IP Library Granted Patent US 11,698,845
Granted Patent B2
US 11,698,845 · App. 17/128,509 · Granted Jul 11, 2023

Evaluation rating of a system or portion thereof

Inventors: Raymond Hicks (Chicago, IL); Ryan Michael Pisani (Burlington, WI); Thomas James McNeela (Streamwood, IL)
Assignee: UncommonX Inc.
G06F11/26G06F11/076G06F11/079G06F11/0709G06F11/0793G06F11/3006G06F11/3409G06F11/3476G06F11/3495G06F11/3668G06F16/2379G06F21/577G06Q10/06393H04L63/1416H04L63/1425H04L63/1433H04L63/20G06F2221/034
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 11,698,845
App. No.
17/128,509
Granted
Jul 11, 2023
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method for execution by an analysis unit includes obtaining a collection of data for a particular evaluation of a system aspect. The method further includes acquiring data analysis parameters regarding the particular evaluation of the system aspect. The method further includes determining one or more evaluation perspectives based on the data analysis parameters. The method further includes determining one or more evaluation modalities based on the data analysis parameters. The method further includes determining one or more evaluation metrics based on the data analysis parameters. The method further includes evaluating the collection of data in accordance with the one or more evaluation metrics, the one or more evaluation perspectives, and the one or more evaluation modalities to produce one or more evaluation outputs.

Claims (135)

1. A method comprises:

obtaining, by an analysis unit, a collection of data for a particular evaluation of a system aspect;

acquiring, by the analysis unit, data analysis parameters regarding the particular evaluation of the system aspect;

determining, by the analysis unit, one or more evaluation perspectives based on the data analysis parameters;

determining, by the analysis unit, one or more evaluation modalities based on the data analysis parameters;

determining, by the analysis unit, one or more evaluation metrics based on the data analysis parameters; and

evaluating, by the analysis unit, the collection of data in accordance with the one or more evaluation metrics, the one or more evaluation perspectives, and the one or more evaluation modalities to produce one or more evaluation outputs; wherein the evaluating the collection of data further includes, when the one or more evaluation modalities is a sufficiency modality:

quantifying data of the collection of data regarding an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics to produce quantified data;

determining a reference scale based on an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives and one or more objectives of the system aspect for the evaluation metric; and

comparing the quantified data with the reference scale to produce an evaluation rating regarding sufficiency of the evaluation metric for the system aspect from the evaluation perspective as at least a part of the one or more evaluation outputs regarding the processes of the system aspect.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the system aspect comprises:

one or more system elements;

one or more system criteria; and/or

one or more system modes.

3. The method of claim 1 , wherein an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives comprises:

understanding;

implementation;

operation; or

self-analysis.

4. The method of claim 1 , wherein an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics comprises:

process;

policy;

procedure;

documentation;

automation; or

certification.

5. The method of claim 1 , wherein an evaluation modality of the one or more evaluation modalities comprises:

a level of sufficiency of an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics associated with the system aspect;

a level of effectiveness of the evaluation metric with respect to one or more objectives of the system aspect;

a measure of use of the evaluation metric with respect to supporting the one or more objectives of the system aspect;

a measure of appropriate use of the evaluation metric with respect to supporting the one or more objectives of the system aspect; or

a measure of consistency of use of the evaluation metric with respect to supporting the one or more objectives of the system aspect.

6. The method of claim 1 , wherein an evaluation output of the one or more evaluation outputs comprises:

one or more evaluation ratings;

one or more system aspect deficiencies; or

one or more auto-corrections of the one or more system aspect deficiencies.

7. The method of claim 1 , wherein the evaluating the collection of data comprises:

when the one or more evaluation modalities is an effectiveness modality:

determining a reference scale based on an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives and one or more objectives of the system aspect for an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics; and

evaluating data of the collection of data regarding the evaluation metric with respect to the reference scale to produce an evaluation rating regarding how effective the evaluation metric supports the one or more objectives of the system aspect from the evaluation perspective.

8. The method of claim 1 , wherein the evaluating the collection of data comprises:

when the one or more evaluation modalities is a measure of use modality:

determining a reference scale based on an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives and one or more objectives of the system aspect for an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics; and

evaluating data of the collection of data regarding the evaluation metric with respect to the reference scale to produce an evaluation rating regarding use of the evaluation metric to support the one or more objectives of the system aspect from the evaluation perspective.

