IP Library Patent Application 18439274
Patent Application
App. No. 18/439,274

SUMMARIZING PREVALENT OPINIONS FOR MEDICAL DECISION-MAKING

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 None
App. No.
18/439,274
Abstract

Methods and systems for document summarization include splitting documents into sentences and sorting the sentences by a metric that promotes review opinion prevalence from the documents to generate a ranked list of sentences. Groups of sentences with similar embeddings are formed and a trained generalization encoder-decoder model is applied to output a common generalization of the sentences in each group. Sentences are added to a summary from the generalizations corresponding to the sentences in the ranked list, in rank-order, until a target summary length has been reached. An action is performed responsive to the summary.

Claims (32)

1 . A computer-implemented method for document summarization, comprising:

splitting documents into sentences;

sorting the sentences by a metric that promotes review opinion prevalence from the documents to generate a ranked list of sentences;

forming groups of sentences with similar embeddings and applying a trained generalization encoder-decoder model to output a common generalization of the sentences in each group;

adding sentences to a summary from generalizations corresponding to the sentences in the ranked list, in rank-order, until a target summary length has been reached; and

performing an action responsive to the summary.

2 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising simplifying the sentences before sorting.

3 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising filtering trivial conclusions from the sentences before sorting.

4 . The method of claim 1 , wherein sorting the sentences includes sorting by a number of implications each sentence has from other sentences.

5 . The method of claim 1 , wherein sorting the sentences includes assigning a score to each sentence based on a cosine comparison of encoded sentence representations.

6 . The method of claim 5 , wherein the score is further discounted by a maximum of previous scores for each sentence.

7 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the documents are reviews for a healthcare product and wherein performing the action includes altering a treatment for a patient based on the summary.

8 . The method of claim 7 , wherein altering the treatment for the patient includes automatically ceasing a treatment that is indicated as being dangerous by the summary.

9 . The method of claim 7 , wherein altering the treatment for the patient includes aiding in decision-making by a medical professional.

10 . The method of claim 1 , wherein generalizing the summary includes informativeness ranking based on a comparison of implications of the summary by reviews of a current product or entity to implications by reviews of a different product or entity.

11 . A system for document summarization, comprising:

a hardware processor; and

a memory that stores a computer program which, when executed by the hardware processor, causes the hardware processor to:

split documents into sentences;

sort the sentences by a metric that promotes review opinion prevalence from the documents to generate a ranked list of sentences;

form groups of sentences with similar embeddings and applying a trained generalization encoder-decoder model to output a common generalization of the sentences in each group;

add sentences to a summary from the generalizations corresponding to the sentences in the ranked list, in rank-order, until a target summary length has been reached; and

perform an action responsive to the summary.

12 . The system of claim 11 , wherein the computer program further causes the hardware processor to simplify the sentences before sorting.

13 . The system of claim 11 , wherein the computer program further causes the hardware processor to filter trivial conclusions from the sentences before sorting.

14 . The system of claim 11 , wherein the computer program further causes the hardware processor to sort by a number of implications each sentence has from other sentences.

15 . The system of claim 11 , wherein the computer program further causes the hardware processor to assign a score to each sentence based on a cosine comparison of encoded sentence representations.

16 . The system of claim 15 , wherein the score is further discounted by a maximum of previous scores for each sentence.

17 . The system of claim 11 , wherein the documents are reviews for a healthcare product and wherein the computer program further causes the hardware processor to alter a treatment for a patient based on the summary.

18 . The system of claim 17 , wherein the computer program further causes the hardware processor to automatically cease a treatment that is indicated as being dangerous by the summary.

19 . The system of claim 17 , wherein the computer program further causes the hardware processor to in decision-making by a medical professional.

20 . The system of claim 11 , wherein the computer program further causes the hardware processor to rank informativeness based on a comparison of implications of the summary by reviews of a current product or entity to implications by reviews of a different product or entity.

Assignments (2)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jun 24, 2026
From: NEC LABORATORIES AMERICA, INC.
To: NEC CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 075069/0642 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Feb 14, 2024
From: MALON, CHRISTOPHER
To: NEC LABORATORIES AMERICA, INC.
Reel/Frame 066583/0042 →