IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,555,684
Granted Patent B2
US 12,555,684 · App. 17/503,714 · Granted Feb 17, 2026

Assessing a treatment service based on a measure of trust dynamics

Inventors: James R. Kozloski (New Fairfield, CT); Sara Berger (White Plains, NY); Anup Kalia (Elmsford, NY); Jeffrey L. Rogers (Briarcliff Manor, NY)
Assignee: INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION
G16H50/30G06N5/04G06N20/00G16H10/60G16H20/10G16H50/70
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 12,555,684
App. No.
17/503,714
Granted
Feb 17, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

Techniques regarding autonomously determining an entity's susceptibility towards one or more treatment services are provided. For example, one or more embodiments described herein can comprise a system, which can comprise a memory that can store computer executable components. The system can also comprise a processor, operably coupled to the memory, and that can execute the computer executable components stored in the memory. The computer executable components can comprise an assessment component that can determine a susceptibility disposition value that measures a susceptibility of an entity to a treatment service based on a trust disposition value. The trust disposition value can be determined based on a communication with the entity using machine learning technology.

Claims (42)

1 . A system, comprising:

a memory that stores computer executable components;

a processor, operably coupled to the memory, and that executes the computer executable components stored in the memory, wherein the computer executable components comprise:

an assessment component that determines, via a trained machine learning model, a susceptibility disposition value that measures a susceptibility of a patient to a treatment service, wherein the susceptibility disposition value is computed from a trust disposition value, the trust disposition value being derived from features extracted from electronic communications involving commitments between the patient and one or more entities, the commitments comprising debtor, creditor, antecedent, and consequent parameters, and being evaluated as fulfilled or violated to update binary evidence values <r,s>; and

a model component that generates a computer model depicting, as a trust graph, linkages between a plurality of entities associated with the patient and the treatment service, wherein the linkages depict how the patient is indirectly correlated with the treatment service, and wherein the computer model is algorithmically traversable to generate a prediction of the susceptibility disposition value for the patient.

2 . The system of claim 1 , further comprising:

a data collection component that generates a dataset that represents a plurality of features extracted from a communication between the patient and a chatbot using machine learning technology.

3 . The system of claim 2 , further comprising:

an evaluation component that determines a plurality of trust disposition values that characterize trust that the patient has in the plurality of entities based on the communication.

4 . The system of claim 3 , wherein the plurality of trust disposition values are associated with the linkages in the computer model.

5 . The system of claim 2 , wherein the communication regards a commitment regarding an entity from the plurality of entities, and wherein the plurality of features delineates whether the commitment was fulfilled.

6 . The system of claim 1 , further comprising:

a distribution component that generates a recommendation regarding whether to perform the treatment service based on the susceptibility disposition value, and wherein the treatment service regards a chemical effect affecting the patient.

7 . The system of claim 6 , wherein the chemical effect is a chemically induced dependency generated by a chemical compound.

8 . The system of claim 6 , wherein the distribution component sends the recommendation to the patient.

9 . The system of claim 1 , further comprising:

a distribution component that distributes the treatment service to the patient based on a comparison of the susceptibility disposition value to a predefined threshold.

10 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the susceptibility disposition value is determined in a cloud computing environment.

11 . A computer-implemented method, comprising:

determining, by executing a machine learning classifier trained on commitment-based features, a susceptibility disposition value that quantitatively measures a susceptibility of a patient to a treatment service, wherein the susceptibility disposition value is computed from a trust disposition value, the trust disposition value being derived from features extracted from electronic communications involving commitments between the patient and one or more entities, the commitments comprising debtor, creditor, antecedent, and consequent parameters, and being evaluated as fulfilled or violated to update binary evidence values <r,s>; and

generating, by the system, a computer model implemented as a graph data structure stored in memory, the computer model depicting linkages between a plurality of entities associated with the patient and the treatment service, wherein the linkages are weighted by the trust disposition values, and wherein traversing the graph algorithmically facilitates prediction of the susceptibility disposition value.

12 . The computer-implemented method of claim 11 , further comprising:

generating, by the system, a dataset that represents a plurality of features extracted from a communication between the patient and a chatbot using machine learning technology; and

determining, by the system, a plurality of trust disposition values that characterize trust that the patient has in the plurality of entities based on the communication.

13 . The computer-implemented method of claim 11 , further comprising:

generating, by the system, a recommendation regarding whether to perform the treatment service based on the susceptibility disposition value, and wherein the treatment service regards a chemical effect affecting the patient.

14 . The computer-implemented method of claim 11 , further comprising:

distributing, by the system, the treatment service to the patient based on a comparison of the susceptibility disposition value to a predefined threshold value.

15 . The computer-implemented method of claim 14 , wherein the treatment service is a media selected from a group consisting of a text, a video and an audio signal.

