Web-based customer service interface

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 10055501
  • Patent Number
    10,055,501
  • Date Filed
    Friday, November 6, 2015
    9 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, August 21, 2018
    6 years ago
Abstract
A system and method for processing a web-based query is provided. The system comprises a web server for transmitting a web form having a text field box for entering a natural language query, and a language analysis server for extracting concepts from the natural language query and classifying the natural language query into predefined categories via computed match scores based upon the extracted concepts and information contained within an adaptable knowledge base. In various embodiments, the web server selectively transmits either a resource page or a confirmation page to the client, based upon the match scores. The resource page may comprise at least one suggested response corresponding to at least one predefined category. The language analysis server may adapt the knowledge base in accordance with a communicative action received from the client after the resource page is transmitted.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention


This invention relates generally to electronic communications and relates more particularly to a system and method for a web-based customer service interface.


2. Description of the Background Art


In a typical organization, communications with customers and others may occur via a variety of different channels. In addition to traditional channels such as letters and telephone calls, customers may also communicate with an organization via electronic mail, facsimile, web-based forms, web-based chat, and wireless communication and voice. An organization will most likely incorporate these and any other newly developed communication channels to allow customers to communicate in a way they find most convenient.


Many of the communication channels mentioned above contain information that is unstructured in nature, usually expressed in natural language. Different customers may make identical requests each in a unique way, using different communication channels, different words and expressions, or both. Human agents are usually required to review each natural language communication to evaluate the customer's intent, and to determine what information or action would be responsive to that intent.


Agents typically must look to various sources to gather all of the information required to respond appropriately to a customer communication. The information may be retrieved from a variety of sources, such as legacy systems, databases, back office systems, and front office systems. Each of these sources may store data in a unique structure or format. An agent typically gathers and organizes the required information from one or more of these information sources and uses the information to compose an appropriate content-rich reply that is responsive to the customer's intent.


Utilizing people to respond to customer communications is often inefficient. In addition, an increase in the number of communications received by an organization typically requires an even larger increase in the number of people required to provide an acceptable level of customer service.


Several types of automatic systems exist for responding to customer communications. Rule-based systems, keyword-based systems, and statistical systems typically do not perform with the necessary accuracy to substantially automate business processes, such as responding to customer inquiries, and require a large investment in resources to keep them up-to-date. Many learning systems utilize a training set of data that is a poor representation of the system's world, which reduces the accuracy of the system and makes the process of updating the system very cumbersome.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention provides a system and method for processing a web-based query. In one embodiment of the invention, the System comprises a web server for transmitting a web form having at least one text field box for entering a natural language query to a client, and a language analysis server for analyzing the natural language query and optional meta-data received from the client to classify the natural language query into at least one predefined category based on information contained within a knowledge base. The web server is further configured to selectively transmit a resource page to the client, where the resource page includes at least one suggested response and optionally other data corresponding to at least one predefined category. In addition, the web server is further configured to receive a communicative action from the client after the resource page is transmitted, wherein the language analysis server may adapt the knowledge base in accordance with the communicative action.


In one embodiment of the invention, the language analysis server classifies the natural language query into predefined categories based on computed match scores, where each match score corresponds to one of the predefined categories. Furthermore, each match score is representative of a confidence level that the natural language query is relevant to a corresponding predefined category. The language analysis server calculates each match score based upon a comparison of concepts extracted from the natural language query to concepts associated with the predefined categories. Each match score is representative of a statistical likelihood of the natural language query being correctly classified to the corresponding predefined category


In another embodiment of the invention, the language analysis server routes the natural language query to an agent based upon an analysis of the computed match scores according to a predetermined logic (e.g., if none of the computed match scores meet a predetermined threshold level). In yet another embodiment, the language analysis server transmits a solution page to the client based upon an analysis of the computed match scores according to the predetermined logic (e.g., if at least one match score meets a predetermined high-threshold level).


In accordance with the invention, the method comprises transmitting a web page having at least one user-interactable element for entering a natural language query and optional meta-data to a client, receiving the natural language query and the optional meta-data, analyzing the natural language query to classify the natural language query into at least one predefined category using information contained within a knowledge base, and selectively transmitting a resource page to the client. The resource page includes at least one suggested response and optionally other data corresponding to at least one predefined category.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is an exemplary block diagram of a customer service network for processing an electronic query, according to one embodiment of the invention;



FIG. 2 is an exemplary embodiment of the customer service interface illustrated in FIG. 1, according to one embodiment of the invention;



FIG. 3A illustrates an exemplary embodiment of a contact-us page, according to the invention;



FIG. 3B illustrates an exemplary embodiment of the drop-down box component illustrated in FIG. 3A, according to one embodiment of the invention;



FIG. 3C illustrates an exemplary embodiment of the text field box illustrated in FIG. 3A, according to one embodiment of the invention;



FIG. 4 illustrates one embodiment of the language analysis server illustrated in FIG. 2, according to one embodiment of the invention;



FIG. 5 illustrates an exemplary communication-flow diagram for processing an electronic query as implemented by the customer service network illustrated in FIG. 1, according to one embodiment of the invention; and



FIG. 6 illustrates exemplary method steps for processing an electronic query, according to one embodiment of the invention.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION


FIG. 1 is an exemplary block diagram of a customer service network 100 for processing an electronic query, according to one embodiment of the present invention. The customer service network 100 comprises a client 105, a network 110 (e.g., the Internet), and a customer service interface 115. The client 105 may comprise a browser 120 for browsing Internet web sites. According to one embodiment of the invention, the customer service interface 115 receives, classifies, and automatically responds to electronic queries submitted by the client 105 via the network 110. The customer service interface 115 is discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 2.



FIG. 2 is an exemplary embodiment of the customer service interface 115 illustrated in FIG. 1, according to one embodiment of the invention. The customer service interface 115 comprises a server 205, a language analysis server 210, and a knowledge base 215. In an alternate embodiment, the language analysis server 210 and the knowledge base 215 may be integrated in a single module. The server 205 preferably comprises a web-server 220 for providing web services to the client 105 (FIG. 1). For example, the web-server 220 may submit a contact-us page to the client 105. The contact-us page allows a user to address an electronic query to the customer service interface 115, and is discussed further below in conjunction with FIGS. 3A-3C. In addition, the server 205 utilizes a script 225 for processing communications (i.e., queries) from the client 105. The script 205 may be any configurable or non-configurable mechanism for routing information between various components of the customer service interface 115. The communications received by the server 205 contain data or information that is structured and unstructured in nature. For example, the communications typically contain unstructured information expressed in natural language. Each individual client correspondent may compose a communication in a unique way, even when requesting the same type of information from the customer service interface 115. In addition, the communications may contain structured information, such as meta-data associated with the communication, and queries in which the client correspondent selects structured text displayed in drop-down menu boxes. Meta-data may additionally include, for example, information not explicitly provided by the client correspondent, and information regarding client correspondent attributes accessible to the customer service interface 115. In one embodiment of the invention, the script 225 parses the received communications, and sends the parsed information to the language analysis server 210 for further analysis.


