Patent Grant
11978072
The present disclosure relates to efficient management of location-based data, and in particular to the visualization and analysis of location-aware market data in a manner that minimizes memory and processor requirements.
According to embodiments of the present disclosure, methods of and computer program products for generating a visualization of location-dependent values is provided. In various embodiments, the method of generating a visualization of location-dependent values is provided where a plurality of bids and a plurality of supply locations are received from at least one datastore. Each of the plurality of bids has an associated location. A first geographic location is selected from the plurality of supply locations. A ball tree is generated, the ball tree comprising a plurality of nodes, each node of the ball tree comprising a pivot geographic location and a radius, each node corresponding to at least one local value having a location within the radius of the pivot. The ball tree is traversed to generate sorted collection of location dependent values. Each of the location dependent values is determined from one of the plurality of bids. A map of the collection of location dependent values is output.
In various embodiments, a computer program product for sorting location-dependent values is provided including a computer readable storage medium having program instructions embodied therewith. The program instructions are executable by a processor to cause the processor to perform a method where a plurality of bids and a plurality of supply locations are received from at least one datastore. Each of the plurality of bids has an associated location. A first geographic location is selected from the plurality of supply locations. A ball tree is generated, the ball tree comprising a plurality of nodes, each node of the ball tree comprising a pivot geographic location and a radius, each node corresponding to at least one local value having a location within the radius of the pivot. The ball tree is traversed to generate sorted collection of location dependent values. Each of the location dependent values is determined from one of the plurality of bids. A map of the collection of location dependent values is output.
In various embodiments, a system includes a first datastore having stored therein a plurality of bids where each of the plurality of bids have an associated location. The system further includes a second datastore having stored therein a plurality of supply locations. The system further includes a first computing node configured to perform a method where the plurality of bids are read from the first datastore and the plurality of supply locations are read from the second datastore. Each of the plurality of bids have an associated location. A first geographic location is selected from the plurality of supply locations. A ball tree is generated, the ball tree comprising a plurality of nodes, each node of the ball tree comprising a pivot geographic location and a radius, each node corresponding to at least one local value having a location within the radius of the pivot. The ball tree is traversed to generate sorted collection of location dependent values. Each of the location dependent values is determined from one of the plurality of bids. A map of the collection of location dependent values is output.
Growers and buyers rely on a variety of third party transportation providers to convey crops. Generally, a transportation provider is contracted for a particular job at a particular rate. The routes employed have a significant impact on growers, buyers, and transportation providers. For transportation providers, it is preferable to select routes that result in high utilization of their equipment and drivers, for example by ensuring that there is a profitable backhaul (and thus avoiding deadheading). Whether or not a backhaul is available for a given route affects the pricing of a transport contract, which in turn affects the price of a crop net of transport to a given destination. Accordingly, there is a need to provide systems and methods for management of location-aware market data.
In an exemplary system for matching transportation providers to growers and buyers, a transportation provider identifies territories (or regions) for which they will provide inbound or outbound transportation services. An origin zone (or outbound zones) represents the geographic area within which the transportation provider agrees to start a route for freight transportation or pick-up product for transportation. A destination zone (or inbound zones) represents the geographic area within which the transportation provider agrees to deliver a product or end a route for freight transportation. A group of zones may be referred to collectively as a lane. A lane represents a region containing at least one origin location or zone and a least one destination location or zone. Each region or lane may have an associated rate for transportation services
In this example a user has defined a rate name in the rate name field 134. The user has defined a region 103 within a user defined territory 102. The user defined region 103 is defined by a circular area having a radius of a number of miles set in a user determined radius field 108. In this example the circular user defined region 103 is centered around the geographic location, Sioux City. The user interface additionally displays a user editable field containing the default rate 125 shown in dollars per bushel of commodity transported. Default rates may be quoted per unit or quantity of goods transported (for example, dollars per crate, cents per bushel or dollars per ton) or a price per mile of transportation (for example, cents per mile of transportation of cargo, or cents per mile with an empty truck). In some embodiments, a default rate may be a flat fee. The user interface contains a seasonal adjustment 115 to the default rate, in this example the seasonal adjustment is an additional premium of $0.05 per bushel relative to the default rate for transportation in the months of May, June, September and three other months not visible. The user interface also contains a quantity adjustment 114, in this example the quantity adjustment is a premium of $0.02 per bushel for jobs involving transportation of fewer than 10,000 bushels. The user interface also contains a user editable field for a lead time adjustment 113. A lead time adjustment, like any adjustment may be a positive or negative value. In some embodiments, adjustments may be a monetary value per mile, a monetary value per unit or volume of good transported, a flat fee per trip, or a combination thereof.
It will be appreciated that based on the contents of one or more rate cards, crop prices net of transportation costs can be computed. Alternatively, if no rate card is available for the lane to quote, one could use predictive models based historical data to estimate the freight rate. In some embodiments, transportation costs for a region may be computed based on the lowest cost custom rate of any transportation provider offering services within a geographic region where the crop product is located or where purchaser of a crop product would like the product delivered.
In an embodiment, the goods transaction system 201 and the transportation management system 202 include an integrated web or mobile application and a back-end computing infrastructure (such as one or more web servers). In another embodiment, the goods transaction system 201 includes a first web or mobile application and the transportation management system 202 includes a second web or mobile application distinct from the first web or mobile application. In alternative configurations, different and/or additional components may be included in the system environment. For example, the system environment may include additional or fewer growers, buyers, external data sources, and/or transportation entities. Likewise, in some embodiments, the goods transaction system 201 and the transportation management system 202 are unrelated and/or are managed by different entities. In various embodiments, the system environment include more than one goods transaction system 201. In some embodiments, a goods transaction system is a crop transaction system.
It will be appreciated that a key value of systems set forth herein are their ability to link supply (growers) and demand (buyers). In particular, for a given grower, it is desirable to compute a best bid net of transport and to display the best bid in a readily digestible manner. For a buyer, it is desirable to determine the competitiveness of a bid net of transport in a given region. A naïve approach to generating these location-aware data is computationally inefficient, and may be intractable for sufficiently large groups of growers and buyers.