16 . A computer program product for assessing a treatment service, the computer program product comprising a computer readable storage medium having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions executable by a processor to cause the processor to:

(a) receive communication data and extract, using natural language processing and feature extraction, parameters of commitments involving the patient, the commitments comprising debtor, creditor, antecedent, and consequent parameters;

(b) update trust evidence <r,s> values based on whether the commitments are fulfilled or violated;

(c) determine a trust disposition value from the updated evidence values using a learned probabilistic model; and

(d) generate a computer model implemented as a trust graph stored in memory, the trust graph comprising linkages between a plurality of entities associated with the patient and the treatment service, wherein the linkages are weighted by the trust disposition values, and wherein the trust graph is algorithmically traversable to compute a susceptibility disposition value for the patient.

17 . The computer program product of claim 16 , wherein the program instructions further cause the processor to:

generate, by the processor, a dataset that represents a plurality of features extracted from a communication between the patient and a chatbot using machine learning technology; and

determine, by the processor, a plurality of trust disposition values that characterize trust that the patient has in the plurality of entities based on the communication.

18 . The computer program product of claim 16 , wherein the program instructions further cause the processor to:

generate, by the processor, a recommendation regarding whether to perform the treatment service based on the susceptibility disposition value, and wherein the treatment service regards a chemical effect affecting the patient.

19 . The computer program product of claim 16 , wherein the program instructions further cause the processor to:

distribute, by the processor, the treatment service to the patient based on a comparison of the susceptibility disposition value to a predefined threshold value.