The language analysis server 210 analyzes and classifies the electronic query comprising any combination of natural language text, structured text, and structured data (e.g., meta-data) into predefined categories stored in the knowledge base 215, based upon linguistic modeling rules and concepts associated with the predefined categories. In one embodiment, the language analysis server 210 linguistically analyzes the query based upon content and context of the query, and classifies the query to one or more of the predefined categories stored in the knowledge base 215 based upon a match score derived from a statistical comparison of concepts extracted from the query to concepts associated with the one or more predefined categories. In another embodiment, the language analysis server 210 analyzes the query (i.e., extracts concepts from the query) to match the query to the one or more predefined categories using standard search techniques. The language analysis server 210 is discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 4.


The knowledge base 215 is a branching network of nodes arranged in a vertically structured hierarchy (i.e., tree hierarchy) that represent the various predefined categories. Logically related predefined categories are associated with a branch, which in turn may be associated with a branch of larger scope. Creation of the hierarchies can be either manual (via a configuration tool or an API), automatic by monitoring feedback received via the client 105 or an agent, or a combination, whereby an automatic tool displays suggestions according to performance of the customer service interface 115. A user may then create the hierarchies based upon the suggestions. The knowledge base 215 may also include flat hierarchies as a special case of tree hierarchies. An embodiment of the language analysis server 210 and the knowledge base 215 are discussed in more detail in patent application Ser. No. 10/839,829, entitled, “System and Method for Electronic Communication Management,” herein incorporated by reference, filed on an even date herewith.



FIG. 3A illustrates an exemplary embodiment of a contact-us page 310, as composed by the customer service interface 115 (FIG. 2) and transmitted to the client 105 (FIG. 1) via the network 110 (FIG. 1). The contact-us page 310 may include a selectable text box 320 and a text field box 330 for insertion of natural language text. In other embodiments, the contact-us page 310 comprises multiple fields.



FIG. 3B illustrates an exemplary embodiment of the selectable text box 320 illustrated in FIG. 3A, according to one embodiment of the invention. The selectable text box 320 may include a plurality of drop-down boxes 322 that comprise predefined questions or statements, selectable by a user. For example, if the customer service interface 115 services a financial institution, then the drop-down boxes 322 may include statements corresponding to customer service issues such as loans, new accounts, PIN numbers, monetary transfers, among others.



FIG. 3C illustrates an exemplary embodiment of the text field box 330 illustrated in FIG. 3A, according to one embodiment of the invention. The text field box 330 comprises a selectable area in which the user may compose a natural language message to the customer service interface 115. For example, the user may not be able to access an electronic application for financial aid, partially completed and saved on a server of the financial institution during a previous session. The user may compose a message in the text field box 330, comprising, for example, “A PIN number was sent to me when I electronically applied for financial aid. However, that PIN number does not allow me access to my financial aid account. Could you please rectify the situation?” As described in more detail below in conjunction with FIGS. 5-6, the customer service interface 115 classifies and responds to the message, either via a list of suggested responses, a direct link to a “solutions page,” or a confirmation page to the client that the query is being routed to an agent for further analysis.



FIG. 4 illustrates one embodiment of the language analysis server 210 as illustrated in FIG. 2, according to one embodiment of the invention. The language analysis server 210 comprises a modeling application 410 and a language modeling engine 415. The modeling application serves as an interface to the server 205 for receiving and transmitting communications. In addition, the modeling application 410 may compare match scores (computed by the language modeling engine 415 in classifying the query to predefined categories) with various predefined threshold scores to determine the nature of the automated response to the client 105. The basis of the automated response to the client's query is discussed below in further detail in association with FIGS. 5-6.


The language modeling engine 415 analyzes and classifies natural language text, structured text, and meta-data into predefined categories stored in the knowledge base 215. For example, the language modeling engine 415 analyzes the text and the meta-data by application of linguistic and morphological models to extract concepts. The language modeling engine 415 then computes match scores based upon a comparison of the extracted concepts with rules and concepts associated with the predefined categories stored in the knowledge base 215. The computation of the match scores and further details of the knowledge base 215 are discussed below in conjunction with FIGS. 5-6.



FIG. 5 is an exemplary communication-flow diagram for processing an electronic query as implemented by the customer service network 100 illustrated in FIG. 1, according to one embodiment of the invention. First, the web-server 220 (FIG. 2) serves a contact-us page 310 (FIG. 3A) to the client 105 (FIG. 1) via a communication 510. The client 105 responds to the contact-us page 310 via a communication 512. For example, the client 105 may respond to the contact-us page 310 (hereinafter referred to as a client query, or simply a query) by selecting specific choices displayed in the drop-down boxes 322 (FIG. 3B), by composing a natural language text in the text field box 330 (FIG. 3C), or both. The web-server 220 receives the client query and routes the query to the script 225 (FIG. 2). The script 225 processes the query, and routes the query to the language analysis server 210 (FIG. 2) via a communication 514.


The language analysis server 210 linguistically and/or morphologically analyzes the query based upon content and context of the query, and classifies the query to one or more of the predefined categories stored in the knowledge base 215 (FIG. 2) via a communication 516. In one embodiment of the invention, the language analysis server 210 classifies the query into the one or more predefined categories based upon a match score derived from a statistical comparison of concepts extracted from the query to concepts associated with the one or more predefined categories. The language analysis server 210 may utilize meta-data in addition to conceptual data extracted from the query to classify the query to the one or more predefined categories. For example, meta-data includes peripheral data not typically associated with content of the query (i.e., with the natural language text and/or drop-down box selections). For example, if the customer service interface 115 (FIG. 2) services a financial institution, then the peripheral data may include user name, user account number, or customer service plan afforded the user. In accordance with a preferred embodiment of the invention, the language analysis server 210 comprises classification techniques as disclosed in patent application Ser. No. 10/839,829, entitled, “System and Method for Electronic Communication Management,” herein incorporated by reference, filed on an even date herewith. However, the scope of the present invention covers standard classification techniques well known in the art.