The below describes an algorithm that uses a decorated ball trees for performing an efficient retrieval of the best bid net-of-transport for a grower. This data structure is constructed using haversine distances, although other distance metrics that satisfy the triangle inequality can be used. Suitable metrics are those that are computationally cheap. Similar variations of the algorithm can be implemented for related queries (e.g., best growers for a buyer, best bids within a given radius, etc.). Other related spatial data structures, such as k-D trees, can also be used in a similar way.
Finding the top FOB (Free On Board, i.e., ownership changes at the time that a shipment is picked-up at the farm) bids among all open bids requires matching a grower's crop and delivery and calculating freight costs. Referring to
However, determining an optimal bid ranking of a large bid pool requires a potentially prohibitive amount of computation if an exhaustive search is performed. For example, a full-search approach would entail finding all bids that match the supply, determining a distance (e.g., via Geo-API 403) and determining freight pricing (e.g., via Transport Pricing Service 404), computing the basis net of transport, and then ranking the bids. For every bid with matching metadata (same crop, futures month, and year) the grower's net-of-transport basis is computed. It will be appreciated that such a full search approach does not scale well, particularly for real-time applications. In particular, sorting all B bids and then selecting the top N gives complexity of O(B log B). Thus, for an exemplary 1,000 grower locations and 10,000 bids, over 132 million steps would be required to determine the rankings. This complexity may be reduced by using a size-limited, double-ended queue to hold the top N bids. In this case, the algorithm would have a best-case complexity of O(N log N+B) and a worst-case complexity O(B log N+B) for each grower location.
One approach to reducing the computational load would be to limit the bids searched using a relatively cheap computation prior to performing further computation. Exemplary search limiting steps include: including only bids within a fixed haversine distance of the grower; including only the N most proximate bids, or including only bids with an approximate FOB meeting a minimum value.
However, these approaches provide only a statistical guarantee of correctness. In practice, obtaining a high confidence requires looking at bids that are a great distance away.
To address this shortcoming of alternative approaches, the present disclosure provides an efficient and correct bid ranking algorithm. The algorithm includes two major components: a custom spatial index that stores the bids in memory using a decorated ball tree; and heuristics for index exploration that prune the search for the best bids.
Referring to
In various embodiments, a recursive bulk insertion algorithm is used to construct the tree as illustrated in
The construction will generate a tree with log N+1 levels (ignoring truncation driven by the node size limit), and on each level there are 4 N distance calculations. Thus, the distance calculation function will be called O(4 N log N+4 N) times when constructing the tree. Increasing the node size will reduce the depth of the tree and the construction effort, but it will also increase the effort on querying the tree.
In order to perform efficient search of the ball tree, heuristic search may be employed. The search problem may be phrased as follows: given a grower supply point g (with crop and delivery), find the top N bids by basis net of transport (FOB bids). A ball tree containing all open bids is searched. In addition, distance and freight heuristics (distH and rateH, respectively) are combined to provide a FOB heuristic (FOBH) that overestimates net basis. It will be appreciated that dist and rate are expensive functions that, e.g., require calling services like geo-API to obtain the over-the-road distance and Transport Pricing Service for the freight cost, while distH and rateH are cheap to call.
distH(g,b)≤dist(g,b)
rateH(g,b)≤rate(g,b)
FOBH(basis,g,b)=basis−distH(g,b)·rateH(g,b)≥basis−dist(g,b)·rate(g,b)=FOB(basis,g,b)
During search, a priority queue of size N is maintained, holding the bids located to date, sorted by actual FOB.
At each non-leaf node, a decision is made as to whether to traverse its children. If the queue has fewer than N items, the children are always traversed. A node cannot contain a better bid if:
node.best_basis−distH rate(g,c)−r)·rateH(g,c)≤FOBN
where FOBN represents the best Nth FOB value found so far (stored at the end of the priority queue).
Accordingly, the child nodes are traversed only where there is the possibility of a better bid. g corresponds to the grower supply point, c corresponds to the center of the ball, and r corresponds to the radius of the ball.
At each leaf node, all bids are evaluated and the queue is updated using exact FOB, computed from actual distance and price data rather than a heuristic. If the FOB of a bid in the leaf node's list is favorable to the a bid in the queue (has a FOB value greater than the Nth best value in the queue), or the queue has fewer than N bids, the bid is inserted to the queue. Bids can be evaluated in a batch to amortize any possible fixed overhead computational cost when calling dist( ) and/or rate( ).
In exemplary embodiments, given a test point q and one or more desired BidCategory, a current_node variable is set to point to the root of the ball tree and a size-limited, double-ended priority queue top_n is initialized to hold the best bids (sorted by net basis). The search process may then be summarized as follows:
It is assumed in this example that freight costs are proportional to distance. This assumption can be relaxed as long as net_basis_bound remains a valid upper bound on net basis.
In order to achieve network efficiency and improve response time, it is desirable to send as few lanes (origin/destination pairs) as to the transport pricing service and Geo-API as possible. In addition, it is desirable to make as few service calls as possible in order to minimize connection setup and teardown costs.
In order to minimize the number of service calls, bids in each explored leaf node are batched to be sent to the transport pricing service and Geo-API. In addition, it is possible to increase the leaf node size in order to increase the number of grower-bid pairs per batch while minimizing the number of batches. However, this approach reduces the efficacy of the ball tree in minimizing the total number of requests. An alternative approach is to aggregate several leaf nodes before sending a request.
In various embodiments, in addition to node aggregation, a warm start optimization is provided. In an exemplary warm start search, the top N*K bids are determined using only FOB′. By using the heuristic value in place of actual FOB, faster approximate results are obtained. The actual FOB value is then computed for those N*K bids. The resulting bids are sorted, and the top Nth bid is selected as the starting point for the ball tree search. Warm starting cuts down the search significantly, especially for N≥10.
