U.S. patent application number 11/736236 was filed with the patent office on 2007-08-09 for apparatus and method for displaying records responsive to a database query.
Invention is credited to Philip J. Rosenthal, Edward J. Walters.
Application Number | 20070185850 11/736236 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 38001111 |
Filed Date | 2007-08-09 |
United States Patent
Application |
20070185850 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Walters; Edward J. ; et
al. |
August 9, 2007 |
Apparatus and Method for Displaying Records Responsive to a
Database Query
Abstract
An apparatus and method for simultaneously displaying both
record names and the associated files responsive to a user's search
over a database. A user conducts a routine search query over a
database or group of databases of records containing, for example,
text documents, or alphabetical concordances thereof. The search
engine returns a list of records responsive to the user's query. In
contrast to the standard list of record identifiers, the apparatus
displays both the identifiers and selected portions of those
records or other useful information, as defined by the user,
facilitating quick review. The user is able to sort the list of
these responsive records in a variety of ways, either before the
search, or within the list of results, to expedite review. The
apparatus identifies records that have been reviewed previously by
marking them as "viewed" links. Finally, when reviewing any
responsive record in full, the complete list of records is
displayed in a side panel, in a way that still allows resorting by
the user. This side panel display may be re-sorted "on the fly." It
also allows the user to see the identifiers of records anywhere in
the list, and to easily jump, such as with a single mouse click, to
any record in the list.
Inventors: |
Walters; Edward J.;
(Alexandria, VA) ; Rosenthal; Philip J.;
(Washington, DC) |
Correspondence
Address: |
WHITHAM, CURTIS & CHRISTOFFERSON & COOK, P.C.
11491 SUNSET HILLS ROAD
SUITE 340
RESTON
VA
20190
US
|
Family ID: |
38001111 |
Appl. No.: |
11/736236 |
Filed: |
April 17, 2007 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
09707910 |
Nov 8, 2000 |
7216115 |
|
|
11736236 |
Apr 17, 2007 |
|
|
|
60164549 |
Nov 10, 1999 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
1/1 ;
707/999.003; 707/E17.082 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G06F 16/338 20190101;
Y10S 707/99933 20130101; Y10S 707/917 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
707/003 |
International
Class: |
G06F 17/30 20060101
G06F017/30 |
Claims
1. A method for displaying records responsive to a database query
where the records are characterized by having identifiers and
content elements, said method comprising the steps of: performing
said database query to select one or more records from a database
or group of databases, wherein said one or more records selected by
said performing of said database query comprise one or more
responsive records; displaying a list of identifiers for a
plurality of said records which are responsive to said database
query; and displaying, simultaneously with said step of displaying
a list of identifiers, content elements of at least one of said
responsive records, wherein said list of identifiers and said
selected elements are displayed simultaneously in separate
respective areas of a display.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein said content elements comprise at
least a portion of one of said responsive records.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein said identifiers comprise case
citations.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of
identifying and marking records displayed in a prior search
request.
5. A method for displaying records responsive to a database query
where the records are characterized by having identifiers and
content elements, said method comprising the steps of: performing
said database query to select one or more records from a database
or group of databases, wherein said one or more records selected by
said performing of said database query comprise one or more
responsive records; displaying a list of identifiers for a
plurality of said records which are responsive to said database
query; displaying, simultaneously with said step of displaying a
list of identifiers, content elements of at least one of said
responsive records; and identifying and marking records in
accordance with at least one of a user action in regard to a
corresponding responsive record and a prior search request.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of sorting
said responsive records.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein said responsive records include a
record name; a record citation; a record date; and a record
author.
8. The method of claim 6, further comprising the step of computing
relevance of said responsive records.
9. The method of claim 7, further comprising the step of computing
relevance of said records.
10. The method of claim 7, wherein said list of responsive records
is sorted according to at least one of said record name, said
record citation, said record date and said record author.
11.-13. (canceled)
14. The method of claim 9, wherein said list of responsive records
is sorted according to said relevance of said records.
15. The method of claim 6, further comprising the step of resolving
ties in a preceding sort.
16. (canceled)
17. The method of claim 1, wherein said responsive records are
identified with at least one of text, icons, color or a browser
viewed link designation.
18.-20. (canceled)
21. An apparatus for displaying records responsive to a database
query where the records are characterized by having identifiers and
content elements, said apparatus comprising: means for displaying a
list of identifiers for at least two of said records which are
responsive to a database query means for displaying content
elements of at least one of said records simultaneously with
display of said list of identifiers, wherein said list of
identifiers and at least one of said content elements are displayed
simultaneously in separate respective areas of a display.
22. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein said content elements
comprise at least a portion of one of said responsive records.
23. The apparatus of claim 21, further comprising a means for
identifying said records which are responsive to a database
query.
24. (canceled)
25. An apparatus for displaying records responsive to a database
query where the records are characterized by having identifiers and
content elements, said apparatus comprising: means for displaying a
list of identifiers for at least two of said records which are
responsive to a database query means for displaying content
elements of at least one of said records simultaneously with
display of said list of identifiers, and a means for marking
records in accordance with at least one of a user action in regard
to a corresponding responsive record and a prior database
query.