In one embodiment of the invention, the language analysis server 210 computes, for each predefined category, a match score based upon concepts associated with the predefined categories, concepts extracted from the query, and metadata. In an exemplary embodiment of the invention, suppose that the customer service interface 115 services a motorcycle parts and equipment distribution house. Additionally, suppose that the knowledge base 215 has the following three predefined categories: a first predefined category entitled “new parts order,” a second predefined category entitled “complaints,” and a third predefined category entitled “suggestions.” A client correspondent submits to the server 205 a query comprising a natural language text that states, for example, “I am unhappy with the head gasket that you shipped me for my 1955 BMW R50/2. The surface of the replacement gasket is cross-hatched (unlike the original), leading to reduced power and oil leakage. Please either refund my purchase, credit my account or send me the correct gasket.” In response to this query, the language analysis server 210 computes a first, a second, and a third match score in classifying the query to the first, the second, and the third predefined categories, respectively, where the second match score is greater than the first match score, and the first match score is greater than the third match score. For example, the second match score may be 95, the first match score may be 42, and the third match score may be 16.


In one embodiment of the invention, each of the predefined categories has a corresponding resource, or linked suggested response in the knowledge base 215, and the relative values of the computed match scores are indicative of a level of confidence of the corresponding suggested responses to answer the query or of the relevancy of the resource to the query. For example, the second match score of 95 (relative to the first and third match scores of 42 and 16, respectively) indicates that the query is more likely to be resolved by the suggested response associated with the second predefined category than the suggested responses associated with the first or third predefined categories.


Next, the language analysis server 210 sends the suggested responses and corresponding match scores to the server 205 via a communication 518. In one embodiment of the invention, the customer service interface 115 is configured to respond to the communication 518 via either a first set of communications (i.e., communications 520, 522, and 524) or a second set of communications initiated by a communication 526, depending upon the corresponding match scores as described below.


If each of the corresponding match scores is less than a predetermined threshold score (where each predefined category may have a different predetermined threshold score), or based upon an analysis of the match scores according to a predetermined logic, then the customer service interface 115 responds via the first set of communications. The predetermined logic includes any functional analysis of the match scores, exemplary embodiments of which include, but are not limited to, computations of an average match score, a median match score, a match score standard deviation, or other types of statistical and/or numerical functional analyses. In an exemplary embodiment of the first set of communications, the server 205 sends a confirmation page to the client 105 via a communication 520. The confirmation page informs the client 105 that the query will be routed to an agent for further analysis. The communication 520 may comprise additional information such as when the client 105 may expect to receive a reply from the agent, for example. In addition, the language analysis server 210 routes the query to the agent for further analysis via a communication 522. The agent may then reply to the client's query, preferably via an electronic message. However the agent may also respond to the query via alternate communication channels, such as a telephone, a Web-based reply, or other means of electronic communication. Optionally, the language analysis server 210 may analyze the agent's reply, and, based upon the analysis, update the knowledge base 215 via a communication 524.


If, however, at least one of the corresponding match scores received by the server 205 via the communication 518 is greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold score (also referred to as a predetermined threshold level), then the customer service interface 115 responds with the communication 526. In one embodiment of the invention, the communication 526 comprises a solution page. The communication 526 comprises a solution page when at least one of the computed match scores has a very high value. Alternatively, the customer service interface 115 may respond with the communication 526 that comprises the solution page based upon an analysis of the match scores according to the predetermined logic as described above. For example, if the customer service interface 115 services a financial institute, a client correspondent may submit a query to the server 205 via the communication 512 that recites, “I want to change my password.” If the customer service interface 115 classifies the query to a “change password” predefined category with a high degree of certainty (e.g., the customer service interface 115 classifies the query to the “change password” predefined category with a match score the meets a predetermined high-threshold score), then the server 205 sends the client 105 a “password changing” web page (i.e., the solution page). In another embodiment, the server 205 re-directs the client 105 to the solution page corresponding to the “password changing” web page. The client 105 may then utilize the solution page to resolve the query.


In another embodiment of the invention, the communication 526 may comprise a resource page. For example, the server 205 sends the resource page to the client 105 comprising the suggested responses having corresponding match scores greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold level via the communication 526. The resource page may also comprise other data (such as links to web resources) having corresponding match scores greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold level. In one embodiment of the invention, the client 105 may utilize one of several communicative actions (i.e., communicative actions 528, 534, or 540) to respond to the resource page.


For example, the client 105 may select a suggested response on the resource page, respond to an embedded form on the resource page, or click on a link to a web resource, via a first communicative action 528. The first communicative action 528 is received and processed by the server 205, and the server 205 then routes the processed first communicative action to the language analysis server 210 for linguistic analysis via a communication 530. The language analysis server 210 may optionally update the knowledge base 215 via a communication 532 based upon the linguistic analysis of the first communicative action 528.


Alternatively, the client 105 may respond to the resource page via a second communicative action 534. The second communicative action 534 comprises a non-response to the resource page. More specifically, the client 105 does not respond to the resource page (i.e., the client is non-responsive). For example, in one embodiment of the invention, if the client 105 does not respond to the resource page within a given time limit, or if the client 105 disconnects from the server 205, for example, the second communicative action 534 comprising a non-response is sent to the server 205. The server 205 then sends a communication 536 to the language analysis server 210 indicating the non-response. The language analysis server 210 may update the knowledge base 215 based upon the non-responsiveness of the client 105 via an optional communication 538.


As an additional alternative, the client 105 may respond to the resource page via a third communicative action 540 comprising a communicative escalation. For example, the client 105 may select (e.g., by mouse-clicking) a “request for help” button embedded in the resource page, or request more information regarding a particular suggested response. The server 205 receives the third communicative action 540 comprising the communicative escalation, and routes the communicative escalation to the language analysis server 210 via a communication 542. The language analysis server 210 then sends the communicative escalation to the agent for further analysis via a communication 544. The language analysis server 210 may optionally update the knowledge base 215 based upon the agent's reply to the communicative escalation via a communication 546.



FIG. 6 illustrates exemplary method steps for processing an electronic query, according to one embodiment of the invention. In step 610, the client 105 (FIG. 1) submits an electronic query to a web-site. In one embodiment, the query may be in response to a page served to the client 105 by the web-server 220 (FIG. 2) associated with the web site. The client 105 may be running the browser 120 (FIG. 1) to view the page served by the web-server 220. Next, in step 615, the server 205 (FIG. 2) intercepts and routes the query. For example, the server 205 may run the script 225 (FIG. 2) that processes the query and routes the processed query to the language analysis server 210 (FIG. 2).