In various embodiments, different heuristic freight rates may be used. In various embodiments, lower bounds 0, 1, and 2 $/mi are adopted as heuristics. It will be appreciated that a lower bound of 0 results in a greater number of unnecessary quotes and calls, while a tighter lower bound results is significant increase in performance. It will also be appreciated that a lower bound may be predetermined for a given region according to historic or current values with a low-cost sorting of existing rates.
In an exemplary embodiment of a decorated ball tree, 45 k bids can be held in approximately 250 MB of memory. Bid tree construction takes approximately one minute. A constructed tree can be serialized and stored for reinstantiation.
In various embodiments, a ball tree is refreshed on a schedule as new bids become available.
In various embodiments, distH is given by the haversine distance. In various embodiments, rateH is provided as a static value. In various embodiments, rateH is provided by a transportation rate service that provides a lowest rate of any active rate cards. In various embodiments, rateH is provided by a transportation rate service that provides a lowest rate for any rate card with a given origin and delivery window.
In various embodiments, the net basis is computed by sending the lanes to the transportation rate service (to perform rate card matching) in parallel with sending the lanes to a Geo-API for road-distance measuring. The net basis is then computed for each of the relevant grower/bid pairs.
As set out above, the ball tree implementation relies on a distance function and a value function to find the best bids (in this case, the value function returns a bid's net-of-transport value for a given grower and bid pair). These functions are called at different times during the construction and exploration of bids in the ball tree. It is thus helpful to distinguish between two types of calls: Heuristic Calls for Non-Leaf Nodes, used to determine if a given branch should be explored; and Batch Calls for Leaf Nodes, used to evaluate all the actual bids in a leaf node, which can be sent in a batch.
Heuristic calls need not return the exact distance or freight cost, as long as they return a lower bound on these quantities. On the other hand, batch calls do need to return the correct net basis. Thus, separate implementations for the heuristic and the batch functions may be provided to ensure an efficient exploration of the bids. Accordingly, in various embodiments, a haversine approximation and a lower bound on rate cards is used for the heuristic calls, while actual road distances and rate cards are used for the batch calls.
The advantage of this approach is that the number of batch calls needed is typically much lower than the number of heuristic calls.
The relative number of heuristic and batch calls can be controlled by adjusting the minimum number of bids per leaf in the ball tree (the ball tree leaf node size). A larger node size would give a shallower tree, where fewer batch calls are sent but each batch request will have a larger number of bids. As the ball size increases, more points are evaluated in each batch request, but fewer calls are also made to this function (an asymptote of about 25 batch function calls is reached at ball sizes of 80 or greater). The total query time increases more slowly and stayed below 30 sec for ball sizes of 80. In an exemplary case using 45,000 matching open bids, using a ball size of 80, about 25 calls to the rate function would be required, with a total of 1250 lane quotes. Assuming each service request has an overhead of 100 msec (independent of request size), plus 0.65 msec per lane, about 3.3 sec would be required to find the top 20 bids in this scenario.
As set out above, in various embodiments a transport pricing service is used to manage rate cards configured by users. This allows carriers to set their quotes ahead of time. These rate cards can then be used for directly quoting growers. It is important that this service is able to retrieve rate cards and find the most appropriate rate for a lane efficiently and at scale. Multiple services and tools, including those described above rely on these rates for the appropriate evaluation and comparison of bids, an evaluation that often requires calculating freight costs for hundreds or thousands of grower-buyer pairs in a very short amount of time.
Two categories of approaches for retrieving all relevant rate cards and finding the optimal match for a given lane(s) are provided herein. The first category relies on a spatial database (e.g., PostGIS), while the second category relies on custom data structures such as those described above in connection with efficiently retrieving bids. By residing fully in memory, these structures reduced the time to retrieve the rate cards significantly, while incorporating evolving business logic that would be otherwise hard to incorporate using a GIS database.
For the purposes of the following analysis, the approaches are compared against performance metrics under some assumptions about the expected scale of the transport pricing service. The table below states these metrics, as well as their targets and assumed scale for testing (metrics are ranked in order of descending importance).
Rate card matching can be implemented using a spatial database query. The following pseudo-code sketches such a query, ignoring for illustration purposes some of the requirements (the carrier base rate, lead time adjustments, and capacity constraints are not incorporated in this query, but it will be appreciated that they can be added). The query can be broken down into the following steps:
The next step is to use a carrier_rates table to find the best rate for the lane of interest. The query sorts rate cards from best to worst. In case this table is empty, a standard rate may be substituted.
A main drawback of the database approach is the potential for increased latency, particularly in cases where this service must quote a large number of lanes in a short amount of time in order to run calculations such as finding the top bids net-of-transport for a given grower. Thus, alternate approaches are provided relying on custom, in-memory data structures that holds the rate cards and allows for very fast retrieval.
For the purposes of this discussion, a RateCard contains a rate and a series of adjustments for date ranges that are contained by the rate card's date range. It is assumed that, for each carrier, there is exactly one rate card with is_base=True, and this rate card contains (spatially and temporally) all other rate cards for the carrier. Rate cards of a given carrier with is_base=False are disjoint (but do not necessarily partition the space enclosed by the carrier's base rate card).
In a first exemplary custom-index variant, sequential matching is employed. In the sequential matching approach, all the rate cards are stored in a list. When given a Lane instance to match, all the rate cards are traversed, checking if the rate card overlaps, and if it does capture the carrier's rate. The best rate among all rate cards is returned, being careful about always preferring a custom rate (if it exists) over the base rate for each carrier and giving preference to high-performance carriers (carrier.rating=1). In some embodiments, overlaps checking, which could be expensive, is only performed if the rate can improve the current best rate.
In a second exemplary custom-index variant, independent attribute indexing is employed. In this approach, the lane's origin, destination, and delivery windows are matched independently against the corresponding attributes of the rate cards. Each attribute matching returns a set of rate cards. The intersection of the sets is taken to find all rate cards that match all attributes. Finally, those rate cards are processed according to the sequential matching method described above.