26. The apparatus of claim 21, further comprising means for sorting
said records which are responsive to a database query.
27. The apparatus of claim 26, wherein said means for sorting
comprises an algorithm.
28. The apparatus of claim 27, wherein said algorithm comprises:
means for computing the frequency of occurrence of a plurality of
search terms; and means for ordering said records which are
responsive to a database query based on said frequency.
29. The apparatus of claim 28, wherein said algorithm further
comprises: means for computing proximity of said search terms; and
means for ordering said records which are responsive to a database
query based on said proximity.
30. The apparatus of claim 27, wherein said algorithm comprises:
means for computing proximity of a plurality of search terms; and
means for ordering said records which are responsive to a database
query based on said proximity.
31. The apparatus of claim 27, wherein said algorithm comprises:
means for computing the number of times each of said records which
are responsive to a database query is referenced by each other
record of said records which are responsive to said database query;
and ordering said records which are responsive to said database
query based on said number.
32. The apparatus of claim 31, wherein said means for computing
comprises a table containing the number of times each of said
records which is responsive to said database query is referenced by
each other record which is responsive to said database query.
33. The apparatus of claim 27, wherein said algorithm comprises
means for ordering said records which are responsive to a database
query according to the number of times each of said records which
is responsive to said database query has been selected by prior
users.
34. The apparatus of claim 21, further comprising means of
computing the relevance of said records which are responsive to a
database query.
35. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein said records are sorted
according to at least one of a record name, a record citation, a
record date and a record author.
36.-38. (canceled)
39. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein said records are sorted
according to a record rank, said record rank being determined by a
previously-applied algorithm.
40. The apparatus of claim 21, further comprising means for
identifying records contained in said list of responsive records
that were selected responsive to a prior search query.
41. The apparatus as recited in claim 40 wherein said identifying
means comprises text.
42.-49. (canceled)
50. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of replacing
said displayed content element with a different content
element.
51. The apparatus of claim 21, further comprising a means of
replacing said displayed content element with a different content
element.
52. The method of claim 1, wherein said content elements include at
least a portion of a first paragraph and said displayed content
element is at least a portion of said first paragraph.
53. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein said content elements
include at least a portion of a first paragraph and said displayed
content element is at least a portion of said first paragraph.
54. The method of claim 1, wherein said content elements include at
least a portion of a paragraph and further comprising the steps of:
identifying a most relevant paragraph of said record; and choosing
said portion of said most relevant paragraph as said content
element to display.
55. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein said content elements
include at least a portion of a paragraph and further comprising a
means for: identifying a most relevant paragraph of said record;
and choosing said portion of said most relevant paragraph as said
content element to display.
56. A method for displaying records responsive to a database query
on a screen having at least two panels where the records are
characterized by having identifiers and content elements,
comprising the steps of: displaying simultaneously in a first panel
the identifier and at least one content element of at least one
record; and displaying in a second panel the identifier of each
record of at least two different records.
57. An apparatus for displaying records responsive to a database
query on a screen having at least two panels where the records are
characterized by having identifiers and content elements,
comprising: means for simultaneously displaying in a first panel
the identifier and at least one content element of at least one
record; and means for displaying in a second panel the identifier
of each record of at least two different records.
58. The method of claim 6 further comprising the step of re-sorting
said records responsive to a database query.
59. The apparatus of claim 26, further comprising the means for
re-sorting said records responsive to a database query.
60. The method of claim 56 further comprising the step of sorting
said records responsive to a database query.
61. The apparatus of claim 57 further comprising means for sorting
said records responsive to a database query.
62. The method of claim 1 where said identifiers are identified
using XML tags.
63. The method of claim 1 where said content elements are
identified using XML tags.
64. The apparatus of claim 21 where said identifiers are identified
using XML tags.
65. The apparatus of 21 where said content elements are identified
using XML tags.
66. The method of claim 1 wherein a prior search is conducted
before the database query, further comprising the step of
identifying responsive records that were printed in the prior
search.
67. The apparatus of claim 21 wherein a prior search is conducted
before the database query, further comprising means of identifying
responsive records that were printed in the prior search.
68. The apparatus of claim 31, wherein the apparatus further
comprises: means for computing a frequency of occurrence of a
plurality of search terms and wherein the ordering of said records
responsive to a database query is based on said number and said
frequency.
69. A method of selecting documents responsive to a database query
comprising steps of: identifying keywords in the database query;
computing a frequency of selection of documents by users that used
a prior database query containing at least one of said keywords;
and choosing documents such that said frequency exceeds a threshold
frequency.
70. An apparatus for selecting documents responsive to a database
query, said apparatus comprising: means for identifying keywords in
the database query; means for computing a frequency of selection of
documents by users that used a prior database query containing at
least one of said keywords; and means for choosing documents such
that said frequency exceeds a threshold frequency.
71. The apparatus of claim 27 wherein said algorithm comprises:
means for identifying keywords in the database query; means for
computing the frequency that documents were selected by users that
used a prior search query containing at least one of said keywords;
and means for ordering said records responsive to a database query
based on said frequency.