In step 620, the language analysis server 210 analyzes the query using the language modeling engine 415 (FIG. 4) and the knowledge base 215 (FIG. 2) to compute match scores and classify the query to predefined categories stored in the knowledge base 215 based upon the match scores, where each predefined category is associated with a suggested response. In one embodiment of the invention, the knowledge base 215 is configured as a rule-oriented/concept-oriented database. For example, the knowledge base 215 may comprise a plurality of nodes configured in a hierarchically structured branching network, where each node is configured as either a rule-oriented or a concept-oriented node. Each concept-oriented node is typically associated with a predefined category. In one embodiment of the invention, the language analysis server 210 utilizes a statistical process to compute the match scores. For example, the language modeling engine 415 analyzes the natural language text of the query to generate concepts associated with the query. The language modeling engine 415 then statistically compares the query-derived concepts with rules associated with the rule-oriented nodes and with concepts associated with the concept-oriented nodes stored in the knowledge base 215. The language modeling engine 415 then computes a match score for one or more concept-oriented nodes (i.e., for one or more predefined categories). In one embodiment, a high match score for a particular predefined category indicates that a suggested response corresponding to the predefined category is more likely to be a correct response than a suggested response corresponding to a predefined category with a low match score. Based upon the computed match scores, the modeling application 410 (FIG. 4) determines if the query meets any of the predetermined threshold levels for an automated response.


For example, if each match score associated with each predefined category is less than a corresponding predetermined threshold level, then in step 625, the modeling application 410 routes the query to an agent for further analysis. Preferably, the agent is a human agent. However, in alternate embodiments, the agent may be an automated service, such as an automated phone service or an automated computer system. Next, in step 630, the server 205 sends the client 105 a confirmation page. In one embodiment, the confirmation page comprises a communication confirming that the client's query is being routed to the agent for further analysis. Next, in step 635, the agent replies to the query. In one embodiment of the invention, the agent replies to the client 105 via an electronic mail system. However, the scope of the present invention covers alternate agent-reply methods, such as web-based, telephonic, or facsimile methods.


Next, in optional step 640, the language analysis server 210 processes the agent's reply to the client to generate agent-based feedback. The language analysis server 210 may then update the knowledge base 215 based upon the agent-based feedback. The agent-based feedback may comprise positive or negative feedback. The language analysis server 210 uses the feedback to modify the knowledge base. For example, the language analysis server 210 may modify concepts, add new concepts, eliminate concepts, or modify weights assigned to different concepts associated with concept-oriented nodes. The language analysis server 210 may also modify relationships between nodes, such as structural relationships defined by branching structures, for example. In alternate embodiments, the language analysis server 210 may modify classification rules associated with rule-oriented nodes stored in the knowledge base 215.


Referring back to step 620, if at least one match score associated with at least one predefined category is greater than or equal to a corresponding predetermined threshold level, then in step 645, the server 205 submits a resource page to the client 105. The resource page may comprise a suggested response page, where each suggested response corresponds to a predefined category with an associated match score greater than or equal to the corresponding threshold level. A suggested response may include a message that recites, for example, “no response was found.” Alternatively, if an associated match score is greater than or equal to a corresponding high-threshold level, then the resource page comprises a solution page that provides either a link or a web page to the client 105 that may directly resolve the query. Each predefined category may have different threshold levels and high-threshold levels. Next, in step 650, the client 105 responds to the resource page and the server 205 determines whether the client query is resolved based upon the client response. In one embodiment of the invention, the query is not resolved if the client 105 escalates (e.g., the client 105 responds with a request for help), and the process then continues at step 625.


However, if in step 650 the query is resolved, then in optional step 655, the language analysis server 210 receives client-based feedback (i.e., feedback based upon the client's response). In one embodiment of the invention, the query is considered resolved if the client 105 selects a suggested response, or if the client 105 does not select any response (i.e., the client 105 is non-responsive).


In optional step 655, the language analysis server 210 updates the knowledge base 215 based upon the client-based feedback. For example, a selection of a suggested response corresponding to a high match score generates a positive client-based feedback that may strengthen the concept-oriented nodes of the knowledge base 215 that generated the suggested responses. In one embodiment of the invention, a concept-oriented node may be strengthened by redistributing weights assigned to concepts associated with the node. However, if the client 105 selects a suggested response corresponding to a low match score, then the client 105 generates negative client-based feedback that may modify the concept-oriented nodes and branching structures that generated the selected suggested response.


The present invention has been described above with reference to exemplary embodiments. Other embodiments will be apparent to those skilled in the art in light of this disclosure. The present invention may readily be implemented using configurations other than those described in the exemplary embodiments above. Therefore, these and other variations upon the exemplary embodiments are covered by the present invention.

