IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,724,784
Granted Patent B2
US 12,724,784 · App. 18/391,225 · Granted Sep 1, 2026

Distance based search ranking demotion

Inventor: Neha Arora (San Carlos, CA)
Assignee: GOOGLE LLC
G06F16/24578G06F16/248G06F16/29G06F16/9537G06F16/9535H04L2101/69
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 12,724,784
App. No.
18/391,225
Granted
Sep 1, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

Methods, systems, and apparatus, including computer programs encoded on a computer storage medium, for processing local search results. In one aspect, a method determines a first local document in a set of local documents for search results is eligible for a demotion operation. The determination is based at least in part on a proximity measure based on the location of the user device and a location specified for the first local document. In response to the determination, for each other local documents in the set of local documents, a proximity measure location of the user device and the location specified for the other local document is determined. The first local document is demoted in its ranking when at least one of the proximity measures indicates a respective other local document has a specified location that is within a threshold distance of the location of the user device.

Claims (47)

1 . A method performed by data processing apparatus, the method comprising:

receiving data specifying a search query, and a location of a user device from which the search query was received;

receiving data specifying a set of documents determined to be relevant to the search query, wherein a subset of the documents are local documents having local significance to a geographic location;

determining that a first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for a demotion operation that adjusts a search score of the first local document to demote a rank of the first local document, the determination based at least in part on the geographic location of the user device and the geographic location to which the first local document has local significance, and in response to the determination:

determining that at least one document in the set of documents that is not a local document has a search score that meets a distant document demotion threshold; and

in response adjusting the search score of the first local document to demote the first local document's ranking so that the rank of the first local document relative to the rank of the at least one document is decreased.

2 . The method of claim 1 , wherein adjusting the search score of the first local document comprises:

adjusting the search score of the first local document to demote the first local document's ranking so that the rank of the at least one document is greater than the rank of the first local document.

3 . The method of claim 1 , wherein determining that the first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for the demotion operation is based on a proximity measure based on the geographic location of the user device and the geographic location to which the first local document has local significance.

4 . The method of claim 3 , wherein determining that the first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for the demotion operation comprises:

determining that the proximity measure indicates a distance between the geographic location of the user device and the geographic location to which the first local document has local significance exceeds a maximum distance.

5 . The method of claim 3 , wherein determining that the first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for the demotion operation comprises:

determining that the proximity measure indicates the geographic location of the user device and the geographic location to which the first local document has local significance are not within a same region defined by a political boundary.

6 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the search query does not include a location phrase that explicitly specifies a geographic location.

7 . The method of claim 6 , wherein determining that the first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for a demotion operation further comprises:

determining that the first local document is eligible for demotion based, in part, on a local intent measure of a query meeting a threshold value.

8 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the data specifying the set of documents further comprises, for each of the documents, a respective search score indicative of the relevance of the document to the query and a ranking of the documents according to a first order based on the search scores.

9 . A system, comprising:

a data processing apparatus; and

one or more computer-readable storage media storing instructions executable by the data processing apparatus and that upon such execution cause the data processing apparatus to perform operations comprising:

receiving data specifying a search query, and a location of a user device from which the search query was received;

receiving data specifying a set of documents determined to be relevant to the search query, wherein a subset of the documents are local documents having local significance to a geographic location;

determining that a first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for a demotion operation that adjusts a search score of the first local document to demote a rank of the first local document, the determination based at least in part on the geographic location of the user device and the geographic location to which the first local document has local significance, and in response to the determination:

determining that at least one document in the set of documents that is not a local document has a search score that meets a distant document demotion threshold; and

in response adjusting the search score of the first local document to demote the first local document's ranking so that the rank of the first local document relative to the rank of the at least one document is decreased.

10 . The system of claim 9 , wherein adjusting the search score of the first local document comprises:

adjusting the search score of the first local document to demote the first local document's ranking so that the rank of the at least one document is greater than the rank of the first local document.

11 . The system of claim 9 , wherein determining that the first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for the demotion operation is based on a proximity measure based on the geographic location of the user device and the geographic location to which the first local document has local significance.

12 . The system of claim 11 , wherein determining that the first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for the demotion operation comprises:

determining that the proximity measure indicates a distance between the geographic location of the user device and the geographic location to which the first local document has local significance exceeds a maximum distance.

