IP Library Granted Patent US 8,311,737
Granted Patent B2
US 8,311,737 · App. 11/187,638 · Granted Nov 13, 2012

Automated prioritization of map objects

View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 8,311,737
App. No.
11/187,638
Granted
Nov 13, 2012
Kind
B2
Abstract

Automatic map generation is enabled by assigning priorities to each city in a list of cities under consideration for display on a map. A mapping engine determines a reference count for each city, indicating how frequently the city appears in one or more corpora of documents. Based on the reference count, and optionally upon other data such as population and political importance, a priority score is assigned to each city. Each city is then assigned to one of a plurality of categories according to the city's priority score. A map is then generated including cities from a specified highest number of categories. In one embodiment, cities from a higher-scored category are presented in a more significant way, e.g., in capital letters, bold type, etc., than are those in the next-highest scored category.

Claims (43)

1. A computer-implemented method for automatically generating a map, the method comprising:

determining, by a computer, a frequency with which each of a plurality of city names occurs in a corpus of documents;

associating, by the computer, each city name with one of a plurality of city categories according to the determined frequency of the city name in the corpus; and

generating, by the computer a digital map including the city names, wherein an appearance of each city name on the map is determined by the category with which it is associated.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein the appearance on the map of city names associated with a first category is larger than the appearance on the map of city names associated with a second category.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 wherein cities associated with the first category have a population greater than cities associated with the second category.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein the corpus of documents includes a set of web pages indexed by a search engine.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 4 wherein the frequency of the city name in the corpus is the number of web pages that include the city name.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 4 wherein the frequency of the city name in the corpus is the number of occurrences of the city name in the set of web pages.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein the corpus of documents includes a set of news stories.

8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 further comprising:

determining a population of the city identified by each city name; and

wherein associating each city name with the city category further includes associating each city name with the category according to the determined frequency of the city name in the corpus and the population of the identified city.

9. A system for automatically generating a map, the system comprising:

a processor;

a map source data module, executed by the processor, including a list of city names to be identified on a map; and

a mapping engine, executed by the processor, for:

associating each city name with a city category according to a determined frequency with which the city name occurs in a corpus of documents; and

generating a map including the city names, wherein an appearance of each city name on the map is determined by the category with which it is associated.

10. A computer program product for automatically generating a map, the computer program product stored on a computer-readable storage medium and including executable program code configured to cause a processor to carry out the steps of:

determining a frequency with which each of a plurality of city names occurs in a corpus of documents;

associating each city name with a city category according to the determined frequency of the city name in the corpus; and

generating a map including the city names, wherein an appearance of each city name on the map is determined by the category with which it is associated.

11. A method for labeling objects on a digital map, the method comprising:

determining, by a computer, a reference count for each of the objects with respect to a corpus of documents, the reference count indicating a frequency with which the object appears in the corpus;

associating, by the computer, a priority with each of the objects according to the reference count for the object; and

rendering, by the computer, a digital map including at least some of the objects, each object including a label, the label having an appearance reflecting the priority associated with the labeled object.

12. The method of claim 11 wherein a first object having a first priority includes a label having a bold appearance, and a second object having a second priority lower than the first priority includes a label not having a bold appearance.

13. The method of claim 11 wherein each object is a city.

14. The method of claim 11 wherein each object is a county.

15. The method of claim 11 wherein each object is an airport.

16. A method for labeling cities on a digital map, the method comprising:

determining, by a computer, a priority score for each of a plurality of cities, the priority score determined according to a frequency with which the city appears in a corpus of documents;

categorizing each city, by the computer, according to its determined priority score; and

rendering, by the computer, a digital map including at least some of the cities, each included city having a label with an appearance determined at least in part by the category to which the city belongs.

17. The method of claim 16 wherein cities having a priority score lower than a threshold amount are not included in the rendered map.

18. The method of claim 17 wherein the threshold is variable according to input from a user.

19. The method of claim 16 wherein the documents in the corpus are web pages.

20. The method of claim 16 wherein the documents in the corpus are customer records, each customer record including a city in which the customer is located.

21. The method of claim 16 wherein determining the priority score for a city further comprises weighting the frequency with which the city appears in the corpus according to a population of the city.

22. The method of claim 16 wherein each document in the corpus has an age, and determining the priority score for a city further comprises weighting the score according to the age of the documents in which the city occurs.

23. The method of claim 16 wherein the corpus includes queries to a search engine.

24. The method of claim 16 in which each document in the corpus is written in the same language.

Assignments (15)
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Oct 3, 2024
From: MORGAN STANLEY SENIOR FUNDING, INC., AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT
To: UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Reel/Frame 069110/0508 →
TERMINATION AND RELEASE OF PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT (TERM LOAN) AT REEL 039341, FRAME 0008 Recorded Sep 11, 2024
From: MORGAN STANLEY SENIOR FUNDING, INC. AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT
To: UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Reel/Frame 069133/0140 →
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Mar 10, 2021
From: CORTLAND CAPITAL MARKET SERVICES LLC, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT
To: UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Reel/Frame 055547/0404 →
CORRECTIVE ASSIGNMENT TO CORRECT THE PROPERTY NUMBER PREVIOUSLY RECORDED AT REEL: 45853 FRAME: 418. ASSIGNOR(S) HEREBY CONFIRMS THE ASSIGNMENT. Recorded Jul 26, 2018
From: UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
To: CORTLAND CAPITAL MARKET SERVICES LLC, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT
Reel/Frame 049259/0064 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Apr 6, 2018
From: UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
To: CORTLAND CAPITAL MARKET SERVICES LLC, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT
Reel/Frame 045853/0418 →
PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT (TERM LOAN) Recorded Jul 14, 2016
From: UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
To: MORGAN STANLEY SENIOR FUNDING, INC., AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT
Reel/Frame 039341/0008 →
PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT (REVOLVER) Recorded Jul 14, 2016
From: UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
To: MORGAN STANLEY SENIOR FUNDING, INC., AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT
Reel/Frame 039341/0064 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded May 12, 2015
From: DECARTA LLC
To: UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Reel/Frame 035622/0242 →
MERGER AND CHANGE OF NAME Recorded May 6, 2015
From: DECARTA INC.; DECARTA LLC
To: DECARTA LLC
Reel/Frame 035581/0194 →
MERGER AND CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Apr 29, 2015
From: MAGELLAN MERGER SUB CORP.; DECARTA INC.
To: DECARTA INC.
Reel/Frame 035530/0942 →
MERGER Recorded Apr 21, 2015
From: DECARTA INC.
To: DECARTA INC.
Reel/Frame 035462/0301 →
RELEASE Recorded Aug 6, 2012
From: SILICON VALLEY BANK
To: DECARTA, INC.
Reel/Frame 028735/0375 →
SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Jul 8, 2010
From: DECARTA, INC.
To: SILICON VALLEY BANK
Reel/Frame 024640/0765 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Aug 23, 2006
From: TELCONTAR
To: DECARTA INC.
Reel/Frame 018160/0245 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Nov 11, 2005
From: POPPEN, MR. RICHARD F.; HUNKINS, MR. DAVID; WELS, MR. ERIC
To: TELCONTAR
Reel/Frame 016768/0946 →