IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,367,423
Granted Patent B2
US 12,367,423 · App. 18/615,599 · Granted Jul 22, 2025

System and method for ensuring that the results of machine learning models can be audited

Inventors: Edward R. Wetherbee (Omaha, NE); Kenneth P. Baclawski (Waltham, MA); Guang C. Wang (San Diego, CA); Kenny C. Gross (Escondido, CA); Anna Morav (East Palo Alto, CA); Dieter Gawlick (Palo Alto, CA); Zhen Hua Liu (San Mateo, CA); Richard Paul Sonderegger (Dorchester, MA)
Assignee: Oracle International Corporation
G06N20/00G05B23/024G06F17/16G06F17/18G06F30/27G06F2111/10G06N3/08G06N20/10
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 12,367,423
App. No.
18/615,599
Granted
Jul 22, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Systems, methods, and other embodiments associated with auditing the results of a machine learning model are described. In one embodiment, a method accesses original time series data and machine learning estimates of the original time series data. The method generates reconstituted time series data from the machine learning estimates by reversing operations of a machine learning model trained for generating the machine learning estimates from the original time series data. The method detects tampering (or corruption) in the original time series data based on a difference between the original time series data and reconstituted time series data. And, the method generates an electronic verification report that indicates whether the tampering (or corruption) is detected in the original time series data.

Claims (53)

1. One or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by at least a processor of a computer, cause the computer to:

access original time series data and machine learning estimates of the original time series data;

generate reconstituted time series data from the machine learning estimates by reversing operations of a machine learning model trained for generating the machine learning estimates from the original time series data;

detect tampering in the original time series data based on a difference between the original time series data and reconstituted time series data; and

generate an electronic verification report that indicates whether the tampering is detected in the original time series data.

2. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 1 , wherein the instructions for reversing operations of the machine learning model further cause the computer to:

identify the operations of the machine learning model;

determine an inverse operation for each of the operations that undoes the operation;

configure the inverse operations to be performed in a reverse order from that of the machine learning model; and

execute the inverse operations in the reverse order on the machine learning estimates to produce the reconstituted time series data.

3. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 1 , wherein the instructions for detecting tampering in the original time series data further cause the computer to compare values from the reconstituted time series data and original time series data pairwise using a sequential probability ratio test that detects the tampering as an anomaly.

4. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 1 , wherein the instructions further cause the computer to, prior to generating reconstituted time series data:

select a training data set from the original time series data that was captured prior to an update to the original time series data; and

train the machine learning model to generate estimates consistent with correlation patterns learned between time series signals of the training data set.

5. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 1 , wherein the instructions further cause the computer to, prior to generating reconstituted time series data, reduce complexity of the trained machine learning model by limiting the trained machine learning model to major components of a matrix that represents the trained machine learning model.

6. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 1 , wherein the machine learning estimates are multivariate state estimates, and the machine learning model is a multivariate state estimation model.

7. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 1 , wherein the instructions further cause the computer to display the electronic verification report on a graphical user interface.

8. A computing system, comprising:

a processor;

a memory operably connected to the processor;

one or more non-transitory computer-readable media operably connected to the processor and memory and storing computer-executable instructions that when executed by at least the processor of the computing system cause the computing system to:

access original time series data and machine learning estimates of the original time series data;

generate reconstituted time series data from the machine learning estimates by reversing operations of a machine learning model trained for generating the machine learning estimates from the original time series data;

detect corruption in the original time series data based on a difference between the original time series data and reconstituted time series data; and

generate an electronic verification report that indicates whether the corruption is detected in the original time series data.

9. The computing system of claim 8 , wherein the instructions for reversing operations of the machine learning model further cause the computing system to:

identify the operations of the machine learning model;

determine an inverse operation for each of the operations that undoes the operation;

configure the inverse operations to be performed in a reverse order from that of the machine learning model; and

execute the inverse operations in the reverse order on the machine learning estimates to produce the reconstituted time series data.

10. The computing system of claim 8 , wherein the instructions for detecting corruption in the original time series data further cause the computing system to compare values from the reconstituted time series data and original time series data pairwise using a sequential probability ratio test that detects the corruption as an anomaly.

11. The computing system of claim 8 , wherein the instructions further cause the computing system to, prior to generating reconstituted time series data:

select a training data set from the original time series data that was captured prior to an update to the original time series data; and

train the machine learning model to generate estimates consistent with correlation patterns learned between time series signals of the training data set.

12. The computing system of claim 8 , wherein the instructions further cause the computing system to, prior to generating reconstituted time series data, reduce complexity of the trained machine learning model by limiting the trained machine learning model to major components of a matrix that represents the trained machine learning model.

