 0 37 0 C, Web Page, Not Your Average Jukebox, On Hollywood 1000 contender Ecast uses broadbank to being the digital media experience to your watering hole.
Cano, Pedro et al., On the Use of FastMap for Audio Retrieval and Browsing, The International Conference on Music Information Retrieval and Related Activities (ISMIR 2002), Paris, France, Oct. 2002, 2 pages.
Connell, Iain et al., Ontological Sketch Models: Highlighting User-System Misfits, in P. Palanque, E. O'Neill and P. Johnson, editors, Proceedings of Human Computer Interaction (HCI) Bath, England, Sep. 2003, London Springer, pp. 1-16.
The Trustees of Indiana University, Varlations2, The Indiana University Digital Music Library, http://dml.indiana.edu/, last updated May 11, 2005, 1 page.
Logan, Beth, Content-Based Playlist Generation: Exploratory Experiments, The International Conference on Music information Retrieval and Related Activities (ISMIR 2002), Paris, France, Oct. 2002, 2 pages.
Logan, Beth et al., A Music Similarity Function Based on Signal Analysis, IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME), Tokyo, Japan, Aug. 2001, IEEE Press, pp, 952-955.
Maidin, Donncha O et al., The Best of Two Worlds: Retrieving and Browsing, Proceedings of the COST G-6 Conference on Digital Audio Effects (DAFX-00), Verona, Italy, Dec. 7-9, 2000, 4 pages.
Notess, Mark et al., Variations2: Toward Visual Interface for Digital Music Libraries, Second International Workshop on Visual Interfaces to Digital Libraries, 2002, 6 pages.
Pampalk, Elias et al., Content-based Organization and Visualization of Music Archives, ACM Multimedia, Juan les Pins, France, Dec. 2002, pp. 570-579.
Pauws, Steffen et al., PATS: Realization and User Evaluation of an Automatic Playlist Generator, The international Conferences on Music Information Retrieval and Related Activities (ISMIR 2002), Paris, France, Oct. 2002, 9 pages.
Rauber, Andreas et al., The SOM-enhanced JukeBox: Organization and Visualization of Music Collections Based on Perceptual Models, Journal of New Music Research, Vol, 32, Nov. 2, 2003, pp. 193-210.
Shneiderman, Ben, Tree Visualization with Tree-Maps: 2-d Space-Filling Approach, ACM Transactions on Graphics, vol. 11, No. 1, Jan. 1992, pp. 92-99.
Treemap, University of Maryland, http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/treemap/, last udpated Aug. 5, 2003, 4 pages.
Shneiderman, Ben, Treemaps for Space-Contrained Visualization of Hierarchies, http://www.sc.umd.edu/heil/treemap-history/, last updated Apr. 28, 2006, 16 pages.
Tzanetakis, George et al., MARSYAS3D: A Prototype Audio Browser-Editor Using a Large Scale Immersive Visual and Audio Display, Proceedings of the 2001 International Conference on Auditory Display, Espoo, Finland, Jul./Aug. 2001, 5 pages.
“New Music Recommendation System is Based on FOAF Personal Profiling,” www.masternewmedia.org/music—recommendation/music—recommendation—system—FOAF, Oct. 1, 2005.
“Social Networking Meets Music Listening: Mecora Launches Radio 2.0,” www.masternewmedia.org/news/2006/04/13/social—networking—meets—music—listening.htm, Apr. 13, 2006.
Strands Business Solutions. “Integration Document v.2.0”; Published May 2008; [online retrieved on Jan. 21, 2010] Retrieved from the internet <URL: http://recommender.strands.com/doc/SBS-Integration-Document.pdf>: entire document—18 pages.
PCT/US09/68604 International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority; dated Feb. 17, 2010.
John Thompson, “A Graphic Representation of Interaction With the NEXIS News Database,” MIT Thesis (May 1983).
Lippman, et al., “News and Movies in the 50 Megabit Living Room,” IEEE/IEICE, Global Telecommunications Conference, pp. 1976-1981 (Nov. 15, 1987).
Bender, et al., “Newspace: Mass Media and Personal Computing,” Proceedings of USENIX, Conference, pp. 329-348 (Summer 1991).
Jonathan L. Orwant, “Doppelgänger: A User Modeling System,” MIT Bachelor's Thesis (Jun. 1991).
“Lessons from LyricTimeTM: A Prototype Multimedia System” 4th IEEE ComSoc International Workshop on Multimedia Communications (Apr. 1992).