9. The method of claim 1 , wherein the evaluating the collection of data comprises:

when the one or more evaluation modalities is a measure of appropriate use modality:

determining a reference scale based on an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives and one or more objectives of the system aspect for an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics; and

evaluating data of the collection of data regarding the evaluation metric with respect to the reference scale to produce an evaluation rating regarding appropriate use of the evaluation metric to support the one or more objectives of the system aspect from the evaluation perspective.

10. The method of claim 1 , wherein the evaluating the collection of data comprises:

when the one or more evaluation modalities is a measure of consistency of use modality:

determining a reference scale based on an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives and one or more objectives of the system aspect for an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics; and

evaluating data of the collection of data regarding the evaluation metric with respect to the reference scale to produce an evaluation rating regarding consistency of use of the evaluation metric to support the one or more objectives of the system aspect from the evaluation perspective.

11. The method of claim 1 further comprises:

determining, by the analysis unit, one or more evaluation viewpoints based on the data analysis parameters.

12. The method of claim 11 , wherein an evaluation viewpoint of the one or more evaluation viewpoints comprises:

a disclosed data viewpoint;

a discovered data viewpoint; or

a desired data viewpoint.

13. The method of claim 1 further comprises:

determining, by the analysis unit, one or more evaluation categories based on the data analysis parameters.

14. The method of claim 13 , wherein an evaluation category of the one or more evaluation categories comprises:

an identify category;

a protect category;

a detect category;

a respond category; or

a recover category.

15. A computer readable memory comprises:

a first memory section for storing operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, causes the computing entity to:

obtain a collection of data for a particular evaluation of a system aspect; and

acquire data analysis parameters regarding the particular evaluation of the system aspect;

a second memory section for storing operational instructions that, when executed by the computing entity, causes the computing entity to:

determine one or more evaluation perspectives based on the data analysis parameters;

determine one or more evaluation modalities based on the data analysis parameters; and

determine one or more evaluation metrics based on the data analysis parameters; and

a third memory section for storing operational instructions that, when executed by the computing entity, causes the computing entity to:

evaluate the collection of data in accordance with the one or more evaluation metrics, the one or more evaluation perspectives, and the one or more evaluation modalities to produce one or more evaluation outputs; wherein the evaluating the collection of data further includes, when the one or more evaluation modalities is a sufficiency modality:

quantify data of the collection of data regarding an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics to produce quantified data;

determine a reference scale based on an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives and one or more objectives of the system aspect for the evaluation metric; and

compare the quantified data with the reference scale to produce an evaluation rating regarding sufficiency of the evaluation metric for the system aspect from the evaluation perspective as at least a part of the one or more evaluation outputs regarding the processes of the system aspect.

16. The computer readable memory of claim 15 , wherein the system aspect comprises:

one or more system elements;

one or more system criteria; and/or

one or more system modes.

17. The computer readable memory of claim 15 , wherein an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives comprises:

understanding;

implementation;

operation; or

self-analysis.

18. The computer readable memory of claim 15 , wherein an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics comprises:

process;

policy;

procedure;

documentation;

automation; or

certification.

19. The computer readable memory of claim 15 , wherein an evaluation modality of the one or more evaluation modalities comprises:

a level of sufficiency of an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics associated with the system aspect;

a level of effectiveness of the evaluation metric with respect to one or more objectives of the system aspect;

a measure of use of the evaluation metric with respect to supporting the one or more objectives of the system aspect;

a measure of appropriate use of the evaluation metric with respect to supporting the one or more objectives of the system aspect; or

a measure of consistency of use of the evaluation metric with respect to supporting the one or more objectives of the system aspect.

20. The computer readable memory of claim 15 , wherein an evaluation output of the one or more evaluation outputs comprises:

one or more evaluation ratings;

one or more system aspect deficiencies; or

one or more auto-corrections of the one or more system aspect deficiencies.