13. The computing system of claim 8 , wherein the machine learning estimates are multivariate state estimates, and the machine learning model is a multivariate state estimation model.

14. The computing system of claim 8 , wherein the instructions further cause the computing system to display the electronic verification report on a graphical user interface.

15. A computer-implemented method, comprising:

accessing original time series data and machine learning estimates of the original time series data;

generating reconstituted time series data from the machine learning estimates by reversing operations of a machine learning model trained for generating the machine learning estimates from the original time series data;

detecting tampering in the original time series data based on a difference between the original time series data and reconstituted time series data; and

generating an electronic verification report that indicates whether the tampering is detected in the original time series data.

16. The computer-implemented method of claim 15 , wherein reversing operations of the machine learning model further comprises:

identifying the operations of the machine learning model;

determining an inverse operation for each of the operations that undoes the operation;

configuring the inverse operations to be performed in a reverse order from that of the machine learning model; and

executing the inverse operations in the reverse order on the machine learning estimates to produce the reconstituted time series data.

17. The computer-implemented method of claim 15 , wherein detecting tampering in the original time series data further comprises comparing values from the reconstituted time series data and original time series data pairwise using a sequential probability ratio test that detects the tampering as an anomaly.

18. The computer-implemented method of claim 15 , further comprising, prior to generating reconstituted time series data:

select a training data set from the original time series data that was captured prior to an update to the original time series data; and

training the machine learning model to generate estimates consistent with correlation patterns learned between time series signals of the training data set.

19. The computer-implemented method of claim 15 , further comprising, prior to generating reconstituted time series data, reducing complexity of the trained machine learning model by limiting the trained machine learning model to major components of a matrix that represents the trained machine learning model.