72. A method for analyzing a list of records which are responsive
to a database query, said method comprising steps of: choosing a
means for sorting said records; viewing said records; and choosing
a second means for sorting said records.
73. A apparatus for analyzing a list of records which are
responsive to a database query, said apparatus comprising: means
for choosing a means for sorting said records; means for viewing
said records; and means for choosing a second means for sorting
said records.
74. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of
identifying records which are responsive to a prior database
query.
75. The apparatus of claim 21, further comprising means for
identifying records responsive to a prior database query.
76. The method of claim 60 further comprising the step of
re-sorting said records responsive to a database query.
77. The apparatus of claim 61 further comprising means for
re-sorting said records responsive to a database query.
78. The apparatus of claim 27, wherein said algorithm comprises:
means for computing the percentage of records responsive to a
database query which reference each other record of said records
which are responsive to said database query; and ordering said
records which are responsive to said database query based on said
percentage.
79. The apparatus of claim 78, wherein said means for computing
comprises a table containing the number of times each record which
is responsive to said database query references each other record
which is responsive to said database query.
Description
RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] This application claims priority under 35 U.S.C. .sctn. 119
to provisional application No. 60/164,549, filed Nov. 10, 1999, the
entirety of which is incorporated herein by reference. This
application also relates to co-pending application Ser. No. ______,
filed on even date herewith, entitled "Improved Relevance Sorting
for Database Searches," the entirety of which is incorporated
herein by reference.
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
[0002] The present invention pertains to the field of computerized
information search, display, and retrieval systems and methods.
More particularly, the present invention relates to an apparatus
and method of expediting the review of records responsive to such a
search, by more efficiently displaying, representing, sorting, and
navigating such responsive records.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0003] For centuries, researchers have pored over books, reading
document after document to inform their knowledge of a certain
field. These searches are time-consuming and cumbersome, frequently
involving the review of documents that are not on point failure to
locate relevant documents. With the advent of computers, companies
have created searchable databases of research materials. In a
computerized search, the user enters a search query, usually using
"keywords" or Boolean search terms, and is given a list of
documents in the database that meet the requirements of the search.
The user can then review responsive documents, search within that
subset of responsive documents, or conduct another query. Research
of this sort generally takes place on a local computer system, on
compact discs or other storage devices, over a dial-up modem
connection, and more recently via the Internet.
[0004] Research materials can comprise files in various formats,
from unstructured strings of characters, sentences, or text files,
to very highly structured data. They can be of a wide variety of
data classes, such as words, numbers, graphics, etc. In other
cases, the research materials might be contained, for example, in a
database. A simple database might be comprised of a single file
containing many records, each of which contains the same set of
elements (sometimes referred to as fields, items, etc.) where each
element is a certain fixed width and a certain format. More complex
databases often contain a large number of files, with each file
itself containing many, many records of both fixed and
variable-width elements in a variety of formats. One great
advantage of searching databases by computer is that the user may
determine how broadly or narrowly to conduct searches, allowing the
user, to a certain extent, to control the number of responsive
records. This is especially helpful because researchers, to be
thorough, frequently must review each responsive record, often
numbering in the hundreds or thousands. One example of this type of
text retrieval system is Anglo-Dutch conglomerate Reed-Elsevier's
"Lexis/Nexis" system.
[0005] Despite great advances in computer-assisted research,
reviewing responsive records remains time consuming, inefficient,
and dreadfully dull. Searches yield sets of responsive records that
are both underinclusive and overinclusive--queries do not return
important records that are not literally responsive to a user's
Boolean request, and they often return irrelevant records that are
incidentally responsive to a user's query. In order to tell whether
a query was well formulated, researchers must often review, one
record at a time, scores of responsive records. In a long list of
records, the user may be required to review all responsive records
in order to guarantee the comprehensiveness of the research
assignment. Many times, reviewing records responsive to a query is
akin to looking for a needle in a haystack.
[0006] A further disadvantage with typical computerized research
systems is that search engines will return a list of only the
titles or other identifiers of responsive records, which tells very
little about the contents of those records. To view in full a
record in the list, the user must use a mouse or other pointing
device to click on a link in the list, which takes the user to the
beginning of that individual record. The user can either skip
sequentially from record to record, through the entire list of
records, in the order they were listed, or jump back and forth
between individual records and a list of identifiers. For a user to
skip several records ahead or back in the list, she must either
review all the records in between, or return to the list of
identifiers and click a separate link. Review of results involves a
lot of toggling back and forth between a list of responsive records
and the full body of the records themselves, and especially with
slow connections to the Internet, this can be time consuming.
[0007] A further disadvantage of current computerized research
systems is that users frequently retrieve the same records, over
and over, in subsequent searches. One common problem is illustrated
by the following scenario. Assume that a user conducts a search
over the database of research materials, yielding 80 results. The
user reads all 80 records and decides that she did not find a
record responsive to her needs. The user then reformulates the
query, to which the search engine returns 50 responsive records.
Unable to remember all the titles of the 80 records already
reviewed, the user must then read through all 50 records returned
by the second query, even records she has already reviewed.
