IP Library Granted Patent US 12,481,527
Granted Patent B2
US 12,481,527 · App. 17/709,859 · Granted Nov 25, 2025

Resource teaming optimization for resource planning

Inventors: Martin Andersson (Jonsered, SE); Fredrik Altenstedt (Mölndal, SE); Lennart Bengtsson (Gothenburg, SE); Dmitrii Sergejev (Mölndal, SE); Waldemar Kocjan (Gothenburg, SE); Christoffer Sandberg (Gothenburg, SE); Henrik Roos (Mölndal, SE); Björn Carlsson (Gothenburg, SE)
Assignee: The Boeing Company
G06F9/4881G06F9/5038G06F9/505G08G5/30
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 12,481,527
App. No.
17/709,859
Granted
Nov 25, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Resource teaming optimization for resource planning is provided by identifying a set of tasks, wherein each task of the set of tasks includes a plurality of subtasks that includes an initial subtask starting at a given state and a final subtask returning to the given state; identifying resource requirements for each subtasks of the plurality of subtasks; dividing a set of resources into a plurality of candidate slices to meet resource requirements for the plurality of subtasks; forming a plurality of combinations from the plurality of candidate slices to satisfy the resource requirements; identifying a given combination from the plurality of combinations having a highest teaming metric across the set of tasks; and assigning the given combination for the set of tasks.

Claims (54)

1 . A method for reducing a memory usage and a power usage and improving a computational speed of a computing device forming a team of resources for completing a task, the method comprising:

transforming the computing device to a special purpose computer by adding a teaming optimizer for assigning the team of resources to complete the task comprising: resource requirements, a plurality of subtasks, and rule sets, wherein the teaming optimizer prioritizes whole-task teaming completing the task with the team being formed from rosters of resources completing all the subtasks and preferring partial teaming over no teaming in completing the task;

accessing through a communication interface, by the teaming optimizer, the task and the rosters of resources, wherein each resource comprises, respectively, a state;

accessing through the communication interface, by the teaming optimizer, a resource requirement in the resource requirements for each subtask of the plurality of subtasks;

formatting for each subtask respectively, by the teaming optimizer, a table comprising the resource requirements and a plurality of candidate slices comprising selections of resources from the rosters forming potential assignments forming every potential combination of the resources that satisfies the resource requirement;

transforming the table by the teaming optimizer using the rule sets for assigning a class respectively for each of the resources and curating, using the rule sets, the plurality of candidate slices into curated slice tables comprising at least a first curated slice table comprising resources from a first class and a second curated slice table comprising resources from a second class;

weighting evaluations of the first curated slice table and the second curated slice table separately from one another by the teaming optimizer using teaming metrics;

identifying the team of resources from the curated slice tables having a highest total teaming metric that satisfies all the resource requirements and all the rule sets of the task; and

assigning the combination of resources to complete the task.

2 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising the teaming metrics prioritizing cross period teaming in the team of resources.

3 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising each:

resource of the team of resources changing the state of the resource respectively between a first subtask and the last subtask; and

the rule sets prioritizing each resource of the team of resources completing the task in a same state that the resource began the task.

4 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising the teaming optimizer prioritizing in-class teaming over cross-class teaming.

5 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the team of resources comprises a lowest possible number of resources that satisfy all the resource requirements for the task.

6 . The method of claim 5 , further comprising the rosters of resources comprising cores of computer processors.

7 . The method of claim 6 , further comprising evening a heating/cooling cycle of the computing device.

8 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the resource requirements differ among the subtasks of the task.

9 . The method of claim 1 , wherein a state of each resource of the team of resources differs during a subtask of a rest period from the state of each resource during a first subtask.

10 . The method of claim 1 , wherein:

the subtasks comprise handling individual threads of a load on a processor; and

the teaming metrics comprise cumulative penalties and bonuses.

11 . A system configured to reduce a memory usage and a power consumption and increase a computational speed by a computing device, wherein the system comprises:

a memory that comprises computer-executable instructions; and

a processor configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the system to perform a method comprising:

transforming the computing device to a special purpose computer by adding a teaming optimizer to the computing device assigning a team of resources to complete a task comprising: resource requirements, a plurality of subtasks, and rule sets, wherein the teaming optimizer prioritizes whole-task teaming completing the task with the team being formed from rosters of resources completing all the subtasks and preferring partial teaming over no teaming in completing the task;

accessing through a communication interface, by the teaming optimizer, the task and the rosters of resources, wherein each resource comprises, respectively, a state;

accessing through the communication interface, by the teaming optimizer, a resource requirement in the resource requirements for each subtask of the plurality of subtasks;

formatting for each subtask respectively, by the teaming optimizer, a table comprising the resource requirements and a plurality of candidate slices comprising selections of resources from the rosters forming potential assignments forming every potential combination of the resources that satisfies the resource requirement;

transforming the table by the teaming optimizer using the rule sets for assigning a class respectively for each of the resources and curating, using the rule sets, the plurality of candidate slices into curated slice tables comprising at least a first curated slice table comprising resources from a first class and a second curated slice table comprising resources from a second class;

weighting evaluations of the first curated slice table and the second curated slice table separately from one another by the teaming optimizer using teaming metrics;

identifying the team of resources from the curated slice tables having a highest total teaming metric that satisfies all the resource requirements and all the rule sets of the task; and

assigning the combination of resources to complete the task.

