WO2002015453A2 - System and method for business decision making implementation by decision operation trees - Google Patents
System and method for business decision making implementation by decision operation trees Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- WO2002015453A2 WO2002015453A2 PCT/IL2001/000750 IL0100750W WO0215453A2 WO 2002015453 A2 WO2002015453 A2 WO 2002015453A2 IL 0100750 W IL0100750 W IL 0100750W WO 0215453 A2 WO0215453 A2 WO 0215453A2
- Authority
- WO
- WIPO (PCT)
- Prior art keywords
- decision
- nodes
- node
- actions
- event
- Prior art date
Links
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 title claims description 62
- 230000009471 action Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 91
- 230000004044 response Effects 0.000 claims description 10
- 238000009825 accumulation Methods 0.000 claims description 5
- 238000004364 calculation method Methods 0.000 claims description 5
- 230000000750 progressive effect Effects 0.000 claims description 4
- 230000000007 visual effect Effects 0.000 claims description 4
- 230000001419 dependent effect Effects 0.000 claims description 3
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 claims 2
- 230000000977 initiatory effect Effects 0.000 claims 1
- 230000001960 triggered effect Effects 0.000 abstract description 6
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 description 10
- 230000001413 cellular effect Effects 0.000 description 7
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 5
- 230000008901 benefit Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000035508 accumulation Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000004913 activation Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000013459 approach Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000004422 calculation algorithm Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 2
- 235000004522 Pentaglottis sempervirens Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000004891 communication Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000002860 competitive effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000000470 constituent Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000010276 construction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000009849 deactivation Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000003203 everyday effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000010354 integration Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000003993 interaction Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000005259 measurement Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000011218 segmentation Effects 0.000 description 1
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/10—Office automation; Time management
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q20/00—Payment architectures, schemes or protocols
- G06Q20/08—Payment architectures
- G06Q20/10—Payment architectures specially adapted for electronic funds transfer [EFT] systems; specially adapted for home banking systems
- G06Q20/102—Bill distribution or payments
Definitions
- the present invention relates to the field of methods and systems for automated decision making.
- CC&B Customer Care and Billing
- OSS Operation Support Systems
- the system and method facilitates the processes whereby a company designs an electronic rating, business or other decision-handling engine of a Billing System or other such system.
- the task of designing such an engine is one of the tougher challenges in the construction of a competitive business CC&B and OSS.
- the Business Engine is typically the core of a company's electronic billing system, it needs to be intuitive to use and efficient, scalable and platform independent, yet still able to yield real time outputs in generic form such that it may be applied to a variety of business models.
- FIG. 1 generally depicts an exemplary Rate Table, labeled "First Generation Rate Table".
- the figure presents an example of a rating decision relating to peak and off-peak (Time of Day) cellular phone airtime fees on one hand, and to Quality of Service (QoS) measurement on the other hand.
- the table is two-dimensional, meaning, it depends on two business parameters - Time of Day and QoS.
- the combination between Time of Day and QoS parameters determines the desired rate(s).
- To determine the appropriate airtime rate one just looks up the corresponding entry in the table for the appropriate Time of Day (Peak or Off Peak) and Quality of Service (QoSl or QoS2).
- Rate Table There are times when the Rating Engine applies different rates for different segments of the event according to the Rate Table parameters. The order in which the event is segmented may result in different rates for the same Event.
- An important enhancement of the Rate Table approach can reside in prioritizing the different business parameters, (e.g. QoS has higher priority than Time of Day, thus the Event will be segmented first according to QoS and only then each segment will be divided by Time of Day) .
- Rate Table The advantage of the Rate Table method is its simplicity and ease of use in representing non-complex business decisions, or more specifically rating decisions. By all respects, for one or two dimensions, it is equally simple to visually present a Rate Table to the end user of the system and to design a Rating Engine to support it. Unfortunately, a Rate Table has fixed business parameters with a fixed number of dimensions that often makes it difficult to define a rating method based on new parameter without the painful customization involving re-coding part of the billing system. These drawbacks make it merely suitable for certain application types that are relatively simple in nature.
- the prior art has developed a variation of the Rate Table that expands the table to greater power and flexibility.
- the new concept is that of a multi-dimensional or n-dimensional Rate Table.
- An example of such a method is represented in Figure 1 labeled as a "Second Generation Multi-Dimensional Rate Table".