[0008] Therefore, what is needed is an apparatus and method for
expediting computerized research by allowing users to view more
information about responsive records in a summary fashion. This
would allow users to view, in a list of responsive records, both
the record identifier, as well as certain portions, fields or
elements of those records, as determined by the user. Researchers
then more easily could skim a list of responsive records to
determine whether they are important to the research task at hand.
The apparatus would further allow users to change the type or
length of fields or elements that are listed, either at the time of
the query or while reviewing the list of results. Furthermore, when
a user reviews a record in full, the apparatus would display the
list of responsive records in a "side panel," so that the user
could re-sort the list "on the fly," or jump effortlessly several
records forward or back in the list of responsive records.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0009] In view of the problems associated with digital search and
retrieval systems, the present invention advantageously expedites
computerized research by providing an apparatus and method for
displaying, representing, sorting, and navigating responsive
records.
[0010] The present invention also provides a mechanism for
displaying a list of records responsive to a user's search that
includes user-defined portions of responsive records. Providing
more information in a list of responsive records reduces the need
to access the full text of records in order to determine whether
the record is relevant to the user's research.
[0011] The invention also reduces the user's need to switch back
and forth between lists of identifiers of responsive records and
the full body of those records, by displaying fields or other
portions of the records in the list of responsive records along
with the record identifiers, and by displaying the list of
responsive records (e.g., by displaying their identifiers) along
with the display of a portion of any responsive record, such as
displaying the record in full.
[0012] The invention advantageously expedites review of responsive
records, both by allowing users to sort the list of such records,
and by showing users which records they have already reviewed. This
may also be achieved by listing identifiers for responsive records
in a side panel while the user reviews any responsive record in
full. This allows the user to select different records or to jump
forward or back a number of records at a time by clicking on the
identifiers. This also allows users to re-sort the list of
responsive records in the side panel.
[0013] One embodiment of the present invention provides a method
for displaying records responsive to a database query comprising
the steps of: (i) displaying a list of identifiers for a plurality
of responsive records; and (ii) displaying selected elements of at
least one of the responsive records, wherein the list of
identifiers and selected elements are displayed simultaneously.
[0014] In yet another embodiment, an apparatus for displaying
records responsive to a database query is presented. The apparatus
comprises means for displaying a list of responsive records, and
means for displaying selected elements of at least one of the
responsive records, wherein the list of identifiers and selected
elements are displayed simultaneously.
[0015] In other aspects of the present invention, an apparatus and
a method for expediting legal research, in computerized searches of
legal materials, including without limitation judicial opinions,
statutes, regulations, regulatory decisions, Security and Exchange
Commission filings, briefs, pleadings, docket entries, treatises,
articles, and other law-related information, are provided.
[0016] In yet another aspect of the present invention, information
retrieved from searches over databases of subsequent history
information for such legal materials is displayed in user-defined
lists. This embodiment includes displaying a list of document
titles in a side panel while viewing the full text of any document
returned by the search. In a further aspect of the present
invention, a list of the titles of responsive records, as well as
user-defined portions of those records, are displayed. In yet a
further aspect of the present invention, the responsive records
whose identifiers, title, or other elements are to be displayed,
are identified by use of an apparatus that uses the searching and
sorting methods described below.
[0017] Typically, although not necessarily, the present invention
is implemented along with, or as part of, a computerized
information search and retrieval system. The user conducts a search
by selecting a database and parameters for the search (including,
for example, date or field restrictions), then enters a Boolean or
other search query. The user then selects display preferences, such
as how she wants to sort the responsive records and what portions
of those records (if any) should be displayed in the list. The
computer system performs a search of a database and/or associated
alphabetical concordance and returns a list of records that are
responsive to the user's search.
[0018] The search of the database may be done by standard methods,
such as standard Boolean searching. Alternatively, or in addition,
the search may be modified or replaced with other kinds of
searches, such as natural language searches. These alternative
searches may return records that would not normally be responsive
to a Boolean search. In another embodiment, a standard Boolean
search might be followed by an "extended reference search." The
extended reference search begins by checking which documents are
referenced by those returned by the standard Boolean search. Any
document referenced by more than a predetermined percentage, e.g.,
15% in a preferred embodiment, of the responsive documents, is then
added to the search result even if it is not originally part of the
search result. This process may be repeated recursively.
[0019] In another class of embodiments, the results of prior
searches, either by the same user, by similar users, or by all
users, are tracked. In one embodiment, the number of times a record
is returned by a search for given terms or keywords is recorded in
a table or array in a manner in which the number is linked to the
search terms or keywords. Using this table or array, it is possible
to perform a search of a database by returning records that were
frequently returned by other similar searches (e.g., those using
the same or similar terms or keywords) without actually performing
a Boolean search. In another embodiment, the results of similar
searches are used to supplement the results of performing a
standard Boolean search. In another embodiment, the table or array
of similar results is used to modify the relevance of records. If a
record is found with high frequency on that table, its relevance
score is increased, affecting the position in which it, its
identifier, or some other element, will be displayed. All of the
embodiments involving the array or table containing counts of the
number of times each record is returned by similar searches may be
enhanced by tracking instances in which the record was not only
returned as responsive to a search, but also was selected by the
user. In this embodiment, for example, the search would be counted
in the table or array only if the user actually printed,
downloaded, or read the record in full.