Belkins, et al., “Information Filtering and Information Retrieval: Two Sides of the Same Coin?”, Communications of the ACM (Dec. 1992).
Architecting Personalized Delivery of Multimedia Information,: Communications of the ACM (Dec. 1992).
Jonathan L. Orwant, “Doppelgänger Goes to School: Machine Learning for User Modeling,” MIT Master of Science Thesis (Sep. 1993).
Jon Orwant, “Appraising the User of User Models: Doppelgänger's Interface,” in: A. Kobsa and D. Litman (eds.), Proceeding of the 4th International Conference on User Modeling (1994).
Bender, “Twenty Years of Personalization: All about the Daily Me,” Educause Review (Sep./Oct. 2002).
PCT/ES2005/00003 Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority Report dated Jun. 10, 2005.
PCT/ES2005/000213 Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority dated Jan. 12, 2006.
PCT/ES2005/00003 Written Opinion of the International Preliminary Examining Authority dated Mar. 19, 2007.
PCT/ES2005/00003 International Preliminary Report on Patentability (Ch II) Report dated May 22, 2007.
PCT/ES2005/000213 International Preliminary Report on Patentability (Ch II) Report Dated Nov. 15, 2007.
ShopSmart: Product Recommendations through Technical Specifications and User Reviews; Alexander Yates et al. Temple University; CIKM; Oct. 26-30, 2008, Napa Valley, CA, USA; 2 pages.
“Communications of the ACM” Dec. 1992, vol. 35, No. 12 at pp. 26-28 (Introduction to special issue regarding Workshop on High Performance Information Filtering, Morristown, N.J. Nov. 1991).
Delivering Interactive Multimedia Documents over Networks; Shoshana Loeb; IEEE Communications Magazine; May 1992; 8 pages.
PolyLens: A Recommender System for Groups of Users; M. O'Connor, D. Cosley, J.A. Konstan, J. Riedl; European Conference on Computer Supported Co-Operative Work at Bonn, Germany; Published 2001; pp. 199-218.
Toward alernative metrics of journal impact: a comparison of download and citation data, Johan Bollen, Herbert Van de Sompel, Joan Smith, Rick Luce, Google.com, 2005, pp. 1-2.
Incremental tensor analysis: theory and applications, Jimeng Sun, Dacheng Tao, Spiros Papadimitriou, Philip Yu, Christos Faloutsos, ACM, Oct. 2008, pp. 1-37.
IEEE, no matched results, Nov. 11, 2009, 1 page.
Augmenting the Social Space of an Academic Conference; McCarthy, et al. Information School, University of Washington and Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota; pp. 1-10; Nov. 6-10, 2004.
Baluja, S., Seth, R., Sivakumar, D., Jing, Y., Yagnik, J., Kumar, S., Ravichandran, D., and Aly, M. “Video Suggestion and Discovery for YouTube: Taking Random Walks Through the View Graph”. In WWW '08: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on World Wide Web, pp. 895-904, Beijing, China, 2008. ACM Press.
Carson et al. “Internet Banking Market Developments and Regulartory Issues in the New Ecomomy: what Changed, and the Challenges for Ecemonic Policy . . . ”; May 2001; http://www.occ.gov/netbank/SGEC2000.pdf.
Co-Construction of Hybrid Spaces; Asa Rudstronn; A Dissertation submitted to the University of Stockholm in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy; Department of Computer and Systems Sciences Stockholm University and Royal Institute of Technology; pp. 1-69; Nov. 2005.
Das,A., Datar,M., Garg,A., and Rajaram,S. “Google News Personalization: Scalable Online Collaborative Filtering”. In WWW '07: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web, pp. 271-280, New York; NY, USA, 2007. ACM Press.
Dean, J. and Ghemawat, S. “MapReduce: Simplied Data Processing on Large Clusters”. Commun. ACM, 51(1):107-113, 2008.
Dempster, Y., Laird, N., and Rubin, D. “Maximum Likelihood from Incomplete Data via the EM Algorithm”. Jour. of the Royal Stat. Soc., Ser. B., 39:1047-1053, 1977.
Hofmann, T. “Unsupervised Learning by Probabilistic Latent Semantic Analysis”. Mach. Learn., 42:177-196, 2001.
http://www.smartcomputing.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles%2F2000%2Fs1112%2F08s12%2F08s12.asp.
Industry Standard, The, Help FAQs for Standard Prediction Market, http://www.thestandard.com/help, downloaded Jun. 29, 2009.