- the multi-dimensional Rate Table uses a set of rules to decide the right action. Each rule represents a single combination of 1 or more of the 'n' parameters. These series of rules dictate actions to be taken whenever certain relationships exist between any number of business parameters ("dimensions") from a predetermined list of business parameters.
- CC&B or OSS engines Some such potential uses for CC&B or OSS engines include: bonuses (monetary or not), discounts, loyalty credits, provisioning of external devices and activation or de-activation of services. In most cases this drawback leads to complex solution of those business decisions, outside the scope of the Rate Table.
- the quest for new techniques for a generic business decision model and engine has led to the system and method of the present invention which utilizes a Decision Operation Tree, or a DO TreeTM.
- This third generation approach not only solves the above discussed and other disadvantages of the prior art, but also allows the integration of various decision making rules into one system.
- the DO Tree is advantageous over Rate Tables and multi-dimensional rate tables in that it facilitates the application of decision engines into a variety of areas which, prior to the present invention, were usually considered to lie outside the scope of Rate Table methodologies.
- a DO Tree according to the present invention is a logical tree representation, comprised of Nodes and Branches, of decision making rules and actions instituted according to those rules.
- one or more DO Trees are tailored to serve a user's rating and billing system needs.
- Methods according to the present invention include representing a series of decisions necessitated by the occurrence of a predefined event with a DO Tree as herein described. Upon occurrence of the predefined event, the method includes proceeding from Node to Node, and optionally performing one or more actions in each Node, in the DO Tree according to the rules the DO Tree provides.
- Systems according to the present invention include a storage media, a processor, and software run by the processor.
- One or more DO Trees according to the present invention are stored on the storage media.
- the software of the system Upon the occurrence of a predefined event, the software of the system performs the decisions and actions dictated by one or more of the stored DO Trees.
- the present invention is not dependent on any particular storage media, processor or other hardware.
- Do Trees are comprised of a plurality of Nodes and Branches which connect the nodes together in a progressive relationship. Any node may have defined for it one or more "Actions" (whose implementation can be prioritized or ordered) which are triggered whenever the Node is reached. Those Nodes having Branches stemming ("descending") from them have two parameters, a Decision Attribute and a Branching Type, which defines the Node's relationship with its descending Branches. Conversely, each Branch is defined by a parameter called a Decision Value. For each Node having descending Branches, the specified Decision Attribute defines what type of attribute the Node's branches' s Decision Value parameters are referring to.
- each Node having Branches has specified a Branching Type parameter.
- the Branching Type parameter also helps chose which Branches are followed in the DO Tree. This parameter can have various values, inlcuding: Step, Tier, and Period. Each one of these branching types dictate different splitting actions when the DO tree is evaluated for a specific event.
- Figure 1 is a diagram of an exemplary first generation two-dimensional rate table, and a second generation multi-dimensional rate table as known in the prior art.
- Figures 2 and 3 are schematic diagrams of decision operation trees according to embodiments of the present invention.
- Figure 4 is a schematic diagram of a rating engine system operating with several decision operation trees according to embodiments of the present invention.
- Figure 5 is a schematic diagram of a decision operation tree according to embodiments of the present invention.
- Figure 6 is a schematic diagram of a decision operation tree display according to embodiments of the present invention.
- a DO Tree according to the present invention is a logical tree representation tailored to serve a user's decision making needs. In their implementation, such a decision making system and method has particular application to the field of rating and billing systems. While the following detailed description of embodiments of the invention deal with examples from this field, it will be readily appreciated by one skilled in the art that the present invention has advantageous uses in various applications.
- the basic components of each DO Tree according to the present invention are Nodes and Branches. Each DO Tree is directed toward handling the decisions in response to a particular event by analyzing which, if any, actions should be triggered by the event.
- a Node is a vertex in the DO Tree, which has zero or more
- a Node that has one or more Branches stemming from it is characterized by a Decision Attribute and Branching Type.
- a Node may also have several "Actions" attached to it. These actions can include, for example, crediting and debiting of monetary and non-monetary accounts, triggering internal provisioning actions such as activation or deactivation of internal services, triggering external provisioning actions, sending messages to customers.
- a scripting tool allows a user to define complex or other customized actions. Furthermore, multiple actions within a Node can be sequenced such that they are performed in a particular order, performed only if a previous action failed, or performed using a value generated by the previous action. Such actions can vary from simple calculations to initializations of external processes (such as a user defined software script or the initialization of a second DO Tree).
- a Branch forms the linkage between two Nodes.