The independent matching can be done efficiently using indexes. For example, determining if lane. origin is contained in the rate_card.origin can be done efficiently if all the rate card origin geometries (more specifically, their bounding boxes) are stored in an R-tree, and similarly for the other dimensions. It is assumed that RTree has a contains method that returns a list of all geometries stored in the index which contain the given point, and the concept of a geometry is generalized to also include a time interval (used for comparing time range inclusion).
Once all potentially matching rate cards are found, they are passed to the sequential matching method described above to perform an accurate overlap query (using the actual geometry) and find the best rate.
This approach can store the geometries in an R-Tree data structure. Because it is only testing inclusion against bounding boxes, these can be done very efficiently, and once the set intersection is complete, there will at most 2 matching rate cards per carrier (one base and one custom rate).
In a second exemplary custom-index variant, full indexing is employed. In this approach, a custom index is constructed that allows the search procedure to consider all attributes at once. This can be done using an approach similar to k-D Trees, where attributes are alternated as different branches of the tree are explored, and where each node of the tree splits the geometries bounding boxes. Furthermore, if the nodes of the trees are decorated with the best possible rate for each branch, the search could be pruned even further.
The construction of this index relies on an Entry class, that maps to a rate card and that contains three Extent instances. These instances form the bounding boxes of the origin, destination, and date ranges. A binary tree is defined that is referred to as KDRTree, and that uses bulk loading for splitting the entries according to the branching dimension corresponding to each node. This dimension alternates between the 3 dimensions (origin, destination, time) based on the depth of the node.
Searching for lane inclusion in the KDRTree involves going down the nodes of the tree (starting at the root) and testing inclusion of the node's extent for the corresponding dimension against the lane's corresponding attribute. Branches where the inclusion test fails are pruned and entries are only returned from visited leaf nodes.
Referring to
In various embodiments, the trade area summary and the zonal summary summarizing historical crop production, forecasts for current production, grain storage capacity and competitor locations within the trade areas.
Baseline user input parameters 801 are further combined with user input for scenario modeling 806. User input may include bid adjustment information, for example. Datastore 807 includes demand bids and locations. Datastore 808 includes supply locations. Reading from these datastores, matching process 809 determines bids suitable for available supply locations, in view of relative location and net of transport costs. In particular, matching process 809 employs the ball tree algorithm described above, and includes distance calculation 810 and freight cost calculation 811, which employ the heuristic methods described above.
Based on the matching between bids and supply locations provided by bid matching 809, a ranked list of bids per location 812 is generated. In addition, one or more indications 813 may be provided to a user in order to achieve a best bid.
Referring to
In this example, a location and a trade area has been selected, and a regional basis summary is displayed. The user may adjust their bid in order to see a dynamic update of the map and bid information.
Best bid list 901 provides the best bids for a pictured region. In particular, a buyer company, buyer facility, grower ZIP, buyer ZIP, source, delivery window, distance, cash price, and FOB basis are provided. Map 902 depicts a region of interest surrounding a user selected facility located at point 903. Facility information 904 is provided, including CDL total acreage, count of competitor facilities, on-farm storage capacity, on-farm storage total bins, USDA production in prior years, and USDA yield in prior years. A heat map is overlain on the map, showing bid competitiveness on a regional basis according to key 905.
Referring to
Based on the matching between bids and supply locations provided by bid matching 1004, a ranked list of bids per location 1007 is generated.
Referring to
Best bid list 1101 provides the best bids for a pictured region. In particular, a buyer company, buyer facility, grower ZIP, buyer ZIP, source, delivery window, distance, cash price, and FOB basis are provided. Map 1102 depicts a region of interest with the locations of the best bids indicated with a circle indicative of bid rank 1103.
Referring to
Referring to
Referring now to
In computing node 10 there is a computer system/server 12, which is operational with numerous other general purpose or special purpose computing system environments or configurations. Examples of well-known computing systems, environments, and/or configurations that may be suitable for use with computer system/server 12 include, but are not limited to, personal computer systems, server computer systems, thin clients, thick clients, handheld or laptop devices, multiprocessor systems, microprocessor-based systems, set top boxes, programmable consumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputer systems, mainframe computer systems, and distributed cloud computing environments that include any of the above systems or devices, and the like.
Computer system/server 12 may be described in the general context of computer system-executable instructions, such as program modules, being executed by a computer system. Generally, program modules may include routines, programs, objects, components, logic, data structures, and so on that perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types. Computer system/server 12 may be practiced in distributed cloud computing environments where tasks are performed by remote processing devices that are linked through a communications network. In a distributed cloud computing environment, program modules may be located in both local and remote computer system storage media including memory storage devices.
As shown in
Bus 18 represents one or more of any of several types of bus structures, including a memory bus or memory controller, a peripheral bus, an accelerated graphics port, and a processor or local bus using any of a variety of bus architectures. By way of example, and not limitation, such architectures include Industry Standard Architecture (ISA) bus, Micro Channel Architecture (MCA) bus, Enhanced ISA (EISA) bus, Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA) local bus, Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI) bus, Peripheral Component Interconnect Express (PCIe), and Advanced Microcontroller Bus Architecture (AMBA).
Computer system/server 12 typically includes a variety of computer system readable media. Such media may be any available media that is accessible by computer system/server 12, and it includes both volatile and non-volatile media, removable and non-removable media.
System memory 28 can include computer system readable media in the form of volatile memory, such as random access memory (RAM) 30 and/or cache memory 32. Computer system/server 12 may further include other removable/non-removable, volatile/non-volatile computer system storage media. By way of example only, storage system 34 can be provided for reading from and writing to a non-removable, non-volatile magnetic media (not shown and typically called a “hard drive”). Although not shown, a magnetic disk drive for reading from and writing to a removable, non-volatile magnetic disk (e.g., a “floppy disk”), and an optical disk drive for reading from or writing to a removable, non-volatile optical disk such as a CD-ROM, DVD-ROM or other optical media can be provided. In such instances, each can be connected to bus 18 by one or more data media interfaces. As will be further depicted and described below, memory 28 may include at least one program product having a set (e.g., at least one) of program modules that are configured to carry out the functions of embodiments of the disclosure.