12 . The system of claim 11 , wherein the teaming metrics are configured to prioritize cross period teaming in the team of resources.

13 . The system of claim 11 , further comprising:

each resource of the team of resources changing the state of the resource respectively between a first subtask and the last subtask; and

the rule sets prioritizing each resource of the team of resources completing the task in a same state that the resource began the task.

14 . The system of claim 11 , further comprising the teaming optimizer prioritizing in-class teaming over cross-class teaming.

15 . The system of claim 11 , wherein the team of resources comprises a lowest possible number of resources that satisfy all the resource requirements for the task.

16 . The system of claim 11 , further comprising a rest period being a subtask.

17 . The system of claim 11 , wherein the rosters comprise cores of computer processors.

18 . The system of claim 11 , wherein a state of each resource of the team of resources differs during a subtask of a rest period from the state of each resource during a first subtask.

19 . The system of claim 11 , wherein:

the subtasks comprise handling individual threads of a load on a processor; and

the teaming metrics comprise cumulative penalties and bonuses.

20 . A non-transitory computer-readable medium that comprises computer-executable instructions configured to improve a computational speed of a computing device and to perform a method that comprises:

transforming the computing device to a special purpose computer by adding a teaming optimizer to the computing device configured to assign a team of resources to complete a task that comprises: resource requirements, a plurality of subtasks, and rule sets, wherein the teaming optimizer is configured to create whole-task teaming completing the task with a team formed from rosters of resources that completes all the subtasks and prefers partial teaming over no teaming in completing the task;

accessing through a communication interface, by the teaming optimizer, the task and the rosters of resources, wherein each resource comprises, respectively, a state;

accessing through the communication interface, by the teaming optimizer, a resource requirement in the resource requirements for each subtask of the plurality of subtasks;

formatting for each subtask respectively, by the teaming optimizer, a table comprising the resource requirements and a plurality of candidate slices comprising selections of resources from the rosters forming potential assignments forming every potential combination of the resources that satisfies the resource requirement;

transforming the table by the teaming optimizer using the rule sets for assigning a class respectively for each of the resources and curating, using the rule sets, the plurality of candidate slices into curated slice tables comprising at least a first curated slice table comprising resources from a first class and a second curated slice table comprising resources from a second class;

weighting evaluations of the first curated slice table and the second curated slice table separately from one another by the teaming optimizer using teaming metrics;

identifying the team of resources from the curated slice tables having a highest total teaming metric that satisfies all the resource requirements and all the rule sets of the task; and

assigning the combination of resources to complete the task.

Assignments (3)
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Nov 17, 2025
From: FOREFLIGHT LLC; JEPPESEN FOREFLIGHT, INC.
To: APOLLO ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY LLC, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 073622/0920 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Oct 22, 2025
From: THE BOEING COMPANY
To: BOEING DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
Reel/Frame 073156/0773 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 31, 2022
From: ANDERSSON, MARTIN; ALTENSTEDT, FREDRIK; BENGTSSON, LENNART; SERGEJEV, DMITRII; KOCJAN, WALDEMAR; SANDBERG, CHRISTOFFER; ROOS, HENRIK; CARLSSON, BJÖRN
To: THE BOEING COMPANY
Reel/Frame 059459/0600 →
Continuity (2)
Provisional Application 63169639 · Apr 1, 2021
Related Publication 20220318055A1 · Oct 6, 2022
References Cited (18)
US 20050114829A1 · Robin · 2005 [cited by examiner]
US 20090043621A1 · Kershaw · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20100082383A1 · Pachon · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 20140019033A1 · Berge · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20140142998A1 · Kroeger · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20140257900A1 · Jacobs · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20160034841A1 · Matula · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160335583A1 · Suntinger · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160335584A1 · Woicekowski · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20170011637A1 · Woicekowski · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170116552A1 · Deodhar · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20180247273A1 · Tamma · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20200126020A1 · Nicolaisen · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210019179A1 · Yadav · 2021 [cited by examiner]
Yogesh Dashora et al., “4—Reducing Crew Split in Multi-rank Pairing Optimization Problems,” Session TB51—Joint Session AAS/TSL Air/Practice Curated: Airline Scheduling, dated Oct. 22, 2019 [Abstract Only]. [cited by applicant]
Lennart Bengtsson et al., “Railway Crew Pairing Optimization,” Carmen Systems, Year 2007, pp. 1-20. [cited by applicant]
Niklas Kohl et al., “Airline Crew Rostering: Problem Types, Modeling, and Optimization,” Annals of Operations Research, Kluwer Academic Publishers, vol. 127, No. 1-4, Dated: Mar. 1, 2004, pp. 223-257. [cited by applicant]
European Patent Office, Extended European Search Report for Application 22166187.9-1203 dated Jul. 21, 2022. [cited by applicant]