13 . The system of claim 11 , wherein determining that the first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for the demotion operation comprises:

determining that the proximity measure indicates the geographic location of the user device and the geographic location to which the first local document has local significance are not within a same region defined by a political boundary.

14 . The system of claim 11 , wherein the search query does not include a location phrase that explicitly specifies a geographic location.

15 . The method of claim 14 , wherein determining that the first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for a demotion operation further comprises:

determining that the first local document is eligible for demotion based, in part, on a local intent measure of a query meeting a threshold value.

16 . The method of claim 9 , wherein the data specifying the set of documents further comprises, for each of the documents, a respective search score indicative of the relevance of the document to the query and a ranking of the documents according to a first order based on the search scores.

17 . A computer-readable storage device comprising one or more non-transitory computer readable storage media medium storing instructions executable by a data processing apparatus and that upon such execution cause the data processing apparatus to perform operations comprising:

receiving data specifying a search query, and a location of a user device from which the search query was received;

receiving data specifying a set of documents determined to be relevant to the search query, wherein a subset of the documents are local documents having local significance to a geographic location;

determining that a first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for a demotion operation that adjusts a search score of the first local document to demote a rank of the first local document, the determination based at least in part on the geographic location of the user device and the geographic location to which the first local document has local significance, and in response to the determination:

determining that at least one document in the set of documents that is not a local document has a search score that meets a distant document demotion threshold; and

in response adjusting the search score of the first local document to demote the first local document's ranking so that the rank of the first local document relative to the rank of the at least one document is decreased.

18 . The one or more computer-readable media medium of claim 17 , adjusting the search score of the first local document comprises:

adjusting the search score of the first local document to demote the first local document's ranking so that the rank of the at least one document is greater than the rank of the first local document.

19 . The one or more computer-readable media medium of claim 17 , determining that the first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for the demotion operation is based on a proximity measure based on the geographic location of the user device and the geographic location to which the first local document has local significance.

20 . The one or more computer-readable media medium of claim 17 , determining that the first local document of the subset of the documents is eligible for the demotion operation comprises:

determining that the proximity measure indicates a distance between the geographic location of the user device and the geographic location to which the first local document has local significance exceeds a maximum distance.