Claims
  • 1. A method for processing an electronic query, comprising: receiving an electronic query from a client computer at a server computer, wherein the server computer is configured for:analyzing the query using a language modeling engine and a knowledge base to compute match scores and to classify the query into one or more predefined categories stored in the knowledge base based upon the match scores, wherein each of the predefined categories is associated with a suggested response;wherein the language modeling engine analyzes a natural language text of the query to generate concepts associated with the query, statistically compares the concepts with rules associated with the rule-oriented nodes and with concepts associated with the concept-oriented nodes stored in the knowledge base, and computes the match scores for one or more concept-oriented nodes representing one or more of the predefined categories;determining if the query meets any of one or more predetermined threshold levels for an automated response, based upon the match scores;transmitting a suggested response page to the client computer, if the query does meet any of the predetermined threshold levels for the automated response, wherein the suggested response page includes the suggested response associated with each of the predefined categories with an associated match score greater than or equal to a corresponding one of the predetermined threshold levels;otherwise routing the query to an agent for further analysis, if the query does not meet any of the predetermined threshold levels for the automated response, wherein the client computer is sent a confirmation page confirming that the query is being routed to the agent for further analysis, and the agent subsequently replies to the query; andwherein a language analysis server processes the agent's reply to the client computer to generate agent-based feedback, and the language analysis server updates the knowledge base based upon the agent-based feedback;wherein the language analysis server modifies concepts, adds new concepts, eliminates concepts, or modifies weights assigned to different concepts associated with concept-oriented nodes stored in the knowledge base, based upon the agent-based feedback; andwherein the query is considered resolved, if the client computer selects a suggested response or if the client computer does not select any response;receiving client-based feedback, in response to the query being resolved, for use in updating the knowledge base, wherein:if the client computer selects a suggested response corresponding to a high match score, then the client computer generates a positive client-based feedback for use in updating the knowledge base, andif the client computer selects a suggested response corresponding to a low match score, then the client computer generates a negative client-based feedback for use in updating the knowledge base.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the knowledge base comprises a plurality of nodes configured in a hierarchically structured branching network, each node is configured as either a rule-oriented or a concept-oriented node, and each concept-oriented node is associated with a predefined category.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein a high match score for a predefined category indicates that a suggested response corresponding to the predefined category is more likely to be a correct response than a suggested response corresponding to a predefined category with a low match score.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the agent is a human agent.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the agent is an automated service.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the language analysis server modifies relationships between nodes stored in the knowledge base, based upon the agent-based feedback.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the language analysis server modifies classification rules associated with rule-oriented nodes stored in the knowledge base, based upon the agent-based feedback.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the suggested response includes a message that recites “no response was found”.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein, if the associated match score is greater than or equal to a corresponding high-threshold level, then the suggested response page comprises a solution page that provides either a link or a web page to the client computer that resolves the query.
  • 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the client computer responds to the suggested response page and the server determines whether the query is resolved based upon the client response.
  • 11. The method of claim 1, wherein the query is not resolved if the client computer escalates.
  • 12. The method of claim 1, wherein, if the query is resolved, then a language analysis server receives the client-based feedback, and the language analysis server updates the knowledge base based upon the client-based feedback.
  • 13. The method of claim 12, wherein the positive client-based feedback strengthens a concept-oriented node stored in the knowledge base that generated the suggested response.
  • 14. The method of claim 13, wherein the concept-oriented node is strengthened by redistributing weights assigned to concepts associated with the concept-oriented node.
  • 15. The method of claim 12, wherein the negative client-based feedback modifies a concept-oriented node and branching structures stored in the knowledge base that generated the suggested response.
  • 16. A system for processing an electronic query, comprising: a server computer for receiving an electronic query from a client computer, wherein the server computer is configured for:analyzing the query using a language modeling engine and a knowledge base to compute match scores and to classify the query into one or more predefined categories stored in the knowledge base based upon the match scores, wherein each of the predefined categories is associated with a suggested response;wherein the language modeling engine analyzes a natural language text of the query to generate concepts associated with the query, statistically compares the concepts with rules associated with the rule-oriented nodes and with concepts associated with the concept-oriented nodes stored in the knowledge base, and computes the match scores for one or more concept-oriented nodes representing one or more of the predefined categories;determining if the query meets any of one or more predetermined threshold levels for an automated response, based upon the match scores;transmitting a suggested response page to the client computer, if the query does meet any of the predetermined threshold levels for the automated response, wherein the suggested response page includes the suggested response associated with each of the predefined categories with an associated match score greater than or equal to a corresponding one of the predetermined threshold levels;otherwise routing the query to an agent for further analysis, if the query does not meet any of the predetermined threshold levels for the automated response, wherein the client computer is sent a confirmation page confirming that the query is being routed to the agent for further analysis, and the agent subsequently replies to the query; andwherein a language analysis server processes the agent's reply to the client computer to generate agent-based feedback, and the language analysis server updates the knowledge base based upon the agent-based feedback;wherein the language analysis server modifies concepts, adds new concepts, eliminates concepts, or modifies weights assigned to different concepts associated with concept-oriented nodes stored in the knowledge base, based upon the agent-based feedback; andwherein the query is considered resolved, if the client computer selects a suggested response or if the client computer does not select any response;receiving client-based feedback, in response to the query being resolved, for use in updating the knowledge base, wherein:if the client computer selects a suggested response corresponding to a high match score, then the client computer generates a positive client-based feedback for use in updating the knowledge base, andif the client computer selects a suggested response corresponding to a low match score, then the client computer generates a negative client-based feedback for use in updating the knowledge base.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/843,972 entitled “WEB-BASED CUSTOMER SERVICE INTERFACE” filed on Aug. 23, 2007, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/839,930 entitled “WEB-BASED CUSTOMER SERVICE INTERFACE” filed on May 5, 2004, which claims the priority and benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/468,576 entitled “Web-Based Customer Service Interface,” filed on May 6, 2003, both of which applications are incorporated herein by reference. This application is related to patent application Ser. No. 10/839,829 entitled “System and Method for Electronic Communication Management,” filed on May 5, 2004, herein incorporated by reference.