[0020] Some of the advantages of the non-Boolean search features of
the present invention are illustrated in the preferred embodiment
of a legal research system. Here, the user searches, for example,
judicial opinions for certain terms or keywords. In one embodiment,
a Boolean search is first performed, returning a set of opinions.
The search engine then checks each opinion to determine which other
documents are referenced by those opinions. In another embodiment,
rather than using a search engine, a table or array is used to
store a list of all references by each document, to each document,
or both. Then, any document referenced by 15% of the documents in
the initial search result are added to the search result. The
process may be repeated over the new set of documents. The number
of references to each document may also be used in determining its
relevance and the position where each document or its citation may
be displayed. For example, any documents cited by more than 50% of
the search result may be placed ahead of those only cited by 30% of
the search result. In another embodiment, the percentage of
documents citing each document is only one relevance factor,
combined with other measures of relevance to allow sorting. In
another embodiment, a table is constructed with all or most search
words or keywords. Then, each time a search is performed with those
words or keywords, the results are added to the table with those
words or keywords. In another embodiment, the records are only
recorded in the table when a user accesses the document, for
example to download or print it. However constructed, this table is
used to identify documents that other users have found to be
important for certain terms or keywords. If a user searches for
"breach" and "contract," for example, the documents that appear
most often under these terms (or only those that appear most often
under both terms) can be returned, either as an independent search
result or as a supplement to a standard Boolean search result. The
number of times a given document has been found responsive to
similar searches can also be used as a measure of relevance, either
alone or in combination with another relevance index.
[0021] Preferably, the system then displays a list of responsive
records according to the user's preferences. For the preferred
embodiment of a display of a list of responsive legal documents,
the list may include, for example, any combination of the following
elements: a descriptive title of each document, its docket number,
citation, source, authorship, date information, a search relevance
ranking, as well as any text the user elected to display. Displayed
text could include, by way of example and not limitation, the first
paragraph of the document, the first 50 words of the document, the
first n lines of the document (where n is an integer), the
paragraph of the document most relevant to the search, or no text
at all.
[0022] Relevance is computed as a function of the frequency of
appearance of the search terms and their proximity. For example, in
one preferred embodiment, records that have a higher frequency of
search terms are considered more relevant than those with a lower
frequency. In another preferred embodiment, extra weight is given
to records that contain all or most of the search terms, even if
the absolute frequency is lower. In a further preferred embodiment,
the number of words between each search term and the nearest search
term is computed. Records that have a higher frequency of pairs of
search terms with few words between them are deemed more relevant
that those with lesser proximity between them. In another preferred
embodiment, frequency and proximity are combined.
[0023] For example, assume there are three documents, 1, 2, and 3,
found by a Boolean search for three search terms, A, B, and C.
Assume the documents have the following frequencies and
proximities:
[0024] Document 1: A at positions 2, 76, 756, 767, 4956, and
95654.
[0025] Document 2: A at 2 and 6, B at 3 and 9, C at 17
[0026] Document 3: A at 2 B at 877 and C at 8604
[0027] If simple frequency is the measure of relevance, document 1
is the most relevant with six search terms, then documents 2 and 3.
If double weighting is given for occurrences of all three search
terms, 2 is the most relevant, with 1 and 3 tied for second most
relevant. Using proximity, document 2 is the most relevant because
the first A and the first B are adjacent, the second A and second B
are 3 apart, and the last B and first C are 8 apart. If an index is
created by summing the proximity of the nearest three pairs, the
index for document 3 is 12. For document 1, the index is 775 and
for document 3 there are not enough pairs to evaluate proximity. In
order of relevance, the documents are sorted 2, 1, 3. Frequency and
proximity may be combined in a variety of ways. For example, they
both can be applied separately and the results averaged.
Alternately, the proximity index can be normalized to the greatest
frequency of search terms found in any record and then added to the
frequency.
[0028] The user could scroll up and down the list, reviewing both
the titles (or other identifiers of responsive records) and the
relevant portions of those documents. The user could re-sort the
list on the fly, by any information in the list. She could also
change the amount or type of text, fields, or other portions of
records displayed in the list. This allows the user, at a glance
and without accessing the documents in full, to better evaluate the
usefulness of her query, and to evaluate which records are
important to the research task at hand more efficiently.
[0029] The display also may allow the user to determine which
records, if any, have been returned by prior searches or that have
been selected by the user, for example, for printing. To do this, a
running list of records, identified by their unique identifier, is
preserved and associated with the user's unique ID. When a
subsequent set of records is to be displayed, the identifiers of
those records are checked against the preserved list to find the
repeated documents. Repeated records are identified in the display,
for example, by making their identifier's bold or of a different
color. Similarly, if the user selects the document, for example by
clicking on its identifier or by printing it, that document's
identifier is added to a different list which is also associated
with the user's ID. The identifier's of new records to be displayed
are also checked against this list to determine those already
selected. They are displayed in a different fashion, for example by
using a different color, boldness, or a special icon.