- a Branch will hold a Decision Value, whether singular or a range of values, of a type corresponding to its parent Node's Decision Attribute. These values can be numeric or alphanumeric depending on the Decision Attribute (e.g., '0-10' may represent duration in seconds, 'Peak' may represent a billing code, etc.).
- the Decision Attribute of each Node having descending Branches determines what parameter should be considered in this Node and defines the value type of the Branches that stem from the Node. In this manner, the Decision Attribute, working with the values assigned to each Branch, dictates the logical flow down the DO Tree. For example, a Node containing 'event duration in minutes' as its Decision Attribute will have branches stemming from it with values representing a specific duration in minutes or a range of minutes.
- the Branching Type of each Node defines the manner in which the DO Tree algorithm will execute the business decision on a specific event. More specifically, the Branching Type dictates the segmenting method of the Node including what branches are proceeded down and what parameters and values are passed to the Nodes at the end of those Branches. Exemplary Branching Types which will be discussed in more detail below include: Step, Tier, and Period.
- an Action is an operation performed by a Node.
- Each Node holds the definition of zero, one, or multiple Actions that will be triggered when the Do Tree algorithm reaches that particular Node.
- Each Action holds an "Action Value” that determines an outcome or output value of that specific action.
- the Actions provide the capability of implementing the outcome of the decision(s) proscribed by the method and system of the present invention.
- a wide range of "outcome types" can be provided for within a single DO Tree or Node.
- Systems according to the present invention employ decision engines, usually in the form of software, which implement actions in response to events as dictated by the DO Tree related to that event.
- the system then operates according to the logic provided by the related DO Tree, as described with respect to the method of the present invention, to implement the proper decision defined by the DO Tree.
- a system according to the present invention acts in response to pre-defined events, each such event triggers Actions to implement decisions dictated by the DO Tree.
- a DO Tree is dependent upon a certain Event and is only evaluated when that specific "Triggering Event" occurs, (e.g., a customer using an Internet access service can be an event which enters the billing system and triggers a DO Tree to implement a specific billing process).
- the method of the present invention involves a relatively straightforward operation in a recursive manner in response to the triggering event.
- the steps taken in response to such a triggering event are: 1. Start with the first Node of the DO Tree, called a Root Node. Pass parameters (a list of attributes and their values) relating to the
- Event parameters may be, for example, the “customer id,” “start date and time,” “quality of service,” etc. Some of the Event parameters will be used to determine the decision performed by the DO Tree, other parameters will be used in conducting actions, and still others for both (as the below examples will show);
- Branching Type Pass the Event parameters to the next Node(s);
- the Branching Type parameter relating to each Node having descending Branches defines the type of segmentation action (deciding which Branches to take) that will be performed after evaluating the Decision Attribute at a given Node.
- valid Branching types include Step, Tier, and Period, and may refer to either discrete (singular) values or continuous (range) values.
- the "Step" Branching type divides an event between the Branches according to the Branch values.
- the Node's Decision Attribute that the Step Branching type refers to has always a continuous numeric value (as opposed to discrete numeric value or non-numeric value) .
- Example 1 discusses how such a step Branching type would operate.
- Node A has a Decision Attribute of cellular call duration and a Step Branching Type. Branches 1A, 2A and 3A stem from
- Branch 1A first 0-10 seconds of time
- Branch 2A second 0-10 seconds of time
- Branch 3A any time above 20 seconds
- An event (e.g., a cellular call record) having a Decision Attribute (duration) of 17 seconds will be branched under the above Step Branching Type using the above method as follows: first 10 seconds will be sent to Branch 1A, and - remaining 7 seconds will be sent to Branch 2A.
- the "Tier" Branching type differs from the Step Branching type in that it chooses a single Branch to proceed along away from the Node (i.e., the event is not divided among multiple Branches as is possible with Step Branching).
- the attribute that the Tier method refers to can have a discrete or continuous numeric value.
- Example 2 discusses how such a Tier Branching Type would operate.
- Node B is like Node A in that it has a Decision Attribute of cellular call duration.
- Node B has a Tier Branching Type.
- Branches IB, 2B and 3B stem from Node B.
- the values of Branches IB, 2B and 3B, with respect to the Decision Attribute, are as follows:
- Branch IB 0- 10 seconds duration
- Branch 2B 10-20 seconds duration
- Branch 3B above 20 seconds duration
- An event e.g., a cellular call record
- Decision Attribute duration of 17 seconds reaching Node B
- Branched under the Tier Branching Type as follows: - all 17 seconds will be sent to Branch 2B.