US Referenced Citations (334)
Number Name Date Kind
3648253 Mullery et al. Mar 1972 A
4110823 Cronshaw et al. Aug 1978 A
4286322 Hoffman et al. Aug 1981 A
4586160 Amano et al. Apr 1986 A
4642756 Sherrod Feb 1987 A
4658370 Erman et al. Apr 1987 A
4724523 Kucera Feb 1988 A
4805107 Kieckhafer et al. Feb 1989 A
4814974 Narayanan et al. Mar 1989 A
4908865 Doddington et al. Mar 1990 A
4918735 Morito et al. Apr 1990 A
4942527 Schumacher Jul 1990 A
4984178 Hemphill et al. Jan 1991 A
5018215 Nasr et al. May 1991 A
5023832 Fulcher et al. Jun 1991 A
5040141 Yazima et al. Aug 1991 A
5051924 Bergeron et al. Sep 1991 A
5060155 Van Zuijlen Oct 1991 A
5067099 McCown et al. Nov 1991 A
5068789 van Vliembergen Nov 1991 A
5099425 Kanno et al. Mar 1992 A
5101349 Tokuume et al. Mar 1992 A
5111398 Nunberg et al. May 1992 A
5125024 Gokcen et al. Jun 1992 A
5210872 Ferguson et al. May 1993 A
5228116 Harris et al. Jul 1993 A
5230054 Tamura Jul 1993 A
5247677 Welland et al. Sep 1993 A
5251129 Jacobs Oct 1993 A
5251131 Masand et al. Oct 1993 A
5265033 Vajk et al. Nov 1993 A
5278942 Bahl et al. Jan 1994 A
5287430 Iwamoto Feb 1994 A
5311583 Friedes et al. May 1994 A
5321608 Namba et al. Jun 1994 A
5325298 Gallant Jun 1994 A
5325526 Cameron et al. Jun 1994 A
5345501 Shelton Sep 1994 A
5349526 Potts et al. Sep 1994 A
5365430 Jagadish Nov 1994 A
5369570 Parad Nov 1994 A
5369577 Kadashevich et al. Nov 1994 A
5371807 Register et al. Dec 1994 A
5377354 Scannell et al. Dec 1994 A
5418717 Su et al. May 1995 A
5418948 Turtle May 1995 A
5437032 Wolf et al. Jul 1995 A
5444820 Tzes et al. Aug 1995 A
5475588 Schabes et al. Dec 1995 A
5483466 Kawahara et al. Jan 1996 A
5487100 Kane Jan 1996 A
5493677 Balogh et al. Feb 1996 A
5493692 Theimer et al. Feb 1996 A
5506787 Muhlfeld et al. Apr 1996 A
5526521 Fitch et al. Jun 1996 A
5542088 Jennings, Jr. et al. Jul 1996 A
5555344 Zunkler Sep 1996 A
5559710 Shahraray et al. Sep 1996 A
5577241 Spencer Nov 1996 A
5590055 Chapman et al. Dec 1996 A
5594641 Kaplan et al. Jan 1997 A
5596502 Koski et al. Jan 1997 A
5610812 Scabes et al. Mar 1997 A
5615360 Bezek et al. Mar 1997 A
5627914 Pagallo May 1997 A
5630128 Farrell et al. May 1997 A
5634053 Noble et al. May 1997 A
5634121 Tracz et al. May 1997 A
5636124 Rischar et al. Jun 1997 A
5649215 Itoh Jul 1997 A
5664061 Andreshak et al. Sep 1997 A
5680628 Carus Oct 1997 A
5687384 Nagase Nov 1997 A
5694616 Johnson et al. Dec 1997 A
5701400 Amado Dec 1997 A
5708829 Kadashevich Jan 1998 A
5715371 Ahamed et al. Feb 1998 A
5721770 Kohler Feb 1998 A
5721897 Rubinstein Feb 1998 A
5724481 Garberg et al. Mar 1998 A
5737621 Kaplan et al. Apr 1998 A
5737734 Schultz Apr 1998 A
5745652 Bigus Apr 1998 A
5745736 Picart Apr 1998 A
5748973 Palmer et al. May 1998 A
5754671 Higgins et al. May 1998 A
5761631 Nasukawa Jun 1998 A
5765033 Miloslavsky Jun 1998 A
5768578 Kirk et al. Jun 1998 A
5794194 Takebayashi et al. Aug 1998 A
5799268 Boguraev Aug 1998 A
5806040 Vensko Sep 1998 A
5809462 Nussbaum Sep 1998 A
5809464 Kopp et al. Sep 1998 A
5822731 Schultz Oct 1998 A
5822745 Hekmatpour Oct 1998 A
5826076 Bradley et al. Oct 1998 A
5832220 Johnson et al. Nov 1998 A
5835682 Broomhead et al. Nov 1998 A
5845246 Schalk Dec 1998 A
5850219 Kumomura Dec 1998 A
5860059 Aust et al. Jan 1999 A
5864848 Horvitz et al. Jan 1999 A
5864863 Burrows Jan 1999 A
5867495 Elliott et al. Feb 1999 A
5878385 Bralich et al. Mar 1999 A
5878386 Coughlin Mar 1999 A
5884032 Bateman et al. Mar 1999 A
5884302 Ho Mar 1999 A
5890142 Tanimura et al. Mar 1999 A
5890147 Peltonen et al. Mar 1999 A
5895447 Ittycheriah et al. Apr 1999 A
5899971 De Vos May 1999 A
5913215 Rubenstein et al. Jun 1999 A
5920835 Huzenlaub et al. Jul 1999 A
5933822 Braden-Harder et al. Aug 1999 A
5940612 Brady et al. Aug 1999 A
5940821 Wical Aug 1999 A
5944778 Takeuchi et al. Aug 1999 A
5946388 Walker et al. Aug 1999 A
5948058 Kudoh et al. Sep 1999 A
5950184 Kartutunen Sep 1999 A
5950192 Moore et al. Sep 1999 A
5956711 Sullivan et al. Sep 1999 A
5960393 Cohrs et al. Sep 1999 A
5963447 Kohn et al. Oct 1999 A
5963894 Riachardson et al. Oct 1999 A
5970449 Alleva et al. Oct 1999 A
5974385 Ponting et al. Oct 1999 A
5974465 Wong Oct 1999 A
5983216 Kirach Nov 1999 A
5991713 Unger et al. Nov 1999 A
5991751 Rivette et al. Nov 1999 A
5991756 Wu Nov 1999 A
5995513 Harrand et al. Nov 1999 A
5999932 Paul Dec 1999 A
5999990 Sharrit et al. Dec 1999 A
6006221 Liddy et al. Dec 1999 A
6009422 Ciccarelli Dec 1999 A
6012053 Pant et al. Jan 2000 A
6018735 Hunter Jan 2000 A
6021403 Horvitz et al. Feb 2000 A
6025843 Sklar Feb 2000 A
6026388 Liddy et al. Feb 2000 A
6032111 Mohri et al. Feb 2000 A
6035104 Zahariev Mar 2000 A
6038535 Campbell Mar 2000 A
6038560 Wical Mar 2000 A
6055528 Evans Apr 2000 A
6051709 Bronte May 2000 A
6058365 Nagal et al. May 2000 A
6058389 Chandra et al. May 2000 A
6064953 Maxwell, III et al. May 2000 A
6064971 Hartnett May 2000 A
6064977 Haverstock et al. May 2000 A
6067565 Horvitz May 2000 A
6070149 Tavor et al. May 2000 A
6070158 Kirsch et al. May 2000 A
6073101 Maes Jun 2000 A
6076088 Paik et al. Jun 2000 A
6081774 de Hita et al. Jun 2000 A
6085159 Ortega et al. Jul 2000 A
6092042 Iso Jul 2000 A
6092095 Maytal Jul 2000 A
6094652 Falsal Jul 2000 A
6073098 Buchsbaum et al. Aug 2000 A
6098047 Oku et al. Aug 2000 A
6101537 Edelstein et al. Aug 2000 A
6112126 Hales et al. Aug 2000 A
6115734 Mansion Sep 2000 A
6138128 Perkowitz et al. Oct 2000 A
6138139 Beck et al. Oct 2000 A
6144940 Nishi et al. Nov 2000 A
6148322 Sand et al. Nov 2000 A
6151538 Bate et al. Nov 2000 A
6154720 Onishi et al. Nov 2000 A
6161094 Adcock et al. Dec 2000 A
6161130 Horvitz et al. Dec 2000 A
6163787 Tang et al. Dec 2000 A
6167370 Tsourikov et al. Dec 2000 A
6169986 Bowman et al. Jan 2001 B1
6182029 Friedman Jan 2001 B1
6182036 Poppert Jan 2001 B1
6182059 Angotti et al. Jan 2001 B1
6182063 Woods Jan 2001 B1
6182065 Yeomans Jan 2001 B1
6182120 Beaulieu et al. Jan 2001 B1