[0030] Typically, the user selects any document on the list, using
input devices such as a mouse, keyboard, stylus, microphone, or
other selection device. For the preferred embodiment where the
system or method of displaying records is combined with a search to
first identify those records, the computer system then displays the
full record with search terms highlighted therein. The user can
jump from term to term, page to page, or field to field, or element
to element, within a record, or jump from one record to the next
using, for example, navigation keys. In addition, the system
displays a list of the titles of all responsive records in a side
panel. This list may be re-sorted on the fly, and the user may
scroll up and down the list of responsive records, independent of
the individual record being displayed. Using the methods described
above, the user can select any record in the side panel--including
records several places ahead or behind the displayed record in the
complete list--and the system will display the selected record in
full (or in part), with the complete list of responsive records in
a side panel.
[0031] In one preferred embodiment of the present invention, the
database is highly structured using XML tagging. This permits ready
identification of all elements, fields and other unique portions of
each record, such as the record identifier. XML-identified content
is then used in the displays in a variety of ways, including to
identify the records.
[0032] Another preferred embodiment of the invention is to apply it
to legal databases of cases, statutes, regulations, and
administrative opinions. This embodiment is illustrated in the
drawings. The steps in all methods may be performed in any order,
unless expressly stated otherwise.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0033] The present invention is illustrated by way of example, and
not by way of limitation, in the figures of the accompanying
drawings and in which like reference numerals refer to similar
elements and in which:
[0034] FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary embodiment of a window
displayed on a CRT or other display, which can be used as a user
interface for the present invention, including a search dialog
box.
[0035] FIG. 2 illustrates a list of records returned by the user's
search, including several sorting, display, and navigation
features.
[0036] FIG. 3 illustrates the display of the full text of a
responsive record, along with a side panel including the list of
titles of the returned records.
[0037] FIG. 4 illustrates a flow diagram for a query in one
embodiment of the invention.
[0038] FIG. 5 illustrates a flow diagram of options provided to a
user by one embodiment of the invention after a query is
performed.
[0039] FIG. 6 illustrates a flow diagram of one embodiment of the
invention after responsive records are displayed in part or in
full.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0040] An apparatus and method are described for displaying
records. In the preferred embodiment, such apparatus and method are
combined with an apparatus and method for expediting legal research
by displaying, representing, sorting, and navigating text files
identified by a search engine. In the following description, for
the purposes of explanation, numerous specific details such as
mathematical formulae, algorithms, menus, and the like are set
forth in order to provide the best mode of the present invention.
It will be apparent, however, to one skilled in the art that the
present invention may be practiced without these specific details,
and is not limited to the specific details shown and described. In
other instances, well known structures and devices are shown in
block diagram form to more clearly set forth the present
invention.
[0041] FIG. 1 shows a search screen or window 100, as may be
displayed on a CRT, as an example of one possible user interface
for the query screen on a research system. A user first selects a
database or group of databases on which to conduct a search 103,
for example, cases of the U.S. Supreme Court. The user then
delimits the search using such factors as date restrictions 104,
and then enters either a Boolean text search 106, a field search
within the database 105, or a combination of the two.
[0042] Before or after conducting the search, the user may
customize the list of records that will be returned, including how
the results of the search will be organized and what information
the system will return about each record. She may select fields by
which to sort results on the search screen 100, such as the date of
the record, the relevance of the record to the search, or by which
database the record came from 101. The user may sort first by one
criteria, then break ties using second- and third-order sorting
fields. So, for example, if the user chose to sort by "Court
Hierarchy," then by "Date," then by "Search Relevance," the system
would display documents issued by the highest court first, for
example from the U.S. Supreme Court. Supreme Court documents would
be further sorted in date order, and cases from the same date would
be listed in order of relevance. In the preferred embodiment,
instead of customizing the sort order, a user could also use the
system default.
[0043] The system also allows the user to decide how many records
to list per page in the list of returned records 107. The user may
select a smaller number of records to display on each web page, for
example, to speed the loading time of the web page. Conversely, the
user may select a large number so that she can view all the
returned records without having to link to another page. Finally,
the user may customize what kind of text or other portions of the
record will be displayed in the list of returned records 102. For
example, with text documents, the user may select the first 6 lines
of the document, the first 12 lines of the document, the first
paragraph of the document, the most relevant passage or paragraph
from the document, or no text at all. In one embodiment, the user
then conducts the query by selecting "Search" 107.
[0044] In one preferred embodiment of the invention, it is combined
with a search engine that searches the selected database and
returns a user-customized screen 200 listing responsive records,
which is illustrated in FIG. 2. For each responsive record, the
system lists, for example, a document title or other identifier
210, which is hyperlinked to the full record. Each entry also may
display information that identifies the record, its source, date,
and a relevance score for the query, as well as selected text or
other portions of the record itself 201. Records previously viewed
by the user would be identified as such, for example, either
through the use of text, icons, or display of the record identifier
as a "viewed hyperlink," using, for example, either a different
color for the identifier, or the browser default for viewed
hyperlinks. In a preferred embodiment, records that appeared in a
previous list of responsive records, but which were not selected
for a full-text view, are identified as such, either with text, an
icon, or by the use of a different color for the hyperlinked
identifier. Thus the user can avoid duplication of effort, by
choosing not to view records in full that she has already reviewed.