- the "Period" Branching Type causes an event to be segmented between Branches according to time of day.
- Time of day for each Branch is represented according to a Period-Range, which contains a start time and an end time.
- An event that spans more than one Period Range will be segmented according to the period set and every period will get a certain percentage of the session.
- Example 3
- Node C has a Decision Attribute of cellular call duration and a Period Branching Type. Branches 1C and C stem from
- Branch 1C Peak Period (Weekday 08:00-12:00)
- Branch 2C Off-peak Period (All other times of day)
- an event e.g., a cellular call record
- the event will be branched as follows according to the Period Branching Type: 10 minutes will be sent to Branch 2C, and - 50 seconds will be sent to Branch lC.
- DO Tree there is depicted an exemplary DO Tree according to embodiments of the present invention.
- the tree is comprised of Nodes 1 (identified individually as 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5), Branches 22, Decision Attributes 23, Branching Types 24, and Decision Values 25.
- Nodes 1 identified individually as 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
- Branches 22 Branches 22, Decision Attributes 23, Branching Types 24, and Decision Values 25.
- the following decision rule can be implemented easily by a DO Tree:
- Node 1 the root Node, has a Tier Branching Type 24 and Node 2 has a Period Branching Type 24.
- Node 1 has a Decision Attribute 23 of QoS while Node 2 has a Decision Attribute 23 of Time of Day.
- Nodes 3-5 do not have a Branching Type 24 or a Decision Attribute 23 as they are "leaf' Nodes (they have no Branches 22 stemming from them).
- Nodes 3-5 each have Actions 26 that set the appropriate billing rate as determined by the business rule.
- a Customer X could purchase Internet Access Premium Service and use the service for five hours with QoS equal to 2. Out of the five hours, if two were in Peak time where three were in Off Peak time, the illustrated DO Tree according to the present invention would dictate the following steps:
- the root Node (Node 1) is fetched and the process looks for Node actions. No Action 26 to perform in the root Node.
- the first Branch's Decision Value 25 (1) is checked against the attribute value (2) and produces a negative answer.
- the second Branch's Decision Value 25 (2) is checked against the attribute value (2) and produces a positive answer.
- the process continues down the second Branch to Node 2. 5.
- Node 2 is fetched and the process looks for Node Actions 26. There is no Action 26 to perform in Node 2.
- the Decision Attribute 23 of Node 2 is the Time of Day. In addition, the
- Branching Type 24 of the Node is Period.
- the process segments the event into Peak and Off-Peak periods according to the Time of Day parameter values passed to the Node. According to the Period branching method, two hours are sent down the Branch to Node 4, and three hours are sent to Node 5.
- Action 26 indicating a fee generation of $1 per hour sent to the node. $1.00 is multiplied by the event hours passed to Node 4 (2hrs. peak time) giving an output of $2.00.
- Node 5 is fetched and the process looks for Actions 26. There is an action of $0.50 per hour. $0.50 is multiplied by the event hours (3 is peak time) giving an output of $1.50.
- Figure 3 provides a second example of a DO Tree according to embodiments of the present invention with respect to a fictional "Company Y". If Company Y desires to automate a rule saying "For each day of work the employee will get $50 per hour for the first 9 hours and $75 per hour for each hour above 9," an appropriate DO Tree can be built with billing software according to the present invention. This DO Tree in essence will be responsible to rate the mentioned business rule, namely, rate the compensation for each employee.
- Figure 3 is a DO Tree 30 which implements the above business rule.
- Node A (the root Node) has a Decision Attribute 33 of "Working Hours" and a Branching Type 34 of Step. On the Branches 32 leading down from Node A' there are values 35. These values 35 correspond to the hours worked by the employee in question. (This is known because the Decision Attribute of the Node is "Working Hours" i.e., it describes the value type of the Branches 32). Node B' has an Action 36 of $75 per hour worked and Node C has an Action 36 of $50 per hour.
- event E indicating that employee M worked today for 13 hours, we have the following event scenario:
- Billing software utilizing DO Trees initialize the DO Tree 30 depicted by Figure 3 and passes the Working Hours parameter with a value of 13 to the root Node A' which has no Actions 36.
- A' has a Step branching type 34 determined according to the value of the "Working Hours" decision attribute 33.
- the Step values associated with the Branches leading to B' and C cut the event into two. Nine hours continue with the Branch going to Node C, while the other four hours continue to Node B'.