6185603 Henderson et al. Feb 2001 B1
6199103 Sakaguchi et al. Mar 2001 B1
6212544 Borkenhagen et al. Apr 2001 B1
6223201 Reznak Apr 2001 B1
6226630 Billmers May 2001 B1
6233575 Agrawal et al. May 2001 B1
6233578 Machihara et al. May 2001 B1
6236987 Horowitz et al. May 2001 B1
6243735 Imanishi et al. Jun 2001 B1
6249606 Kiraly et al. Jun 2001 B1
6256773 Bowman-Amuah Jul 2001 B1
6260068 Hoenninger et al. Jul 2001 B1
6263335 Paik et al. Jul 2001 B1
6266631 Malcolm Jul 2001 B1
6269368 Diamond Jul 2001 B1
6243679 Mohri et al. Aug 2001 B1
6271840 Finseth et al. Aug 2001 B1
6275819 Carter Aug 2001 B1
6278973 Chung et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282565 Shaw et al. Aug 2001 B1
6292794 Cecchini et al. Sep 2001 B1
6292938 Sarkar et al. Sep 2001 B1
6298324 Zuberec et al. Oct 2001 B1
6301602 Ueki Oct 2001 B1
6304864 Liddy et al. Oct 2001 B1
6304872 Chao Oct 2001 B1
6308197 Mason et al. Oct 2001 B1
6311194 Sheth et al. Oct 2001 B1
6314439 Bates et al. Nov 2001 B1
6314446 Stiles Nov 2001 B1
6324534 Neal et al. Nov 2001 B1
6327581 Platt Dec 2001 B1
6349295 Tedesco et al. Feb 2002 B1
6353667 Foster et al. Mar 2002 B1
6353827 Davies et al. Mar 2002 B1
6360243 Lindsley et al. Mar 2002 B1
6363373 Steinkraus Mar 2002 B1
6363377 Kravets et al. Mar 2002 B1
6366910 Rajaraman et al. Apr 2002 B1
6370526 Agrawal et al. Apr 2002 B1
6374221 Haimi-Cohen Apr 2002 B1
6377945 Rievik Apr 2002 B1
6377949 Gilmour Apr 2002 B1
6393415 Getchius et al. May 2002 B1
6397209 Read et al. May 2002 B1
6397212 Biffar May 2002 B1
6401084 Ortega et al. Jun 2002 B1
6408277 Nelken Jun 2002 B1
6411947 Rice et al. Jun 2002 B1
6411982 Williams Jun 2002 B2
6415250 van den Akkar Jul 2002 B1
6418458 Maresco Jul 2002 B1
6421066 Silvan Jul 2002 B1
6421675 Ryan et al. Jul 2002 B1
6424995 Shuman Jul 2002 B1
6424997 Buskirk, Jr. et al. Jul 2002 B1
6430615 Hellerstein et al. Aug 2002 B1
6434435 Tubel et al. Aug 2002 B1
6434554 Asami et al. Aug 2002 B1
6434556 Levin et al. Aug 2002 B1
6438540 Nasr et al. Aug 2002 B2
6438575 Khan et al. Aug 2002 B1
6442542 Ramani et al. Aug 2002 B1
6442589 Takahashi et al. Aug 2002 B1
6446061 Doerre et al. Sep 2002 B1
6446081 Preston Sep 2002 B1
6446256 Hyman et al. Sep 2002 B1
6449589 Moore Sep 2002 B1
6449646 Sikora et al. Sep 2002 B1
6460074 Fishkin Oct 2002 B1
6463533 Calamera et al. Oct 2002 B1
6466940 Mills Oct 2002 B1
6477500 Maes Nov 2002 B2
6477580 Bowman-Amuah Nov 2002 B1
6480843 Li Nov 2002 B2
6490572 Akkiraju et al. Dec 2002 B2
6493447 Goss et al. Dec 2002 B1
6493694 Xu et al. Dec 2002 B1
6496836 Ronchi Dec 2002 B1
6496853 Klein Dec 2002 B1
6505158 Conkie Jan 2003 B1
6513026 Horvitz et al. Jan 2003 B1
6535795 Schroeder et al. Mar 2003 B1
6542889 Aggarwal et al. Apr 2003 B1
6560330 Gabriel May 2003 B2
6560590 Shwe et al. May 2003 B1
6571282 Bowman-Amuah May 2003 B1
6584464 Warthen Jun 2003 B1
6507872 Geshwind Jul 2003 B1
6594697 Praitis et al. Jul 2003 B1
6601026 Appelt et al. Jul 2003 B2
6611535 Ljungqvist Aug 2003 B2
6611825 Billheimer et al. Aug 2003 B1
6615172 Bennett et al. Sep 2003 B1
6618727 Wheeler et al. Sep 2003 B1
6651220 Penteroudakis et al. Nov 2003 B1
6654726 Hanzek Nov 2003 B1
6654815 Goss et al. Nov 2003 B1
6665662 Kirkwood et al. Dec 2003 B1
6675159 Lin et al. Jan 2004 B1
6704728 Chang et al. Mar 2004 B1
6711561 Chang et al. Mar 2004 B1
6714643 Gargeya et al. Mar 2004 B1
6714905 Chang et al. Mar 2004 B1
6738759 Wheeler et al. May 2004 B1
6742015 Bowman-Amuah May 2004 B1
6744878 Komissarchik et al. Jun 2004 B1
6745181 Chang et al. Jun 2004 B1
6748387 Garber et al. Jun 2004 B2
6766320 Wang et al. Jul 2004 B1
6785671 Bailey et al. Aug 2004 B1
6850513 Pelissier Feb 2005 B1
6862710 Marchisio Mar 2005 B1
6889222 Zhao May 2005 B1
7047242 Ponte May 2006 B1
20010027463 Kobayashi Oct 2001 A1
20010042090 Williams Nov 2001 A1
20010047270 Gusick Nov 2001 A1
20010056456 Cota-Robles Dec 2001 A1
20020032715 Utsumi Mar 2002 A1
20020052907 Wakai et al. May 2002 A1
20020059069 Hsu May 2002 A1
20020059161 Li May 2002 A1
20020065953 Alford et al. May 2002 A1
20020073129 Wang et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020078119 Brenner et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020078121 Ballantyne Jun 2002 A1
20020078257 Nishimura Jun 2002 A1
20020083251 Chauvel et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020087618 Bohm et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020087623 Eatough Jul 2002 A1
20020091746 Umberger et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020099714 Murray Jul 2002 A1
20020103871 Pustejovsky Aug 2002 A1
20020107926 Lee Aug 2002 A1
20020116463 Hart Aug 2002 A1
20020150966 Muraca Oct 2002 A1
20020196911 Gao et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030004706 Yale Jan 2003 A1
20030028564 Sanfilippo Feb 2003 A1
20030046297 Mason Mar 2003 A1
20040010491 Riedinger Jan 2004 A1
20040064554 Kuno Apr 2004 A1
20040167889 Chang et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040225653 Nelken et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040254904 Nelken et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050187913 Nelken et al. Aug 2005 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (7)
Number Date Country
2180392 Feb 2001 CA
0 597 630 May 1994 EP
0 304 191 Feb 1999 EP
09106296 Apr 1997 JP
WO 0036487 Jun 2000 WO
01084373 Aug 2001 WO
01084374 Aug 2001 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (43)
Entry
Breese et al, “Empirical Analysis of Predictive Algorithms for Collaborative Filtering,” Proc. of the 14th Conf. on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Jul. 1998.
Czerwinski et al, “Visualizing Implicit Queries for Information Management and Retrieval,” Proc. of CHI 1999; ACM SIGCHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1999.
Dumais et al., “Inductive Learning Algorithms and Representations for Task Categorization,” Proc. of 7th Intl. Conf. on Information & Knowledge Management, 1998.