Program/utility 40, having a set (at least one) of program modules 42, may be stored in memory 28 by way of example, and not limitation, as well as an operating system, one or more application programs, other program modules, and program data. Each of the operating system, one or more application programs, other program modules, and program data or some combination thereof, may include an implementation of a networking environment. Program modules 42 generally carry out the functions and/or methodologies of embodiments as described herein.
Computer system/server 12 may also communicate with one or more external devices 14 such as a keyboard, a pointing device, a display 24, etc.; one or more devices that enable a user to interact with computer system/server 12; and/or any devices (e.g., network card, modem, etc.) that enable computer system/server 12 to communicate with one or more other computing devices. Such communication can occur via Input/Output (I/O) interfaces 22. Still yet, computer system/server 12 can communicate with one or more networks such as a local area network (LAN), a general wide area network (WAN), and/or a public network (e.g., the Internet) via network adapter 20. As depicted, network adapter 20 communicates with the other components of computer system/server 12 via bus 18. It should be understood that although not shown, other hardware and/or software components could be used in conjunction with computer system/server 12. Examples, include, but are not limited to: microcode, device drivers, redundant processing units, external disk drive arrays, RAID systems, tape drives, and data archival storage systems, etc.
The present disclosure may be embodied as a system, a method, and/or a computer program product. The computer program product may include a computer readable storage medium (or media) having computer readable program instructions thereon for causing a processor to carry out aspects of the present disclosure.
The computer readable storage medium can be a tangible device that can retain and store instructions for use by an instruction execution device. The computer readable storage medium may be, for example, but is not limited to, an electronic storage device, a magnetic storage device, an optical storage device, an electromagnetic storage device, a semiconductor storage device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. A non-exhaustive list of more specific examples of the computer readable storage medium includes the following: a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), a static random access memory (SRAM), a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), a digital versatile disk (DVD), a memory stick, a floppy disk, a mechanically encoded device such as punch-cards or raised structures in a groove having instructions recorded thereon, and any suitable combination of the foregoing. A computer readable storage medium, as used herein, is not to be construed as being transitory signals per se, such as radio waves or other freely propagating electromagnetic waves, electromagnetic waves propagating through a waveguide or other transmission media (e.g., light pulses passing through a fiber-optic cable), or electrical signals transmitted through a wire.
Computer readable program instructions described herein can be downloaded to respective computing/processing devices from a computer readable storage medium or to an external computer or external storage device via a network, for example, the Internet, a local area network, a wide area network and/or a wireless network. The network may comprise copper transmission cables, optical transmission fibers, wireless transmission, routers, firewalls, switches, gateway computers and/or edge servers. A network adapter card or network interface in each computing/processing device receives computer readable program instructions from the network and forwards the computer readable program instructions for storage in a computer readable storage medium within the respective computing/processing device.
Computer readable program instructions for carrying out operations of the present disclosure may be assembler instructions, instruction-set-architecture (ISA) instructions, machine instructions, machine dependent instructions, microcode, firmware instructions, state-setting data, or either source code or object code written in any combination of one or more programming languages, including an object oriented programming language such as Smalltalk, C++ or the like, and conventional procedural programming languages, such as the “C” programming language or similar programming languages. The computer readable program instructions may execute entirely on the user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external computer (for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider). In some embodiments, electronic circuitry including, for example, programmable logic circuitry, field-programmable gate arrays (FPGA), or programmable logic arrays (PLA) may execute the computer readable program instructions by utilizing state information of the computer readable program instructions to personalize the electronic circuitry, in order to perform aspects of the present disclosure.
Aspects of the present disclosure are described herein with reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of the disclosure. It will be understood that each block of the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer readable program instructions.
These computer readable program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, create means for implementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks. These computer readable program instructions may also be stored in a computer readable storage medium that can direct a computer, a programmable data processing apparatus, and/or other devices to function in a particular manner, such that the computer readable storage medium having instructions stored therein comprises an article of manufacture including instructions which implement aspects of the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
The computer readable program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other device to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, other programmable apparatus or other device to produce a computer implemented process, such that the instructions which execute on the computer, other programmable apparatus, or other device implement the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate the architecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementations of systems, methods, and computer program products according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. In this regard, each block in the flowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portion of instructions, which comprises one or more executable instructions for implementing the specified logical function(s). In some alternative implementations, the functions noted in the block may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, two blocks shown in succession may, in fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be noted that each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, and combinations of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-based systems that perform the specified functions or acts or carry out combinations of special purpose hardware and computer instructions.
The figures depict various embodiments for purposes of illustration only. One skilled in the art will readily recognize from the following discussion that alternative embodiments of the structures and methods illustrated herein may be employed without departing from the principles described herein. Persons skilled in the relevant art can appreciate that many modifications and variations are possible in light of the above disclosure. For example, while reference is made to the transportation of crop products, in practice the methods of interaction described herein can apply equally to objects, goods, commodities, or products other than crop products (e.g., non-agricultural goods or products). Likewise, the methods of transportation of goods described here can apply equally to transportation by means of truck, rail, ships, etc.
Any of the steps, operations, or processes described herein may be performed or implemented with one or more hardware or software modules, alone or in combination with other devices. In one embodiment, a software module is implemented with a computer program product comprising a computer-readable medium containing computer program code, which can be executed by a computer processor for performing any or all of the steps, operations, or processes described.
Embodiments may also relate to an apparatus or system for performing the operations herein. Such an apparatus or system may be specially constructed for the required purposes, and/or it may comprise a general-purpose computing device selectively activated or reconfigured by a computer program stored in the computer. Such a computer program may be stored in a non-transitory, tangible computer readable storage medium, or any type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions, which may be coupled to a computer system bus. Furthermore, any computing systems referred to in the specification may include a single processor or may be architectures employing multiple processor designs for increased computing capability.