- Figure 4 generally depicts how one or more different DO Trees 401 can be incorporated into system 400 according to the present invention.
- the DO Trees are stored in a storage medium 402, such as a hard drive or other suitable medium known in the art, and electronically accessed and utilized by software 404 being run by the system's processor 403.
- a triggering event 405 is transmitted 406 to the system 400.
- the software 404 "wakes up" the appropriate DO Tree 401 and passes relevant Event parameters to a DO Tree sub-process.
- Any Actions dictated by the relevant DO Tree which requires external implementation can be transmitted 408 to an external system 407.
- a DO Tree according to the present invention can internally refer 401a to another DO Tree (such as by passing values to a second root node, i__, the root node of another tree) such that one tree can essentially be represented as a sub-tree of another.
- Figure 5 depicts an exemplary embodiment of the present invention wherein a DO Tree 50 is used to implement a decision that includes non-economic actions.
- the decision rule implemented by the DO Tree 50 in figure 5 is "for every calendar day that a customer connects to the Internet service he receives a Star; when he reaches 100 Stars he receives a free service of Video on demand' with 2 free films.”
- Node 4 contains two Actions 51 which are prioritized ( 1 and 2) .
- such prioritized actions within a single node are carried out sequentially.
- DO Tree based systems according to the present invention support not only rating generation but also act as a business decision engines. In this manner, it will be readily appreciated by one of ordinary skill in the art that such an engine can perform many business actions, including rating, hierarchy distribution, revenue sharing, provisioning, disconnecting, loyalty programs, as well as calculate commissions, discounts, and bonuses.
- Attribute independence - A Node can refer to any attribute, that may be an Event attribute or calculated attribute or any data stored, for example accumulations from previous sessions.
- Action independence - A Node can trigger any number of actions on the system, whether it is rating, provisioning, discount and bonus calculations, messaging, accumulation, etc.
- Intuitive Visual Representation The DO Tree visualizes the rating plan hierarchy and gives a "bird's eye view” of the rating scheme and the Decision outcomes. Thereby the business rule logic can easily be depicted in printed, algorithmic form.
- Event driven The DO Tree is part of an event-based system and is only triggered when a predefined event occurs. That allows linkage of all system operation to pre-defined Events. For example sending a message when an event of "service about to expire" is triggered.
- DO Tree may contain actions of various types, that are not only economic (rating) actions - implementation of other Business decisions do not require additional or separate implementation.
- DO Tree can separate actions to different Node levels. An action can take place in every Node disregarding its level. In this way, the company can handle sophisticated business logic without the need to summarize actions.
- An exemplary situation would be where the business rule logic dictates that an Internet Access service should be charged with $0.50 per session and in addition will have usage charges of $1 per Peak hours and $0.80 per Off-peak hours.
- DO Trees according to the present invention would allow an action in the root Node of a $0.50 flat charge and two Branches leading to the corresponding values for peak and off peak.
Abstract
Description
Claims
Priority Applications (2)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
AU2001282450A AU2001282450A1 (en) | 2000-08-14 | 2001-08-13 | System and method for business decision making implementation by decision operation trees |
EP01961072A EP1325438A4 (en) | 2000-08-14 | 2001-08-13 | System and method for business decision making implementation by decision operation trees |
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US09/637,933 | 2000-08-14 | ||
US09/637,933 US6622137B1 (en) | 2000-08-14 | 2000-08-14 | System and method for business decision implementation in a billing environment using decision operation trees |
Publications (2)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
WO2002015453A2 true WO2002015453A2 (en) | 2002-02-21 |
WO2002015453A3 WO2002015453A3 (en) | 2002-05-30 |
Family
ID=24557953
Family Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/IL2001/000750 WO2002015453A2 (en) | 2000-08-14 | 2001-08-13 | System and method for business decision making implementation by decision operation trees |
Country Status (4)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (1) | US6622137B1 (en) |