20 . The computer program product of claim 19 , wherein the treatment service is a media selected from a group consisting of a text, a video and an audio signal.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Oct 18, 2021
From: KOZLOSKI, JAMES R.; BERGER, SARA; KALIA, ANUP; ROGERS, JEFFREY L.
To: INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 057821/0310 →
Continuity (2)
Continuation 15986564 · May 22, 2018
Related Publication 20220037030A1 · Feb 3, 2022
References Cited (168)
US 5908383A · Brynjestad · 1999 [cited by applicant]
US 6249809B1 · Bro · 2001 [cited by applicant]
US 6425764B1 · Lamson · 2002 [cited by examiner]
US 7229430B2 · Hickle et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 7251609B1 · McAlindon et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 7463927B1 · Chaouat · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 7596410B1 · Kroll et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7801591B1 · Shusterman · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7886334B1 · Walsh · 2011 [cited by examiner]
US 7957809B2 · Bourget et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8046241B1 · Dodson · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8086563B2 · Jung et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8380314B2 · Panken et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8380531B2 · Paty et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8469713B2 · Kron et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8636273B2 · Saito · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 8935192B1 · Ventilla · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 9147041B2 · Amarasingham et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9262688B1 · Zadeh · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9536049B2 · Brown et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9607324B1 · Reed · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 9782122B1 · Pulliam et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 11177039B2 · Kozloski · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 11257574B1 · Boussios · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 11457863B1 · Roy · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 11894127B1 · McNair · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 11967428B1 · Boussios · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20010012913A1 · Iliff · 2001 [cited by applicant]
US 20020128866A1 · Goetzke et al. · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 20030178031A1 · Du Pen et al. · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 20040064709A1 · Heath · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 20050182659A1 · Huttin · 2005 [cited by examiner]
US 20060117378A1 · Tam · 2006 [cited by examiner]
US 20060265023A1 · Blumberg · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060293572A1 · Bulat · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20070032827A1 · Katims · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070061166A1 · Ramasubramanian · 2007 [cited by examiner]
US 20070239484A1 · Arond et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070260599A1 · McGuire · 2007 [cited by examiner]
US 20070271272A1 · McGuire et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20080059241A1 · Zahlmann et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080201174A1 · Ramasubramanian · 2008 [cited by examiner]
US 20090131758A1 · Heywood · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20090157141A1 · Chiao et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090259488A1 · Gounares · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20100087795A1 · Krijnsen et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100153832A1 · Markus · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 20110035158A1 · Banos et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110054564A1 · Valencia · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20120078837A1 · Bagchi et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20120316898A1 · Levitt et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130091582A1 · Chen · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20130173277A1 · Eller et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130244336A1 · Mayer et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130296987A1 · Rogers et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130339099A1 · Aidroos · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20140052475A1 · Madan · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20140074454A1 · Brown et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140074509A1 · Amarasingham et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140108034A1 · Akbay et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140122507A1 · Zeng · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20140222833A1 · Jia · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20140275827A1 · Gill et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140276188A1 · Jardin · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140276549A1 · Osorio · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140316793A1 · Pruit · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150019241A1 · Bennett et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150088535A1 · Smith · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150154646A1 · Mishra · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150193583A1 · McNair et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150199484A1 · Morris et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150254408A1 · Dadlani Mahtani · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150278474A1 · Stueckemann et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150278916A1 · Stoll · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150287330A1 · Kron et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150317439A1 · Kress · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150350038A1 · Mohan · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20160030281A1 · Shafieloo · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160051434A1 · Erkiliçet al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160100790A1 · Cantu et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160117484A1 · Hanina et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160140320A1 · Moturu · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160196389A1 · Moturu · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160198996A1 · Dullen · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160210424A1 · Di Battista · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160213314A1 · Zuckerman-Stark et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160335412A1 · Tucker et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160339241A1 · Hargrove et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170004260A1 · Moturu · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170032450A1 · Jia · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170056642A1 · Moffitt et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170124268A1 · Zhang · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170124269A1 · McNair et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170148083A1 · Yu · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170161439A1 · Raduchel · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20180018966A1 · Leonard · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180039763A1 · Tidor · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180075514A1 · Madhvanath · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180133101A1 · Inada · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180278554A1 · Kassabgi · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180307678A1 · Anantaram et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190065970A1 · Bonutti et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190140986A1 · Anderson et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190192874A1 · Shukla · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190198150A1 · Kang · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190275270A1 · Postrel · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190279775A1 · Dey · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190332637A1 · Yoo · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190392953A1 · Steuer · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20210169417A1 · Burton · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210241905A1 · Hoar · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210391083A1 · Moturu · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20240281841A1 · Atazky · 2024 [cited by examiner]