Embodiments may also relate to a product that is produced by a computing process described herein. Such a product may include information resulting from a computing process, where the information is stored on a non-transitory, computer readable storage medium and may include any embodiment of a computer program product or other data described herein.
The descriptions of the various embodiments of the present disclosure have been presented for purposes of illustration, but are not intended to be exhaustive or limited to the embodiments disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the described embodiments. The terminology used herein was chosen to best explain the principles of the embodiments, the practical application or technical improvement over technologies found in the marketplace, or to enable others of ordinary skill in the art to understand the embodiments disclosed herein.
This application is a continuation of International Application No. PCT/US2022/041518, filed Aug. 25, 2022, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/238,539, filed Aug. 30, 2021, both of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4674044 | Kalmus et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
| 4677552 | Sibley, Jr. | Jun 1987 | A |
| 4903201 | Wagner et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
| 5063507 | Lindsey et al. | Nov 1991 | A |
| 5077665 | Silverman et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
| 5136501 | Silverman et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
| 5285383 | Lindsey et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
| 5297031 | Gutterman et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
| 5706442 | Anderson et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5715402 | Popolo | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5727165 | Ordish et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5732400 | Mandler et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5775734 | George, Jr. | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5787156 | Katz | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5794207 | Walker et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5845266 | Lupien et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5873071 | Ferstenberg et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5884286 | Daugherty, III | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5924082 | Silverman et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5930767 | Reber et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5960411 | Hartman et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5970479 | Shepherd | Oct 1999 | A |
| 6104643 | Minton | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6058379 | Odom et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6131087 | Luke et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6134535 | Belzberg | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6242474 | Garcia | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6317728 | Kane | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6338050 | Conklin et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6390472 | Vinarsky | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6393406 | Eder | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6401041 | Peterson | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6418419 | Nieboer et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6422508 | Barnes | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6584451 | Shoham et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6598027 | Breen et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6622129 | Whitworth | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6673479 | McArthur et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
| 6865582 | Obradovic et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6988083 | Dines et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 7076452 | Florence et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7080034 | Reams | Jul 2006 | B1 |
| 7318045 | Baecker et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
| 7349879 | Alsberg et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7418423 | Reding et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
| 7742979 | Reding et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7797205 | Song et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7974853 | Zimmerman | Jul 2011 | B1 |
| 8019694 | Fell et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8352494 | Badoiu | Jan 2013 | B1 |
| 8965812 | Linville | Feb 2015 | B2 |
| 9113590 | Johnson | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9381646 | Fryshman | Jul 2016 | B1 |
| 9489576 | Johnson et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
| 9519861 | Gates et al. | Dec 2016 | B1 |
| 9563945 | Fryshman | Feb 2017 | B2 |
| 9582002 | Cavender-Bares | Feb 2017 | B2 |
| 9582873 | Ulman | Feb 2017 | B2 |
| 9629306 | Sauder et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
| 9652840 | Shriver et al. | May 2017 | B1 |
| 9658201 | Redden et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
| 9745060 | O'Connor et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
| 9756844 | Groeneveld | Sep 2017 | B2 |
| 9974226 | Rupp et al. | May 2018 | B2 |
| RE46968 | Linville | Jul 2018 | E |
| RE47742 | Linville | Nov 2019 | E |
| 10564316 | Xu et al. | Feb 2020 | B2 |
| 11069005 | Ethington et al. | Jul 2021 | B2 |
| 11100579 | Raguse et al. | Aug 2021 | B1 |
| 11170453 | Perry et al. | Nov 2021 | B2 |
| 11263707 | Perry et al. | Mar 2022 | B2 |
| 11367093 | Perry et al. | Jun 2022 | B2 |
| 11657903 | McBratney et al. | May 2023 | B2 |
| 11670401 | McBratney et al. | Jun 2023 | B2 |
| 20010032162 | Alsberg et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010032165 | Friend et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010034663 | Teveler et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20020025330 | May | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020023038 | Fritsch et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020023039 | Fritsch et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020032644 | Corby et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020059091 | Hay et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020065765 | Shuler et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020087453 | Nicolaisen et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020095369 | Kaplan et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020120555 | Lerner | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020138393 | Tatge | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020147670 | Lange | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020183867 | Gupta et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020184135 | Zakaria | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020194115 | Nordicht et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030019408 | Fraisse et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030050901 | Jester et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030084791 | Trenhaile et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030195822 | Tatge | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030236738 | Lange et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20040024648 | Tatge | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20050114252 | Beurskens | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050137964 | Nordlicht et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050234691 | Singh et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20060111845 | Forbis et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060259417 | Marynowski et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060271262 | McLain | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20080033864 | McDonough | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080215167 | Beck | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080313013 | Fell et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20100106653 | Sandholm et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100114753 | Osmanski et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100332430 | Caraviello et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20110208636 | Bachu | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20110290873 | Nishiguchi et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20120116943 | Abramson | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120246050 | McNew | Sep 2012 | A1 |
| 20130197814 | McBratney et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130322733 | Tarnowski | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130332205 | Friedberg et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20140039967 | Scharf et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140095261 | Johnson | Apr 2014 | A1 |
| 20140108663 | Peters | Apr 2014 | A1 |
| 20140222374 | Lock et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140229258 | Seriani | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140263822 | Malveaux | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20150242970 | Avey et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150370935 | Starr | Dec 2015 | A1 |
| 20150371324 | Kumar | Dec 2015 | A1 |
| 20160050840 | Sauder et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
| 20160071410 | Rupp et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
| 20160073573 | Ethington et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
| 20160157414 | Ackerman et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160171680 | Lobell | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160179994 | Levine et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160216245 | Sutton | Jul 2016 | A1 |
| 20160232621 | Ethington et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
| 20160260021 | Marek | Sep 2016 | A1 |
| 20160290918 | Xu et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
| 20160302351 | Schildroth et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
| 20160309646 | Starr et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
| 20160350855 | Lerner | Dec 2016 | A1 |
| 20170083747 | Guan et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
| 20170089761 | McQuilkin et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
| 20170090068 | Xiang et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
| 20170105335 | Xu et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
| 20170109395 | Farah | Apr 2017 | A1 |
| 20170112043 | Nair et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
| 20170124463 | Chen et al. | May 2017 | A1 |
| 20170161627 | Xu et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
| 20170168157 | Hagerman et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
| 20170169523 | Xu et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
| 20170177938 | Papanikolopoulos et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
| 20170186121 | Wen | Jun 2017 | A1 |
| 20170196171 | Xu et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
| 20170199528 | Detweiler et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
| 20170206415 | Redden | Jul 2017 | A1 |
| 20170213141 | Xu et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
| 20170228475 | Aldor-Noiman et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
| 20170231213 | Gordon et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
| 20170258005 | Cutter | Sep 2017 | A1 |
| 20170270446 | Starr et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
| 20170286574 | Chappell | Oct 2017 | A1 |
| 20180020622 | Richt | Jan 2018 | A1 |
| 20180060771 | Mangin | Mar 2018 | A1 |
| 20180070527 | Richt | Mar 2018 | A1 |
| 20180075545 | Richt | Mar 2018 | A1 |
| 20180075546 | Richt | Mar 2018 | A1 |
| 20180181893 | Basso | Jun 2018 | A1 |
| 20180189954 | Albrecht et al. | Jul 2018 | A1 |
| 20180211156 | Guan et al. | Jul 2018 | A1 |
| 20180322426 | Schmaltz et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
| 20180342020 | Sen et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
| 20180349520 | Bhalla et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
| 20180373932 | Albrecht et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
| 20190050741 | Mewes et al. | Feb 2019 | A1 |
| 20190050948 | Perry et al. | Feb 2019 | A1 |
| 20190075727 | Duke et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
| 20190147094 | Zhan et al. | May 2019 | A1 |
| 20190156255 | Carroll et al. | May 2019 | A1 |
| 20190180234 | Healy | Jun 2019 | A1 |
| 20190228224 | Guo et al. | Jul 2019 | A1 |
| 20190325492 | Perry et al. | Oct 2019 | A1 |
| 20190333163 | Perry | Oct 2019 | A1 |
| 20190347836 | Sangireddy et al. | Nov 2019 | A1 |
| 20200068797 | Folle et al. | Mar 2020 | A1 |
| 20200125929 | Guo et al. | Apr 2020 | A1 |
| 20200128769 | Gillberg et al. | Apr 2020 | A1 |
| 20200196535 | Dagondon et al. | Jun 2020 | A1 |
| 20200226150 | Shirani-Mehr et al. | Jul 2020 | A1 |
| 20200311828 | Schäfer | Oct 2020 | A1 |
| 20210081890 | Atwood | Mar 2021 | A1 |
| 20220207608 | Raguse et al. | Jun 2022 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 1389767 | Feb 2004 | EP |
| 3046066 | Jul 2016 | EP |
| 3786860 | Mar 2021 | EP |
| H11-232354 | Aug 1999 | JP |
| 2017-169511 | Sep 2017 | JP |
| WO 2001046774 | Jun 2001 | WO |
| WO 2001057752 | Aug 2001 | WO |
| WO 2001075706 | Oct 2001 | WO |
| WO 2013148290 | Oct 2013 | WO |
| WO 2016090212 | Jun 2016 | WO |
| WO 2021222795 | Nov 2021 | WO |
| WO-2023034118 | Mar 2023 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Location difference of multiple distances based k-nearest neighbors algorithm. Knowledge-Based Systems. vol. 90, Dec. 2015, pp. 99-110. |
| Extending metric index structures for efficient range query processing. Kailing, Karin; Kriegel, Hans-Peter; Pfeifle, Martin; Schönauer, Stefan. Knowledge and Information Systems10.2: 211-227. Springer Nature B.V. (Aug. 2006). |
| Bast et al., “Route planning in transportation networks” arXiv: 65 pages (2015). |
| Dolatshah et al., “Ball*-tree: E cient spatial indexing for constrained nearest-neighbor search in metric spaces” arXiv: 15 pages (2015). |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2022/041518 dated Dec. 19, 2022. |
| Adam, B.D. et al., “Storage Hedging: What's a Merchandiser to Do ?. ” Proceedings of the NCR-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting, and Market Management, 1993, pp. 87-94. |
| Baldwin, E.D., “Understanding and Using Basis—Grains,” Risk and Resilience in Agriculture, Dec. 1986, pp. 1-10. |