EP (1) | EP1325438A4 (en) |
AU (1) | AU2001282450A1 (en) |
WO (1) | WO2002015453A2 (en) |
Cited By (1)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
WO2011054041A1 (en) * | 2009-11-06 | 2011-05-12 | Cieam Pty Ltd | System and method for business decision-making |
Families Citing this family (25)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US6453334B1 (en) * | 1997-06-16 | 2002-09-17 | Streamtheory, Inc. | Method and apparatus to allow remotely located computer programs and/or data to be accessed on a local computer in a secure, time-limited manner, with persistent caching |
US7131069B1 (en) * | 1998-10-22 | 2006-10-31 | Made2 Manage Systems, Inc. | Navigational interface for ERP system |
US8831995B2 (en) | 2000-11-06 | 2014-09-09 | Numecent Holdings, Inc. | Optimized server for streamed applications |
US7062567B2 (en) | 2000-11-06 | 2006-06-13 | Endeavors Technology, Inc. | Intelligent network streaming and execution system for conventionally coded applications |
US20020087883A1 (en) * | 2000-11-06 | 2002-07-04 | Curt Wohlgemuth | Anti-piracy system for remotely served computer applications |
US7451196B1 (en) | 2000-12-15 | 2008-11-11 | Stream Theory, Inc. | Method and system for executing a software application in a virtual environment |
US20030078900A1 (en) * | 2001-06-29 | 2003-04-24 | Dool Jacques Van Den | Distributed decision processing system with advanced comparison engine |
US20030069868A1 (en) * | 2001-06-29 | 2003-04-10 | Vos Jules Jakob | Distributed decision processing system |
US20030069870A1 (en) * | 2001-06-29 | 2003-04-10 | Ras Paul Coronelis Meindert | Distributed decision processing system for multiple participants having different roles |
US7937363B2 (en) * | 2001-11-02 | 2011-05-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Calculation engine for use in OLAP environments |
CA2361242C (en) * | 2001-11-02 | 2010-11-30 | Cognos Incorporated | A calculation engine for use in olap environments |
US6944274B1 (en) | 2004-03-02 | 2005-09-13 | William Nelson Chatfield | Dynamically configured voice mail system |
US20080162221A1 (en) * | 2004-06-14 | 2008-07-03 | Symphonyrpm, Inc. | Decision object for associating a plurality of business plans |
US7240162B2 (en) * | 2004-10-22 | 2007-07-03 | Stream Theory, Inc. | System and method for predictive streaming |
JP2008527468A (en) | 2004-11-13 | 2008-07-24 | ストリーム セオリー,インコーポレイテッド | Hybrid local / remote streaming |
WO2006102621A2 (en) | 2005-03-23 | 2006-09-28 | Stream Theory, Inc. | System and method for tracking changes to files in streaming applications |
US8024523B2 (en) | 2007-11-07 | 2011-09-20 | Endeavors Technologies, Inc. | Opportunistic block transmission with time constraints |
US20070116245A1 (en) * | 2005-11-16 | 2007-05-24 | Nokia Corporation | Device, a method, a computer program for telephone speed dialing |
US8261345B2 (en) | 2006-10-23 | 2012-09-04 | Endeavors Technologies, Inc. | Rule-based application access management |
EP2026264A2 (en) | 2007-08-17 | 2009-02-18 | Searete LLC | Effectively documenting irregularities in a responsive user's environment |
US8892738B2 (en) | 2007-11-07 | 2014-11-18 | Numecent Holdings, Inc. | Deriving component statistics for a stream enabled application |
US8265789B2 (en) * | 2007-12-03 | 2012-09-11 | Electronics And Telecommunications Research Institute | Network-based robot system and method for action execution of robot |
US9292405B2 (en) | 2013-03-08 | 2016-03-22 | Sap Se | HANA based multiple scenario simulation enabling automated decision making for complex business processes |
US9971344B2 (en) * | 2015-03-27 | 2018-05-15 | Rockwell Automation Technologies, Inc. | Systems and methods for assessing a quality of an industrial enterprise |
FR3076384A1 (en) * | 2017-12-28 | 2019-07-05 | Worldline | DETECTION OF ANOMALIES BY A COMBINING APPROACH SUPERVISORY AND NON-SUPERVISE LEARNING |
Citations (2)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5761650A (en) * | 1995-12-29 | 1998-06-02 | Csg Systems, Inc. | Billing system and method |
US5983220A (en) * | 1995-11-15 | 1999-11-09 | Bizrate.Com | Supporting intuitive decision in complex multi-attributive domains using fuzzy, hierarchical expert models |
Family Cites Families (28)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5274749A (en) | 1984-08-23 | 1993-12-28 | Health Care Expert Systems, Inc. | Interpretative system for systematic learning and support for decision-making |
CA2246949C (en) * | 1991-03-28 | 2000-04-18 | Ibm Canada Limited-Ibm Canada Limitee | Method and means for encoding storing and retrieving hierarchical data processing information for a computer system |
US5732397A (en) | 1992-03-16 | 1998-03-24 | Lincoln National Risk Management, Inc. | Automated decision-making arrangement |