CN 102314558A · 2012 [cited by applicant]
CN 105844112A · 2016 [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance received for U.S. Appl. No. 17/224,746 dated Dec. 22, 2023, 56 pages. [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance received for U.S. Appl. No. 17/135,304 dated Feb. 10, 2023, 23 pages. [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance received for U.S. Appl. No. 17/134,686 dated Feb. 1, 2023, 23 pages. [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance received for U.S. Appl. No. 17/134,954 dated Feb. 10, 2023, 24 pages. [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance received for U.S. Appl. No. 17/135,304 dated May 4, 2023, 6 pages. [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance received for U.S. Appl. No. 17/134,954 dated May 4, 2023, 6 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 17/224,746 dated Sep. 14, 2023, 51 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 17/135,304 dated Oct. 14, 2022, 41 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 17/134,686 dated Sep. 29, 2022, 44 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 17/134,954 dated Oct. 14, 2022, 45 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/986,617 dated May 25, 2022, 54 pages. [cited by applicant]
Baliki, et al., Corticostrialal functional connectivity predicts transition to chronic back pain, Nat Neurosci., Jul. 1, 2012; 15(8): 1117-9, doi: 10.1038/nn.3153. [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/986,409 dated Jun. 25, 2020, 38 pages. [cited by applicant]
Baker, et al., Experience and knowledge of pain management in patients receiving outpatient cancer treatment: What do older adults really know about their cancer pain?, Pain Medicine, 2014, pp. 52-60, vol. 15. No. 1. [cited by applicant]
Hallenbeck, Pain and Intercultural Communication, Handbook of Pain and Palliative Care, Chapter 2, 2013, 24 Pages. [cited by applicant]
Pinto, et al., Patient-centred communication is associated with positive therapeutic alliance: a systematic review, Journal of Physiotherapy, 2012, pp. 77-87. vol. 58. [cited by applicant]
Anonymous, Method and System for Enhanced Medication Management System, Nov. 25, 2016, 5 Pages. [cited by applicant]
Kalia, et al., Goven: estimating trust from communications, Journal of Trust Management, 2016, 19 Pages, vol. 3, No. 1. [cited by applicant]
Anonymous, Methods & devices for managing and monitoring arthritis patients, IP.com No. IPCOM000247325D; Aug. 23, 2016, 7 pages. [cited by applicant]
Temple, Enrichment Strategies for Clinical Trials, CDER Enrichment Webinar, Mar. 25, 2013, 40 Pages. [cited by applicant]
Victor, et al., Trustworthiness as a Clinical Variable: The Problem of Trust in the Management of Chronic, Nonmalignant Pain, Pain Medicine, 2005, pp. 385-391, vol. 6, No. 5. [cited by applicant]
Buchman, et al., You Present like a Drug Addict: Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Trust and Trustworthiness in Chronic Pain Management, Pain Medicine, 2016, pp. 1394-1406, vol. 17. [cited by applicant]
Castle, et al., Neural and behavioral bases of age differences in perceptions of trust, PNAS, Dec. 12, 2012, pp. 20848-20852, vol. 109, No. 51. [cited by applicant]
Baliki, et al, Brain Morphological Signatures for Chronic Pain, PLoS ONE, Oct. 13, 2011, 13 Pages, vol. 6, No. 10. [cited by applicant]
Eickhoff, et al., Functional Segregation of the Human Dorsomedial Prefrontal Cortex, Cerebral Cortex, Jan. 2016, pp. 304-321, vol. 26. [cited by applicant]
Hashmi, et al., Shape shifting pain: chronification of back pain shifts brain representation from nociceptive to emotional circuits, Brain A Journal of Neurology, Jun. 14, 2013, pp. 2751-2768, vol. 136. [cited by applicant]
Fett, et al., Social neuroscience in psychiatry: unravelling the neural mechanisms of social dysfunction, Psychological Medicine, Sep. 18, 2014, 21 Pages. [cited by applicant]
Tsukiura, et al., Insular and hippocampal contributions to remembering people with an impression of bad personality, SCAN, 2013, pp. 515-522, vol. 8. [cited by applicant]
Vachon-Presseau, et al., Corticolimbic anatomical characteristics predetermine risk for chronic pain, Brain A Journal of Neurology, 2016, pp. 1958-1970, vol. 139. [cited by applicant]
Getov, et al., Human brain structure predicts individual differences in preconscious evaluation of facial dominance and trustworthiness, SCAN, 2015, pp. 690-699, vol. 10. [cited by applicant]
Mansour, et al., Brain white matter structural properties predict transition to chronic pain, Pain, Oct. 2013, pp. 2160-2168, vol. 154, No. 10. [cited by applicant]
Baliki, et al., Corticostrialal functional connectivity predicts transition to chronic back pain, National Neuroscience, pp. 1117-1119, vol. 15, No. 8. [cited by applicant]
Sprengelmeyer, et al., The neuropsychology of first impressions: Evidence from Huntington's disease, Cortex, Dec. 10, 2016, 41 Pages. [cited by applicant]
Baliki, et al., Predicting value of pain and analgesia: nucleus accumbens response to noxious stimuli changes in the presence of chronic pain, Neuron, Apr. 15, 2010, pp. 149-160, vol. 66, No. 1. [cited by applicant]
Tetreault, et al., Brain Connectivity Predicts Placebo Response across Chronic Pain Clinical Trials, PLOS Biology, Oct. 27, 2016, vol. 14, No. 10. [cited by applicant]
Pecina, et al., Personality Trail Predictors of Placebo Analgesia and Neurobiological Correlates, Neuropsychopharmacology, 2013, pp. 639-646, vol. 38. [cited by applicant]
Schafer, et al., Health Care Providers' Judgments in Chronic Pan: The Influence of Gender and Trustworthiness, Internalional Association for the Study of Pain, 2016, 32 Pages. [cited by applicant]
Colloca, et al., Placebo analgesia induced by social observational learning, Pain, Jan. 29, 2009, pp. 28-34, vol. 144. [cited by applicant]
Geers, et al., Reconsidering the role of personality in placebo effects: Dispositional optimism, situational expectations, and the placebo response, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 2005, pp. 121-127, vol. 58. [cited by applicant]
Hyland, et al., Motivational concordance: An important mechanism in self-help therapeutic rituals involving inert (placebo) substances, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 2008, pp. 405-413, vol. 65. [cited by applicant]
Tuttle, et al., Increasing placebo responses over lime in U.S. clinical trials of neuropalhic pain, Pain, Dec. 2015, pp. 2616-2626, vol. 156. [cited by applicant]
Lount, The Impact of Positive Mood on Trust in Interpersonal and Intergroup Interactions, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2010, pp. 420-433, vol. 98, No. 3. [cited by applicant]
Sessa, et al., Perceived trustworthiness shapes neural empathic responses toward others' pain, Neuropsychologia, 2015, pp. 97-105, vol. 79. [cited by applicant]
Mel, et al., The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing, National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800-145, Sep. 2011, 7 Pages. [cited by applicant]
Mutso et al., “Reorganization of hippocampal functional connectivity with transition to chronic back pain,” Journal of Neurophysiology, 2014, pp. 1065-1076, 12 pages. [cited by applicant]
List of IBM Patents or Applications Treated as Related. [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/986,579 dated Aug. 6, 2020, 36 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/986,566 dated Jul. 24, 2020, 33 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/986,598 dated Aug. 7, 2020, 36 pages. [cited by applicant]
Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/986,409 dated Oct. 2, 2020, 44 pages. [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/986,566 dated Nov. 3, 2020, 25 Pages. [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/986,409 dated Jan. 7, 2021, 44 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/986,564 dated May 4, 2021, 61 pages. [cited by applicant]