20. The computer-implemented method of claim 15 , wherein the machine learning estimates are multivariate state estimates, and the machine learning model is a multivariate state estimation model.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 27, 2024
From: WETHERBEE, EDWARD R.; BACLAWSKI, KENNETH P.; WANG, GUANG C.; GROSS, KENNY C.; CHYSTIAKOVA, ANNA; GAWLICK, DIETER; LIU, ZHEN HUA; SONDEREGGER, RICHARD PAUL
To: ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 066921/0789 →
Continuity (2)
Continuation 16826478 · Mar 23, 2020
Related Publication 20240265308A1 · Aug 8, 2024
References Cited (88)
US 7020802B2 · Gross et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 7613576B2 · Gross et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7613580B2 · Gross et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7702485B2 · Gross et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7869977B2 · Lewis et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8055594B2 · Dhanekula et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8069490B2 · Gross et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8200991B2 · Vaidyanathan et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8275738B2 · Gross et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8341759B2 · Gross et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8457913B2 · Zwinger et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8543346B2 · Gross et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 9933338B2 · Noda et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10452510B2 · Gross et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10496084B2 · Li et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 11055396B2 · Gross et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11429885B1 · McNair · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20080140362A1 · Gross et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080252309A1 · Gross et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080252441A1 · McElfresh et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080256398A1 · Gross et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20090099830A1 · Gross et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090125467A1 · Dhanekula et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090306920A1 · Zwinger et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20100023282A1 · Lewis et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100033386A1 · Lewis et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100305892A1 · Gross et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100306165A1 · Gross et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20120030775A1 · Gross et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130157683A1 · Lymberopoulos et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20140354300A1 · Ramachandran et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150137830A1 · Keller, III et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160097833A1 · Han et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160098561A1 · Keller et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170163669A1 · Brown et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170249376A1 · Garvey et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180011130A1 · Aguayo Gonzalez et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180060203A1 · Gupta et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180276044A1 · Fong et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180349797A1 · Garvey et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190102718A1 · Agrawal · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190163719A1 · Gross et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190196892A1 · Matei et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190197045A1 · Kraljevic et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190197145A1 · Gross · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190237997A1 · Tsujii et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190243799A1 · Gross et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190286725A1 · Gawlick · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190378022A1 · Wang et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200144204A1 · Keller, III et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200201950A1 · Wang et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200387753A1 · Brill et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210081573A1 · Gross et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210158202A1 · Backlawski et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210174248A1 · Wetherbee et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210270884A1 · Wetherbee et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210295210A1 · Wetherbee · 2021 [cited by examiner]
CN 107181543 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
CN 107181543A · 2017 [cited by applicant]
CN 110941020A · 2020 [cited by applicant]
Japanese Patent Office: “Office Action” issued in JP Application No. 2022-557900 having a date of issuance of Oct. 1, 2024 (4 pgs). [cited by applicant]
Wikipedia, Snapshot Isolation, pp. 1-6, downloaded Mar. 19, 2020 from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapshot_isolation. [cited by applicant]
Boris Glavic, Illinois Institute of Technology, A Primer on Database Provenance, Sep. 2014, pp. 1-10. [cited by applicant]
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority in PCT International Application No. PCT/US2021/015359, International filing date Jan. 28, 2021 (J… [cited by applicant]
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority in PCT International Application No. PCT/US2021/014106, International filing date Jan. 20, 2021 (J… [cited by applicant]
Huang H, et al. “Electronic counterfeit detection based on the measurement of electromagnetic fingerprint,” Microelectronics Reliability: an Internat . Journal & World Abstracting Service, vol. 55, No. 9, Jul. 9, 2015 (… [cited by applicant]
Bouali Fatma et al. “Visual mining of time series using a tubular visualization,” Visual Computer, Springer, Berlin, DE, vol. 32, No. 1, Dec. 5, 2014 (Dec. 5, 2014), pp. 15-30. [cited by applicant]
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority in PCT International Application No. PCT/US2021/013633, International filing date Jan. 15, 2021 (J… [cited by applicant]
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority in PCT International Application No. PCT/US2020/060083, International filing date Nov. 12, 2020 (D… [cited by applicant]
Garcia-Martin Eva et al., “Estimation of Energy Consumption in Machine Learning,” Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, Elsevier, Amsterdan, NL, vol. 134, Aug. 21, 2019 (Aug. 21, 2019), pp. 77-88. [cited by applicant]
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority in PCT International Application No. PCT/US2021/015802, International filing date Jan. 29, 2021 (J… [cited by applicant]
1st NF OA dated May 21, 2021 from U.S. Appl. No. 16/820,807, filed Mar. 17, 2020, having a date of mailing of May 21, 2021, 36 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Deepika et al., Design & development of location identification using RFID with Wi-Fi positioning systems, 2017 Ninth Intl. Conference on Ubiquitous and Future Networks (ICUFN). IEEE, 2017) 6 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Whisnant et al.; “Proactive Fault Monitoring in Enterprise Servers”, 2005 IEEE International Multiconference in Computer Science & Computer Engineering, Las Vegas, NV, Jun. 27-30, 2005. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: “Technical Review of On-Lin Monitoring Techniques for Performance Assessment vol. 1: State-of-the-Art”, XP055744715, Jan. 31, 2006, pp. 1-132. [cited by applicant]
Dickey et al.; Checking for Autocorrelation in Regression Residuals; pp. 959-965; Proceedings of 11th Annual SAS Users Group International Conference; 1986. [cited by applicant]
Hoyer et al.; Spectral Decomposition and Reconstruction of Nuclear Plant Signals; pp. 1153-1158; published Jan. 1, 2005; downloaded on Jul. 14, 2021 from: https://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings-archive/SUG… [cited by applicant]
Kenny Gross, Oracle Labs; MSET2 Overview: “Anomaly Detection and Prediction” Oracle Cloud Autonomous Prognostics; p. 1-58; Aug. 8, 2019. [cited by applicant]
Gribok, et al.,. “Use of Kernel Based Techniques for Sensor Validation in Nuclear Power Plants,” International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Plant Instrumentation, Controls, and Human-Machine Interface Technologies (NPIC &… [cited by applicant]
Gross, K. C et al., “Application of a Model-Based Fault Detection System to Nuclear Plant Signals,” downloaded from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236463759; Conference Paper: May 1, 1997, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Singer, et al., “Model-Based Nuclear Power Plant Monitoring and Fault Detection: Theoretical Foundations,” Intelligent System Application to Power Systems (ISAP '97), Jul. 6-10, 1997, Seoul, Korea pp. 60-65. [cited by applicant]
Wald, A, “Sequential Probability Ratio Test for Reliability Demonstration”, John Wiley & Sons, 1947. [cited by applicant]
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in PCT International Application No. PCT/US2021/062380 having a date of mailing of May 24, 2022 (10 pgs). [cited by applicant]
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in PCT International Application No. PCT/US2021/062592 having a date of mailing of Jun. 14, 2022 (13 pgs). [cited by applicant]
1st NF OA from U.S. Appl. No. 16/804,531, filed Dec. 28, 2020, having a date of mailing of Jul. 20, 2021, 51 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Wang, Ray C., et al., Process Fault Detection Using Time-Explicit Kiviat Diagrams. AIChE Journal 61.12 (2015): 4277-4293. [cited by applicant]
Abran et al.; Estimation Models Based on Functional Profiles. Intl. Workshop on Software Measurement-IWSM/MetriKon, Kronisburg (Germany), Shaker Verlag. 2004 (Year: 2004). [cited by applicant]
Gou, Yuhua, “Implementation of 3d Kiviat Diagrams.” (2008). (Year: 2008). [cited by applicant]