US5664181A (en) * | 1992-03-17 | 1997-09-02 | International Business Machines Corporation | Computer program product and program storage device for a data transmission dictionary for encoding, storing, and retrieving hierarchical data processing information for a computer system |
US5978786A (en) | 1992-05-29 | 1999-11-02 | The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. | System and method for automatically executing decisional rules |
US5530957A (en) * | 1992-08-07 | 1996-06-25 | At&T Corp. | Storing trees in navigable form |
US6009420A (en) | 1992-10-05 | 1999-12-28 | Expert Systems Publishing Co. | Computer-implemented decision management system with dynamically generated questions and answer choices |
US5481649A (en) | 1993-03-09 | 1996-01-02 | The University Of Tennessee Research Corp. | Method and apparatus using a decision tree in an adjunct system cooperating with another physical system |
CA2124479A1 (en) | 1993-06-30 | 1994-12-31 | Thaddeus Julius Kowalski | Methods and apparatus for optimizing decision making |
US5692220A (en) | 1993-09-02 | 1997-11-25 | Coulter Corporation | Decision support system and method for diagnosis consultation in laboratory hematopathology |
US5704018A (en) | 1994-05-09 | 1997-12-30 | Microsoft Corporation | Generating improved belief networks |
JPH0822392A (en) | 1994-07-11 | 1996-01-23 | Hitachi Ltd | Method and device for deciding will |
JP3517285B2 (en) | 1994-09-13 | 2004-04-12 | 富士通株式会社 | Decision support system |
US5596502A (en) | 1994-11-14 | 1997-01-21 | Sunoptech, Ltd. | Computer system including means for decision support scheduling |
US5844817A (en) | 1995-09-08 | 1998-12-01 | Arlington Software Corporation | Decision support system, method and article of manufacture |
US5774121A (en) | 1995-09-18 | 1998-06-30 | Avantos Performance Systems, Inc. | User interface method and system for graphical decision making with categorization across multiple criteria |
US5717865A (en) | 1995-09-25 | 1998-02-10 | Stratmann; William C. | Method for assisting individuals in decision making processes |
US5758026A (en) | 1995-10-13 | 1998-05-26 | Arlington Software Corporation | System and method for reducing bias in decision support system models |
EP0770967A3 (en) | 1995-10-26 | 1998-12-30 | Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. | Decision support system for the management of an agile supply chain |
US5787283A (en) | 1995-10-27 | 1998-07-28 | International Business Machines Corporation | Framework for manufacturing logistics decision support |
US6122345A (en) * | 1996-06-25 | 2000-09-19 | Mci Worldcom, Inc. | System and method for developing and processing automatic response unit (ARU) services |
US5875285A (en) | 1996-11-22 | 1999-02-23 | Chang; Hou-Mei Henry | Object-oriented data mining and decision making system |
US6098062A (en) | 1997-01-17 | 2000-08-01 | Janssen; Terry | Argument structure hierarchy system and method for facilitating analysis and decision-making processes |
US5940816A (en) | 1997-01-29 | 1999-08-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | Multi-objective decision-support methodology |
US6012051A (en) | 1997-02-06 | 2000-01-04 | America Online, Inc. | Consumer profiling system with analytic decision processor |
US6029138A (en) | 1997-08-15 | 2000-02-22 | Brigham And Women's Hospital | Computer system for decision support in the selection of diagnostic and therapeutic tests and interventions for patients |
US6049794A (en) | 1997-12-09 | 2000-04-11 | Jacobs; Charles M. | System for screening of medical decision making incorporating a knowledge base |
US6480839B1 (en) * | 2000-07-18 | 2002-11-12 | Go2Market.Com | System and method for improving database data manipulation using direct indexing within a B*tree index having a tunable index organization |
-
2000
- 2000-08-14 US US09/637,933 patent/US6622137B1/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
-
2001
- 2001-08-13 WO PCT/IL2001/000750 patent/WO2002015453A2/en not_active Application Discontinuation
- 2001-08-13 EP EP01961072A patent/EP1325438A4/en not_active Withdrawn
- 2001-08-13 AU AU2001282450A patent/AU2001282450A1/en not_active Abandoned
Patent Citations (2)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5983220A (en) * | 1995-11-15 | 1999-11-09 | Bizrate.Com | Supporting intuitive decision in complex multi-attributive domains using fuzzy, hierarchical expert models |
US5761650A (en) * | 1995-12-29 | 1998-06-02 | Csg Systems, Inc. | Billing system and method |
Non-Patent Citations (1)
Title |
---|
See also references of EP1325438A2 * |
Cited By (1)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
WO2011054041A1 (en) * | 2009-11-06 | 2011-05-12 | Cieam Pty Ltd | System and method for business decision-making |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
