System, method and article of manufacture for using receiver operating curves to evaluate predictive utility
Patent 5842199 Issued on November 24, 1998. Estimated Expiration Date: October 18, 2016. Estimated Expiration Date is calculated based on simple USPTO term provisions. It does not account for terminal disclaimers, term adjustments, failure to pay maintenance fees, or other factors which might affect the term of a patent.
707/2, Access augmentation or optimizing705/8, Allocating resources or scheduling for an administrative function705/10, Market analysis, demand forecasting or surveying705/27, Presentation of image or description of sales item (e.g., electronic catalog browsing)707/4, Query formulation, input preparation, or translation707/5, Query augmenting and refining (e.g., inexact access)707/10, Distributed or remote access707/102, Generating database or data structure (e.g., via user interface)707/104.1, Application of database or data structure (e.g., distributed, multimedia, image)707/200, FILE OR DATABASE MAINTENANCE707/205, File allocation707/206, Garbage collection725/16By polling
An electronic information system is provided for determining predictive utility of prediction techniques in ascertaining which items are valued. The information system includes an input mechanism for obtaining a set of measurements of actual value of items presented to a user. The items presented to the user are derived from a plurality of items by utilizing predictions from a prediction technique. A processor is operatively coupled to the input mechanism to generate a quality metric receiver operating curve (ROC) from the set of measurements which corresponds to a measure of effectiveness of the prediction technique in predicting which items are valued by the user. In addition, a method is provided for operating this electronic information system. Also, a storage device readable by a computer system for implementing this method is provided.
Other References
V. Mashayekhi et al., "CAIS: Collaborative Asynchronous Inspection of Software," Department of Computer Science, University of Minnesota, Oct. 25, 1994
P. Resnick et al., "GroupLens: An Open Architecture for Collaborative Filtering of Netnews," Department of Computer Science, University of Minnesota and MIT Center for Coordination Science, Jan. 19, 1995
D. Goldberg et al., "Using Collaborative Filtering to Weave an Information Tapestry," Communications of the ACM, vol. 35, No. 12, Dec. 1992
U. Shardanand et al., "Social Information Filtering: Algorithms for Automating `Word of Mouth`," CHI '95 Mosaic of Creativity, May 7-11, 1995
M. Morita et al., "Information Filtering Based on User Behavior Analysis and Best Match Text Retrieval," School of Information Science, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology. no. date
G. Salton, "The State of Retrieval System Evaluation," vol. 28, No. 4, (1992) pp. 441-449
T. Saracevic, Ph D., "Evaluation in Information Retrieval," School of Communication, Information and Library Studies, Rutgers University, pp. 138-146. No date
T. B. Roby, "Belief States: A Preliminary Empirical Study," Technical Documentary Report No. ESD-TDR-64-238, Mar. 1964
References, Publications of the U.S. Army Personnel Research Office, OCRD, DA, p. 5, No date
C. S. Gersoni et al., Technical Research Note 143, "Values Associated with Military Caseer Motivation"
L. V. Gordon et al., Technical Research Note 143, "Values Associated with Military Caseer Motivation". Mar. 1964
L. J. Stricker, "Difficulty and Other Correlates of Criticalness Response Style at the Item Level," Educational Testing Service, May 1961
Belkin, N. et al., "Information filtering and information retrieval: Two sides of the same coin?" Communications of the ACM, 35(12), 16 pgs. (Dec. 1992)
Foltz, P. et al., "Personalized information delivery: an analysis of information filtering methods," Communications of the ACM, 35(12), 15 pgs. (Dec. 1992)
Loeb, S., "Architecting personalized delivery of multimedia information," Communications of the ACM, 35(12), 15 pgs. (Dec. 1992
October 18, 2016. Estimated Expiration Date is calculated based on simple USPTO term provisions. It does not account for terminal disclaimers, term adjustments, failure to pay maintenance fees, or other factors which might affect the term of a patent.