She would also be able to identify records added to the list after
she modified a search query or conducted a new search with
different terms.
[0045] As requested by the user, the system will display a certain
number of records per page 202, as well as a link the user can use
to jump to the next n records in the list 203. This display allows
the user to scroll through the list of records in whatever order is
most helpful in the search. The display of text or other portions
of each record reduces the amount of time and effort spent by the
user switching back and forth between screens trying to discern
whether a given document is important to the research being
conducted. Because the user can customize and view text or other
portions of records in the list, she has more information on the
list screen, allowing her to avoid reading records that are
demonstrably unimportant or demonstrably irrelevant, based on a
reading of the displayed portion.
[0046] In one preferred embodiment, the user can re-sort the
document list on the fly, either by clicking any of the headers
204, in this example "Case," "Court," "Date," or "Relevance."
Clicking "Date," for example, would re-sort the records in
descending order of the record's issue date. The user could also
re-sort the list using the sorting options in the side panel 205,
which offers the same multi-level sorting options as the search
query screen 101.
[0047] From the list of displayed cases in FIG. 2, the user can
also change the number of records displayed per page 206 and the
amount and type of text or other portions of the record to display
in the list 207, the same options offered in the search query
screen in 107 and 102. When the user has selected new display
properties, she presses "Resort" 208, and the system re-sorts the
list. These sorting and re-sorting options allow the user to review
the list of responsive records more efficiently--especially when
the list is long, or when the user is looking for a specific
document. Re-sorting allows the user to manipulate the list to
bring important records to the top, using any of a number of
different sorting algorithms. The user can conduct a new search
("N"), modify the current search query ("M"), or search within the
displayed results ("R") by clicking the appropriate button 209 for
those tasks. The user may also decide to sort the results by other
sorting mechanisms, such as the extended reference search method
described above by clicking similar buttons or choosing different
options in a tab.
[0048] In order to view any record in the list in full (or to view
an expanded portion of any record), the user would click the
hyperlinked identifier of the record. The system would then display
the record in full, as illustrated in FIG. 3. One section of the
screen would display the full record itself 301. The user can
navigate the text using a standard browser scroll bar, by using a
keyboard to move the cursor within the record, or by way of
navigation buttons 305-307. By using "Term" navigation buttons 305,
the user can jump from search term to search term within the
document 305. Similarly, by using "Page" navigation buttons 306,
the user can jump ahead or back one page at a time. Finally, the
user can use the "Case" or "Document" navigation buttons 307 to
jump one record forward or back in the list of responsive records.
During this process, no matter what part of the record the user is
viewing, the record's title or other identifier and citation
information appear in a navigation bar 308 at the bottom of the
screen.
[0049] A section of the display screen, depicted as panel 302 in
FIG. 3, is used to display a list of responsive records 302. The
list displays in the same order as it last appeared in the record
list in FIG. 2, that is, before the user selected the full text or
other portion of a record on the list. The user may scroll through
this list independently of the full text or other portion of a
record from within the list. The title of the displayed record will
appear highlighted within the list in this side panel. This allows
the user to view the list of responsive records without returning
to the full list, and greatly facilitates navigation of the list.
For example, the user could select to view the full text of a
record five titles down the list by scrolling down and selecting
the hyperlinked title or other identifier of that record, without
having to go back to the complete list of responsive records. This
reduces the transaction time of the standard mode of reviewing
records in the list.
[0050] As with the responsive record list illustrated in FIG. 2,
the preferred embodiment identifies records previously viewed by
the user, either through the use of text, icons, or display of the
title as a "viewed hyperlink," using either a different color for
the title or identifier, or the browser default for viewed
hyperlinks. Again, records that appeared in a previous list of
responsive records, but which were not selected for a full-text
view, can be identified as such, either with text, an icon, or by
the use of a different color for the hyperlinked title.
[0051] The user has the option of re-sorting the list on the fly
from the full record text screen of FIG. 3. By selecting the
"Re-sort" tab 303, the user is given all of the same multi-level
sorting options from the search query screen 101, and from the
screen listing the responsive record 200. This facilitates review
of recording the list, allowing the user to full the most helpful
records to the top of the list, without having to go back to the
full list of responsive records illustrated in FIG. 2.
[0052] Finally, from the full text view illustrated in FIG. 3, the
user has a series of navigation options. She may return to the full
list of responsive records illustrated in FIG. 2 by selecting a
button option 304. She may also conduct a new search, modify her
existing query, or search within the results by selecting one of
those button options 309, similar to the options 209 in the list of
responsive records illustrated in FIG. 2.
[0053] FIG. 4 is a flowchart illustrating one embodiment of the
steps involved in a simple search of a database as part of this
invention. First, in step 401, the user formulates and enters a
query. The query may use key words or phrases and be constructed
using Boolean logic. The user may then select the databases in
which the search will run, for example, the U.S. Supreme Court, or
the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (step 402). Next, the user
selects the amount of text to be displayed for each responsive
document in the list of responsive documents. See step 403. The
user may also select the sort order for responsive documents (step
404). Documents can be sorted, for example, by court hierarchy,
date, and relevance, in any order. The user may also select more
advanced document sorting options. Alternatively, the user may skip
steps 402, 403, and 404, instead relying on default values.