US6622137B1 (en) | 2003-09-16 |
EP1325438A4 (en) | 2006-02-01 |
WO2002015453A3 (en) | 2002-05-30 |
AU2001282450A1 (en) | 2002-02-25 |
EP1325438A2 (en) | 2003-07-09 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US6622137B1 (en) | System and method for business decision implementation in a billing environment using decision operation trees | |
AU2006236095C1 (en) | System and method for analyzing customer profitability | |
Tallman | Strategic management models and resource‐based strategies among MNEs in a host market | |
CN106371984B (en) | A kind of data monitoring method, equipment and system | |
US7831027B2 (en) | Configurable charging system for a telecommunications service provider | |
US5802159A (en) | Method and apparatus for providing a customized telecommunication service | |
US20080140469A1 (en) | Method, system and program product for determining an optimal configuration and operational costs for implementing a capacity management service | |
US20040133487A1 (en) | Modular, convergent customer care and billing system | |
AU2002354789B2 (en) | Business process policy object | |
WO2000007354A1 (en) | Decision network based event pricing system in a component based, object oriented convergent customer care and billing system | |
AU2002354789A1 (en) | Business process policy object | |
US20060031178A1 (en) | Systems and methods for making margin-sensitive price adjustments in an integrated price management system | |
WO2002029984A2 (en) | Generation and execution of custom requests for quote | |
JP2013503398A (en) | Systems and methods employing the use of neural networks for real-time business intelligence and automation control | |
Beauche et al. | Automated service composition with adaptive planning | |
US20060031179A1 (en) | Systems and methods for making margin-sensitive price adjustments in an integrated price management system | |
EP1788517A1 (en) | System and method for analyzing customer profitability | |
CN109858874A (en) | Payment approval process configuration method and device under a kind of more scenes | |
US11544756B2 (en) | Web service method | |
US20060143024A1 (en) | Methods and systems that calculate a projected utility of information technology recovery plans based on contractual agreements | |
AU2013205629B2 (en) | Configurable charging system for a telecommunications service provider | |
US20060143108A1 (en) | Negotiation system | |
Ugray et al. | Dynamic filters and randomized drivers for the multi-start global optimization algorithm MSNLP | |
JP2003134111A (en) | System, method and program for rule-based rating | |
WO2023047511A1 (en) | Contract cancellation prediction system, contract cancellation prediction method, and program recording medium |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
AK | Designated states |
Kind code of ref document: A2 Designated state(s): AE AG AL AM AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BY BZ CA CH CN CO CR CU CZ DE DK DM DZ EC EE ES FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KP KR KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MA MD MG MK MN MW MX MZ NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SG SI SK SL TJ TM TR TT TZ UA UG US UZ VN YU ZA ZW |
|
AL | Designated countries for regional patents |
Kind code of ref document: A2 Designated state(s): GH GM KE LS MW MZ SD SL SZ TZ UG ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE TR BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GQ GW ML MR NE SN TD TG |
|
121 | Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application | ||
AK | Designated states |
Kind code of ref document: A3 Designated state(s): AE AG AL AM AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BY BZ CA CH CN CO CR CU CZ DE DK DM DZ EC EE ES FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KP KR KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MA MD MG MK MN MW MX MZ NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SG SI SK SL TJ TM TR TT TZ UA UG US UZ VN YU ZA ZW |
|
AL | Designated countries for regional patents |
Kind code of ref document: A3 Designated state(s): GH GM KE LS MW MZ SD SL SZ TZ UG ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE TR BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GQ GW ML MR NE SN TD TG |
|
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 2001961072 Country of ref document: EP |
|
REG | Reference to national code |
Ref country code: DE Ref legal event code: 8642 |
|
WWP | Wipo information: published in national office |
Ref document number: 2001961072 Country of ref document: EP |
|
NENP | Non-entry into the national phase |
Ref country code: JP |
|
WWW | Wipo information: withdrawn in national office |
Ref document number: 2001961072 Country of ref document: EP |