21. The computer readable memory of claim 15 , wherein the third memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by the computing entity, causes the computing entity to evaluate the collection of data by:

when the one or more evaluation modalities is an effectiveness modality:

determining a reference scale based on an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives and one or more objectives of the system aspect for an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics; and

evaluating data of the collection of data regarding the evaluation metric with respect to the reference scale to produce an evaluation rating regarding how effective the evaluation metric supports the one or more objectives of the system aspect from the evaluation perspective.

22. The computer readable memory of claim 15 , wherein the third memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by the computing entity, causes the computing entity to evaluate the collection of data by:

when the one or more evaluation modalities is a measure of use modality:

determining a reference scale based on an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives and one or more objectives of the system aspect for an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics; and

evaluating data of the collection of data regarding the evaluation metric with respect to the reference scale to produce an evaluation rating regarding use of the evaluation metric to support the one or more objectives of the system aspect from the evaluation perspective.

23. The computer readable memory of claim 15 , wherein the third memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by the computing entity, causes the computing entity to evaluate the collection of data by:

when the one or more evaluation modalities is a measure of appropriate use modality:

determining a reference scale based on an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives and one or more objectives of the system aspect for an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics; and

evaluating data of the collection of data regarding the evaluation metric with respect to the reference scale to produce an evaluation rating regarding appropriate use of the evaluation metric to support the one or more objectives of the system aspect from the evaluation perspective.

24. The computer readable memory of claim 15 , wherein the third memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by the computing entity, causes the computing entity to evaluate the collection of data by:

when the one or more evaluation modalities is a measure of consistency of use modality:

determining a reference scale based on an evaluation perspective of the one or more evaluation perspectives and one or more objectives of the system aspect for an evaluation metric of the one or more evaluation metrics; and

evaluating data of the collection of data regarding the evaluation metric with respect to the reference scale to produce an evaluation rating regarding consistency of use of the evaluation metric to support the one or more objectives of the system aspect from the evaluation perspective.

25. The computer readable memory of claim 15 , wherein the second memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by the computing entity, causes the computing entity to:

determine one or more evaluation viewpoints based on the data analysis parameters.

26. The computer readable memory of claim 25 , wherein an evaluation viewpoint of the one or more evaluation viewpoints comprises:

a disclosed data viewpoint;

a discovered data viewpoint; or

a desired data viewpoint.

27. The computer readable memory of claim 15 , wherein the second memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by the computing entity, causes the computing entity to:

determine one or more evaluation categories based on the data analysis parameters.

28. The computer readable memory of claim 27 , wherein an evaluation category of the one or more evaluation categories comprises:

an identify category;

a protect category;

a detect category;

a respond category; or

a recover category.

Assignments (10)
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Mar 27, 2026
From: SW7, LLC
To: UNCOMMONX INC.
Reel/Frame 074208/0453 →
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Mar 27, 2026
From: RN COLUMN INVESTORS LLC
To: UNCOMMONX INC.
Reel/Frame 074208/0338 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Jan 9, 2026
From: UNCOMMONX INC.
To: CBG CAPITAL LLC
Reel/Frame 073416/0993 →
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Aug 22, 2023
From: UNCOMMONX INC.
To: SW7, LLC, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 064659/0492 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Aug 14, 2023
From: UNCOMMONX INC.
To: RN COLUMN INVESTORS LLC, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 064576/0516 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Jan 4, 2023
From: 5THCOLUMN INC.
To: UNCOMMONX INC.
Reel/Frame 062267/0546 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Jan 3, 2023
From: 5THCOLUMN INC.
To: UNCOMMONX INC.
Reel/Frame 062266/0364 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Jan 3, 2023
From: 5THCOLUMN LLC
To: 5C PARTNERS LLC
Reel/Frame 062261/0809 →
CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT Recorded Jan 3, 2023
From: 5C PARTNERS LLC
To: 5THCOLUMN INC.
Reel/Frame 062266/0269 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Dec 22, 2020
From: HICKS, RAYMOND; PISANI, RYAN MICHAEL; MCNEELA, THOMAS JAMES
To: 5THCOLUMN LLC
Reel/Frame 054718/0268 →
Continuity (2)
Provisional Application 62992661 · Mar 20, 2020
Related Publication 20210294902A1 · Sep 23, 2021
Cited By (1)
US 12,519,838