[0054] The user then submits the query, and the system judges
whether or not the query is well-formed (e.g., if the query is a
Boolean search, whether the syntax is correct; alternatively,
whether the user selected at least one database to search over) in
step 405. If the query is not well-formed, the system returns an
error message in step 406, then displays the query for editing in
step 407. If the search is well-formed, the system queries the
relevant database or look-up table associated with selected
database in step 408. If one or more responsive records is not
found via step 409, the query is again displayed for editing when
processing is returned to step 407, perhaps with a message
indicating that no responsive records were found. If responsive
records do exist, the system selects text from each responsive
record by default or as defined by user, as shown in step 410.
[0055] Next, the system sorts the responsive records by a default
method or by a method defined by the user in step 411.
Subsequently, the system displays the sorted list of records and,
if requested by user or required by a default rule, an amount of
text from each document. See step 412. The user then reviews the
list (shown as step 413) and decides if the documents returned are
sufficiently germane to the research topic (step 414). If the
documents are germane, the user reviews the full records list in
step 415. If not, the user may choose either (i) to modify the
query, as shown in step 417, in which case the system displays the
last query for editing and accepts editing commands, step 407, or
(ii) to begin a new search, as shown in step 416, wherein the
system displays a blank search page and the process begins anew in
step 401.
[0056] FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating an embodiment of steps
after a user has chosen to view a record list resulting from a
search, as shown in step 415. First, in step 501 the system
compares the responsive records with records that the user has
previously reviewed, if any. Next, the system displays a sorted
list of responsive records, clearly marking records that the user
has viewed before, and user-defined text (if any). See step 502.
The user then decides in step 503 if the list is sorted in a
helpful way. If not, the user may, as shown in step 504, select new
sort criteria from a supplied list and click page header to
re-sort. The system then re-sorts the records in step 505 and
displays them in an updated list (step 502).
[0057] If the method of sorting is satisfactory, the user must then
decide whether or not the displayed text is useful. See step 506.
If the user determines that it is not, the user selects a new text
type to display in step 507. Continuing with this scenario, the
system extracts the newly selected text from responsive records in
step 508 and again displays the sorted list of responsive records,
identifying records that the user has previously viewed, and
user-defined text (if any) in step 502. If, alternately, the
displayed text is acceptable, the user decides if the listed
records are sufficiently germane to the research in step 509. If
not, the user may start a new query as shown in step 510, or modify
the current query, step 511, returning to the steps in FIG. 4 in
either case. The user also may consider whether the percentage of
germane records is sufficiently high. If it is not, the user may
return to FIG. 4 and further limit the search by conducting a query
on responsive records only, as shown by step 513. If the percentage
is sufficiently high, the user browses through the list of
responsive records and text in step 514.
[0058] Next, the user may choose to print a record, or view a
record, or both, in any order. The user may print a record by
selecting it in the list in step 515. The system then displays the
formatted record to the user in step 516, and the user confirms the
print in step 517. Alternately, the user may choose to view a full
record in step 518, in which case the system displays the full
record, without special formatting, shown in step 519. This
scenario is illustrated in FIG. 6.
[0059] FIG. 6 illustrates an embodiment of the steps taken after a
user opts to display a full record. In the main window, the system
displays the selected record in step 601. The system also compares
responsive records with records previously viewed by the user in
step 602, and displays a sorted list of responsive records,
identifying which of the records have been viewed previously (for
example, by displaying their headings in different colors), and
user-defined text (if any) in the side panel. See step 603. The
user can interact with the system through either window. Through
the main window, which displays the text of the selected record
(see step 601), the user may: [0060] Jump to the next or previous
appearance of a search term (step 604). [0061] Jump to the next or
previous record in sequence (step 605). [0062] Jump to the next or
previous page within a record (step 606). [0063] Print the
unformatted record (step 607). [0064] Select formatted printing
option (step 608), causing the system to display formatted record,
as shown in step 609. The user then confirms the print order which
is then executed. See step 610.
[0065] From the list of responsive records in the side panel, the
user may (i) decide that the listed records are not sorted in a
helpful way (step 615), or (ii) decide that the listed records are
not germane to research (step 611). In the first case, the user may
either (i) click header to re-sort as in step 616, or (ii) select
new sort criteria from the list in the side panel as in step
617.
[0066] If the user decides that the listed records are not germane
to research at step 611, in one embodiment three options are
presented: (i) the user may further limit search by conducting a
query on responsive records (step 612); (ii) the user may modify
the current query (step 613); or (iii) the user may start a new
query (step 614).
[0067] The present invention has been disclosed and described
herein in what is considered to be its most preferred embodiments.
It should be noted that variations and equivalents may occur to
those skilled in the art upon reading the present disclosure and
that such variations and equivalents are intended to come within
the scope of the invention and the appended claims.
* * * * *