Indyk, P. and Matousek, J. “Low-Distortion Embeddings of Finite Metric Spaces”. In Handbook of Discrete and Computational Geometry, pp. 177-196. CRC Press, 2004.
International Search Report PCT/US2009/051233; Sep. 4, 2009; Strands, Inc.
IP City, Integrated Project on Interaction and Presence on Urban Environments—Demonstrators on Large-Scale Events Applications; ipcity.eu; Giulio Jacucci, John Evans, Tommi Ilmonen; pp. 1-37; Feb. 9, 2007.
Lazar, N.A.; Bayesian Empirical Likelihood; Technical Report, Carnegi Mellon University, Department of Statistics, 2000; 26 pages.
MobiLenin—Combining A Multi-Track Music Video, Personal Mobile Phones and a Public Display into Multi-User Interactive Entertainment; Jurgen Scheible, et al. Media Lab, Univeristy of Art and Design, Helsinki, Finland; pp. 1-10; Nov. 6-10, 2005.
PCT/US07/068708; Filed May 10, 2007; International Search Report and Written Opinion; WO 2007/134193; Dec. 7, 2007.
Scihira, I. “A Characterization of Singular Graphs”. Electronic Journal of Linear Algebra, 16:451-462, 2007.
Toward University Mobile Interaction for Shared Displays; Tim Paek, et al.; Microsoft Research, Redmond, WA; pp. 1-4; Nov. 6-10, 2004.
Trustees of Indiana University, Variations2, The Indiana University Digital Music Library, http://dmi.indiana.edu/, last updated May 11, 2005.
Wolfers, Justin and Zitzewitz, Eric, Prediction Markets, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Spring 2004, pp. 107-126, vol. 18, No. 2.
Yen, Yi-Wyn, Apple announces a 32GB iPhone 3G by Jun. 15, 2009, The Industry Standard, Apr. 2, 2009, http://www.thestandard.com/preditions/channel/hardware, downloaded Apr. 8, 2009.
Apple: iTunes 4.2 User Guide for Windows; Dec. 2003; retrieved from the intemet: URL: http://www2.austin.cc.tx.us/tcm/projects/itunes.pdf; pp. 10, 17-19.
PCT/US2007/09/45725; International Search Report—WO; Jul. 15, 2009.
PCT/US2006/004257 European Search Report Oct. 23, 2009.
N.A. Lazar; Bayesian Empirical Likelihood; Technical Report, Carnegi Mellon University, Department of Statistics, 2000; 26 pages.
S. Baluja, R. Seth, D. Sivakumar, Y. Jing, J. Yagnik, S. Kumar, D. Ravichandran, and M. Aly, “Video Suggestion and Discovery for YouTube: Taking Random Walks Through the View Graph”. In WWW '08: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on World Wide Web, pp. 895-904, Beijing, China, 2008. ACM Press.
A. Das, M. Datar, A. Garg, and S. Rajaram. “Google News Personalization: Scalable Online Collaborative Filtering”. In WWW '07: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web, pp. 271-280, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM Press.
J. Dean and S. Ghemawat, “MapReduce: Simplied Data Processing on Large Clusters”. Commun. ACM, 51 (1):107-113, 2008.
Y. Dempster, N. Laird, and D. Rubin. “Maximum Likelihood fom Incomplete Data via the EM Algorithm”. Jour. of the Royal Stat. Soc., Ser. B., 39:1047-1053, 1977.
T. Hofmann. “Unsupervised Learning by Probabilistic Latent Semantic Analysis”. Mach. Learn., 42:177-196, 2001.
T. Hofmann. “Latent Semantic Models for Collaborative Filtering”. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 22:89-115, 2004.
P. lndyk and J. Matousek. “Low-Distortion Embeddings of Finite Metric Spaces”. In Handbook of Discrete and Computational Geometry, pp. 177-196, CRC Press, 2004.
I. Scihira. “A Characterization of Singular Graphs”. Electronic Journal of Linear Algebra, 16:451-462, 2007.
Mukund Deshpande et al., “Item-Based Top-N Recommendation Algorithms,” ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 22:1 (Jan. 2004) pp. 143-177.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20120233193 A1 Sep 2012 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60649945 Feb 2005 US
Continuations (4)
Number Date Country
Parent 13106752 May 2011 US
Child 13476977 US
Parent 12984259 Jan 2011 US
Child 13106752 US
Parent 12858229 Aug 2010 US
Child 12984259 US
Parent 11349370 Feb 2006 US
Child 12858229 US