Assignments (2)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jan 18, 2024
From: ARORA, NEHA
To: GOOGLE INC.
Reel/Frame 066169/0504 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Jan 18, 2024
From: GOOGLE INC.
To: GOOGLE LLC
Reel/Frame 066352/0802 →
Continuity (5)
Continuation 17942819 · Sep 12, 2022
Continuation 16026355 · Jul 3, 2018
Continuation 14990072 · Jan 7, 2016
Continuation 14057692 · Oct 18, 2013
Related Publication 20240211481A1 · Jun 27, 2024
References Cited (91)
US 6317741B1 · Burrows · 2001 [cited by applicant]
US 7277928B2 · Lennon · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 7822742B2 · Majumder et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7827170B1 · Horling et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7870127B2 · Gupta et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8046371B2 · Clair et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8051076B1 · Garg et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8065199B2 · Dumon et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8195653B2 · Dandekar et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8332396B1 · Srinivasaiah et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8396888B2 · Cheng et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8417721B1 · Upstill et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8478751B1 · Garg et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8484188B1 · Upstill et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8527538B1 · Upstill et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8645362B1 · Jain et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 8819004B1 · Petcherski et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 8832088B1 · Chen et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 8949277B1 · Lieuwen et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9098511B1 · Lawry · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9111011B2 · Kogan · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9152701B2 · Linsley · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9189526B1 · Chen · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 10687113B2 · Kegel · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20030065660A1 · Lau · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 20040024752A1 · Manber et al. · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 20050065916A1 · Ge et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20050080786A1 · Fish et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20050154718A1 · Payne et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20050262062A1 · Xia · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20060123014A1 · Ng · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060218114A1 · Weare et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060218146A1 · Bitan et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20070043723A1 · Bitan et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20080141307A1 · Whitehead · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080154888A1 · Buron et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080270379A1 · Ramakrishna · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20090132516A1 · Patel et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090171943A1 · Majmuder et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090234815A1 · Boerries et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20100115621A1 · Staniford et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100174703A1 · Dandekar et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100262495A1 · Dumon et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100287174A1 · Yang et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20110125779A1 · Fiero · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110246937A1 · Roberts et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110252031A1 · Blumenthal et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110264654A1 · Wolosin et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20120054302A1 · Priyadarshan · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20120143859A1 · Lymperopoulos et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20120166432A1 · Tseng · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20120323938A1 · Skeen et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130159383A1 · Tuliani et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130246381A1 · Garg et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20140133293A1 · Ismail et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140280090A1 · Grappo · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140282656A1 · Belyaev et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140304258A1 · Vyas et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140365515A1 · Garrett et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150060973A1 · Tsai et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150066902A1 · Kim · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150169605A1 · Kogan et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150169739A1 · Linsley · 2015 [cited by applicant]
CN 101223526 · 2008 [cited by applicant]
CN 101636737A · 2010 [cited by applicant]
CN 101636935 · 2010 [cited by applicant]
CN 103562916A · 2014 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2008073502 · 2008 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2008073508 · 2008 [cited by applicant]
Kao et all, “Clustering Uncertain Data Using Voronoi Diagrams and R-Tree Index”, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 22, Issue:9, Sep. 2010. [cited by examiner]
Rowlatt et al, “Delivering joined up access to local and national information in the United Kingdom”, Sep. 2002. [cited by examiner]
Chang et al., “Adlet: An Active document abstraction for mulitmedia information fusion”, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 13, Issue: 1, 2001. [cited by examiner]
Craig et al. “A Distributed Wiki System Based on Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Principles”, 2011 IEEE/WIC/ACM international Conferences on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, vol. 1, 2011, pp. 364-371. [cited by examiner]
Alistair, “Re-placing Location: Georgraphic Perspectives in Location Based Services”, Zurich Open Repository and Archive, 2007, 235 pages. [cited by applicant]
Anderson, “Putting Search in Context: Using Dynamically Weighted Information Fusion to Improve Search Results”, 2011 Eighth International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations, Las Vegas, Nevada, United … [cited by applicant]
Arif, “A Holistic Approach in Developing an Ensemble Mobile Peer-to-Peer Computing,” 2013 Fifth International Conference on Computational Intelligence, Communication Systems and Networks, Jun. 2013, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Bouidghaghen et al., “Personalizing Mobile Web Search for Location Sensitive Queries”, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Twelfth International Conference on Mobile Data Management, Lulea, Sweden, Jun. 6-… [cited by applicant]
Chinese Search Report Corresponding to Application No. 2019110360947 on Mar. 20, 2023. [cited by applicant]
Edwardes, “Re-placing Location: Geographic Perspectives in Location Based Services”, Second International Workshop on Location and the Web, Boston, Massachusetts, United States, Apr. 4, 2009, 243 pages. [cited by applicant]
Extended European Search Report in European Application No. 19196203, dated Dec. 5, 2019, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Han, “Research of Mobile Applications-Oriented Peer-to-Peer Context-aware Mechanism,” 2010 International Conference on Computer Application and System Modeling (ICCASM 2010), Oct. 2010, 7 pages. [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion in International Application No. PCT/US2014/060454, mailed Jan. 7, 2015, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Ju et al., “RFID Oat Collection and Integration Based on Mobile Agent”, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Conference on Cybernetics and Intelligent Systems, Jun. 7, 2006. [cited by applicant]
Na, “Design of Location-based Directory Facilitator in Context-Aware Environment”, Tenth International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology, Gangwon, South Korea, Feb. 17-20, 2008, 4 pages. [cited by applicant]
Office Action in Chinese Application No. 201480057219.3, dated Mar. 19, 2019, 12 pages (with English translation). [cited by applicant]
Office Action in European Application 14 79093 9.4-1222, dated Apr. 11, 2019, 4 pages. [cited by applicant]
Office Action in European Application No. 19196203.4, dated Nov. 2, 2020, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Office Action issued in European Application No. 14790939.4, dated Jul. 4, 2018, 7 pages. [cited by applicant]
Regard “Mobile Devices Catalyst for Better Records Management” Information Management, Overland Park, vol. 46, Issue 5, Oct. 2012. [cited by applicant]
Summons to Attend Oral Proceedings issued in European Application No. 14790939.4, dated Dec. 10, 2018, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tung et al., “Location-Assisted Energy-Efficient Content Search for Mobile Peer to Peer Networks”, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Wor… [cited by applicant]