Horvitz, “Principles of Mixed-Initiative User Interfaces,” Proc. of CHI 1999; ACM SIGCHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1999.
Horvitz et al., “Display of Information for Time-Critical Decision Making,” Proc. of the 11th Conf. on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Jul. 1995.
Horvitz et al., “The Lumiere Project: Bayesian User Modeling . . . ,” Proc. of the 14th Conf. on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Jul. 1998.
Horvitz et al., “Time-Dependent Utility and Action Under Uncertainty,” Proc. of the 7th Conf. on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Jul. 1991.
Horvitz et al., “Time-Critical Action: Representations and Application,” Proc. of the 13th Conf. on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Jul. 1997.
Koller et al., “Toward Optimal Feature Selection,” Proc. of 13th Conf. on Machine Learning, 1996.
Lieberman, “Letizia: An Agent That Assists in Web Browsing,” Proc. of International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1995.
Platt, “Fast Training of Support Vector Machines Using Sequential Minimal Optimization, Advances in Kernel Methods: Support Vector Learning,” MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1999.
Platt, “Probabilistic Outputs for Support Vector Machines & Comparisons to Regularized Likelihood Methods,” Adv. In Large Margin Classifiers, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1999.
Sahami et al. “A Bayesian Approach to Filtering Junk E-Mail,” Amer. Assoc. for Art. Intell. Technical Report WS-98-05, 1998.
Cohen, “Learning Rules that Classify E-Mail,” AT&T Laboratories, 1996.
Lewis, “Evaluating and Optimizing Autonomous Text Classification Systems,” ACM SIGIR, 1995.
Lewis et al., “Training Algorithms for Linear Text Classifiers,” ACM SIGIR, 1996.
Apte et al., “Automated Learning of Decision Rules for Text Categorization,” ACM Transactions on Information Systems, vol. 12, No. 3, 1994.
Losee, Jr., “Minimizing Information Overload; The Ranking of Electronic Messages,” Journal of Information Science 15, 1989.
Joachimes, “Text Categorization with Support Vector Machines: Learning with Many Relevant Features,” Universitat Dortmund, Germany, 1998.
Morelli et al., “Predicting Technical Communication in Product Development Organizations,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 42, Iss. 3, Aug. 1995.
Webster's Third New International Dictionary, G. & C. Merriam Company, 1961, pp. 538, 834, 1460.
Computer Dictionary, Microsoft Press, 1997, Third Edition, p. 192.
Parmentier et al., “Logical Structure Recognition of Scientific Bibliographic References,” 4th Int'l Conf. on Document Anlysis & Recognition, vol. 2, Aug. 18-20, 1997.
Kalogeraki et al., “Using Multiple Feedback Loops for Object Profiling, . . . ” IEEE Int'l Symposium on Object-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing, May 2-5, 1999.
Johnson et al., “Adaptive Model-Based Neural Network Control,” IEEE Int'l Conference on Robotics and Automation, May 13-18, 1990.
McKinnon et al., “Data Communications and Management of a Distributed Network of Automated Data Acquisition and Analysis Systems,” 1997 IEEE Nuclear Science Symp., Nov. 1997.
Moore et al., “Web Page Categorization and Feature Selection Using Association Rule and Principal Component Clustering,” Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Information Technologies and Systems, Dec. 1997.
Mase, “Experiments on Automatic Web Page Categorization for IR Systems,” Technical Report, Stanford University, 1998.
Berners-Lee et al., “The Semantic Web,” Scientific American.com, May 17, 2001.
Brasethvik et al., “A Conceptual Modeling Approach to Semantic Document Retrieval,” Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, May 27-31, 2002.
“Grammar-like Functional Rules for Representing Query Optimization Alternative,” 1998 ACM, pp. 18-27.
Khan et al., “Personal Adaptive Web Agent: A Tool for Information Filtering,” Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, vol. 1, May 25, 1997, pp. 305-308.
Davies et al., “Knowledge Discovery and Delivery,” British Telecommunications Engineering, London, GB, vol. 17, No. 1, Apr. 1, 1998, pp. 25-35.
Persin, “Document Filtering for Fast Ranking,” Sigir 94. Dublin, Jul. 3-6, 1994, Proceedings of the Annual International ACM-Sigir Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Berlin, Springer, DE, vol. Conf. 17, Jul. 3, 1994, pp. 339-348.
Han et al., “WebACE: A Web Agent for Document Categorization and Exploration,” Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN, May 9-13, 1998, Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents, New York, NY, May 9, 1998, pp. 408-415.
Shimazu et al., “CAPIT: Natural Language Interface Design Tool with Keyword Analyzer and Case-Based Parser,” NEC Research and Development, Nippon Electric Ltd., Tokyo, JP, vol. 33, No. 4, Oct. 1, 1992, pp. 679-688.
Firepond eService Provider, http://www.firepond.com/products/eserviceperformer.
Banter White Paper:, “Natural Language Engines or Advanced Customer Interaction,” by Banter Inc.
Banter Technology RME, “The Foundation for Quality E-Communications,” Technical White Paper.
Webster's Computer Internet Dictionary, 3rd Edition, P.E. Margolis, 1999.
searchCRM.com Definitions (contact center), http://www.searchctm.techtarget.com.
“Transforming Your Call Center Into a Contact Center: Where Are You? Trends and Recommendations,” An IDC Executive Brief (#33), Jun. 2001.
Hawkins et al., “The Evolution of the Call Center to the ‘Customer Contact Center’”, ITSC White Paper, Feb. 2001.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20160063126 A1 Mar 2016 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60468576 May 2003 US
Continuations (2)
Number Date Country
Parent 11843972 Aug 2007 US
Child 14935174 US
Parent 10839930 May 2004 US
Child 11843972 US