| Blank. S.C., “Research on futures markets: Issues, approaches, and empirical findings,” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1989, vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 126-139. |
| Bolton, D.K et al., “Forecasting crop yield using remotely sensed vegetation indices and crop phenology metrics,” Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, vol. 173, May 2013, pp. 74-84. |
| Chabala, L. M. et al., “Application of Ordinary Kringing in Mapping Soil Organic Carbon in Zambia,” Pedosphere 27(2), Apr. 2017, pp. 338-343. |
| Chicago Board of Trade, Why Trade Ag Products on Project A, 1994, pp. 1-5. |
| Commodity Trading Manual, published by Chicago Board of Trade, copyright 1998, 170 pages. |
| Crawford, P., “The New High-Tech Investing: Computer as Fund Manager,” The International Herald Tribune, Feb. 1, 1992, 4 pages. |
| Daniels Trading, “Daniels Ag Advisory Glossary,” Sep. 2004, pp. 1-2. |
| Diepeveen, D. et al., “Identifying key crop performance traits using data mining,” World Conference on Agricultural Information and IT, Aug. 2008, pp. 1-6. |
| Dowell, F.E. et al., “Predicting Wheat Quality Characteristics and Functionality Using Near-Infrared Spectroscopy,” Cereal Chemistry, vol. 83, Iss. 5, Sep. 2006, pp. 529-536. |
| Einstein-Curtis, A., “Online grain marketplace launches grain testing service,” Feednavigator.com, Oct. 20, 2017, two pages, [Online] [Retrieved on Jun. 1, 2020] Retrieved from the Internet <URL: https://www.feednavigator.com/Article/2017/10/20/Online-grain-marketplace-launches-grain-testing-service>. |
| Ethridge, D.E., “A Computerized Remote-Access Commodity Market: Telcot,” Southern Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Dec. 1978, vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 177-182. |
| European Patent Office, Extended European Search Report, EP Patent Application No. 20836088.3, Jun. 14, 2023, ten pages. |
| Fields, G., “Here is How Trading Stocks by Computer Works,” Miami Herald, Oct. 25, 1987, pp. 1-2. |
| Food Market Exchange, “FoodMarketExchange.com,” Jun. 20, 2000, pp. 1-7, [Online] [Retrieved from the Internet Archive] <URL: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.foodmarketexchange.com>. |
| Gan, Y. et al., “Improving Farming Practices Reduces the Carbon Footprint of Spring Wheat Production,” Nature Communications, vol. 5, Article No. 5012, Nov. 18, 2014, pp. 1-13. |
| Hayenga, M.L. et al., “Formula pricing in five commodity marketing systems,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Nov. 1980, vol. 62, No. 4, pp. 753-759. |
| Kastens, T.L. et al., “Post-harvest grain storing and hedging with efficient futures,” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 1999, pp. 482-505. |
| Lemos, M. F., “Using GIS to Predict Corn Yields in Colombia,” University of Redlands Thesis, May 2008, pp. 1-83, [Online] [Retrieved on Apr. 6, 2020] Retrieved from the Internet <URL: https://inspire.redlands.edu/gis_gradproj/177>. |
| Los Angeles Times, “Ins and Outs of Program Trading, and Why It's Being Blamed for Market Collapse,” Dec. 6, 1987, pp. 1-5. |
| Meymandpour, R. et al. “The Economic Impacts of Electronic Marketplaces in Globalization Age: Examples from Agricultural Web Portals.” 2009 2nd IEEE International Conference on Computer Science and Information Technology, Aug. 8-11, 2009, pp. 109-113. |
| Moschini, G. et al., “Constant or Time Varying Hedge Ratios”, Proceedings of the NCR-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting and Market Risk Management, 1993, pp. 1-17. |
| New York Mercantile Exchange, “A Guide to Energy Hedging,” 1999, 1-66. |
| New York Times, “Gambling in Futures,” Jan. 9, 1910, 1 page. |
| Norvell, J.M et al., “Simultaneously Derived Optimal Hedge Ratios for East Central Illinois Corn and Soybean Producers”, Proceedings of the NCR-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis Forecasting and Market Risk, Chicago, Ill., 1992, pp. 1-16. |
| Patterson, M.D. et al., “Hedge Ratio Estimation and Soybean Storage” Proceedings of the NCR-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis and Market Risk, Chicago, Ill, 1994, pp. 1-15. |
| PCT International Search Report and Written Opinion, PCT Application No. PCT/US2021/030243, Sep. 24, 2021, 22 pages. |
| PCT International Search Report and Written Opinion, PCT Application No. PCT/US2021/064200, Jun. 14, 2022, 20 pages. |
| PCT Invitation to Pay Additional Fees, PCT Application No. PCT/US2021/030243, Jul. 13, 2021, two pages. |
| Piggott, N.E., “North Carolina Soybean and Corn Prices with Basis 1980-2003,” North Carolina State University, Jul. 2003, pp. 1-26. |
| Purcell, W.D. et al., “Agricultural Futures and Options: Principles and Strategies” Second Edition, 1999, pp. 1-5, 7-22, 24-29, 31-54, 362-381. |
| Roper, W.R. et al., “Comparing Four Methods of Measuring Soil Organic Matter in North Carolina Soils,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 83, Mar. 28, 2019, pp. 466-474. |
| Strobl, M. et al., “An Examination of the Spatial and Intertemporal Aspects of Basis Determination,” NCR-134 Conference on Applied Price Analysis, 1992, pp. 1-14. |
| Telcot, “User's Manual for Buyers,” published by Plains Cotton Cooperative Association, 1985, pp. 1-172. |
| United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, “Electronic Trading of Agricultural Products”, paper delivered Jul. 8, 1980 to Commonwealth Club, San Francisco, Jan. 1981, pp. 1-21. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 60/241,543, filed Oct. 18, 2000, Inventor Reding, G. et al. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 62/653,480, filed Apr. 5, 2018, Inventor Dagondon, S.D. et al. |
| USA Futures, “usafutures.com,” Jan. 25, 1999, pp. 1-12, [Online] [Retrieved from the Internet Archive] <URL: http://web.archive.org/web/19990218043052/www.usafutures.com/futuresdirectory.htm>. |
| Wang, A.X. et al., “Deep Transfer Learning for Crop Yield Prediction with Remote Sensing Data,” Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCAS Conference on Computing and Sustainable Societies, vol. 50, Jun. 2018, pp. 1-5. |
| Wang, Z.J. et al., “Prediction of grain protein content in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) using plant pigment ratio (PPR),” Field Crops Research, vol. 90, Dec. 2004, pp. 311-321. |
| Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 1990, p. 265. |
| Wisner, R. et al., “Grain Price Hedging Basics”, Iowa State University, Oct. 1995, pp. 1-3. |
| World Book Corp, “The World Book Encyclopedia,” 1994, pp. 873-874. |
| Zanini, F.C. et al., “Did Producer Hedging Opportunities in the Live Hog Market Decline,” The Proceedings of the NCR-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis Forecasting and Market Risk, Chicago, Ill. 1997, 17 pages. |
| Zhang, D. et al., “Forecasting Agricultural Commodity Proces Using Model Selection Framework with Time Series Features and Forecast Horizons,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, Jan. 2000, pp. 28197-28209. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20230177545 A1 | Jun 2023 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 63238539 | Aug 2021 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | PCT/US2022/041518 | Aug 2022 | US |
| Child | 18154643 | US |
