IP Library Granted Patent US 12,561,223
Granted Patent B2
US 12,561,223 · App. 17/002,444 · Granted Feb 24, 2026

Method for decentralized accessioning for distributed machine learning and other applications

Inventor: Karl Mutch (Kenwood, CA)
Assignee: Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation
G06F11/3466G06N20/00
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 12,561,223
App. No.
17/002,444
Granted
Feb 24, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method for injecting metadata into an existing artifact is described. The method generates metadata related to an existing artifact having a predetermined structure and encodes the metadata in accordance with the predetermined structure. The encoded metadata is embedded within the existing artifact in accordance with the predetermined structure and is delineated within the predetermined structure as one or more individual records. The artifact, including embedded metadata, is stored within a storage entity and is accessible to processes related to the artifact. Additional records may be generated and embedded over time, thus creating a timeline if event related to the artifact.

Claims (53)

1 . A computer-implemented method for injecting metadata into an existing machine learning process artifact comprising:

generating metadata related to an existing machine learning process artifact during one or more processes related to the existing machine learning process, wherein the existing machine learning process artifact is embodied in a predetermined structure and further wherein the metadata is generated at multiple distinct times;

encoding the metadata at each distinct time in accordance with the predetermined structure; and

embedding the metadata at each distinct time within the existing machine learning process artifact in accordance with the predetermined structure, wherein the embedded metadata at each distinct time is delineated within the predetermined structure as a separate individual record;

storing the existing machine learning process artifact with embedded separate individual records in a storage entity after each distinct time as a distinct version.

2 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 1 , wherein the processes related to the existing machine learning process artifact are selected from a group consisting of creating, duplicating, training, serving, deploying, producing, storing and using the existing machine learning process artifact.

3 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 1 , wherein the separate individual records containing the metadata are injected into the existing machine learning process artifact over time to create an audit trail.

4 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 3 , wherein the separate individual records are injected sequentially to the existing machine learning process artifact over time.

5 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 1 , wherein the one or more processes are performed by one or more processing entities selected from a group consisting of instrumented and un-instrumented processing entities.

6 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 5 , wherein metadata generated by a process performed by an instrumented processing entity is encoded and embedded within the existing machine learning process artifact by the instrumented processing entity.

7 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 5 , wherein metadata generated by a process performed by an un-instrumented processing entity is collected by a supervising entity wherein the supervising entity encodes and embeds the metadata within the existing machine learning process artifact on behalf of the un-instrumented processing entity.

8 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 1 , wherein the existing machine learning process artifact is selected from a group consisting of data, code and model artifacts.

9 . A computer-implemented method for injecting metadata generated during one or more processes related to a model into an existing machine learning process artifact comprising:

generating first metadata related to an existing machine learning process artifact during a first process, wherein the existing machine learning process artifact is embodied in a predetermined structure;

encoding the first metadata in accordance with the predetermined structure; and

embedding the first metadata within the existing machine learning process artifact in accordance with the predetermined structure, wherein the embedded first metadata is delineated within the predetermined structure as a first individual record;

storing the existing machine learning process artifact with embedded first individual record in a first storage entity as a first updated version of the existing machine learning process artifact;

generating second metadata related to the existing machine learning process artifact during a second process;

encoding the second metadata in accordance with the predetermined structure;

embedding the second metadata within the existing machine learning process artifact in accordance with the predetermined structure, wherein the embedded second metadata is delineated within the predetermined structure as a second individual record;

storing the existing machine learning process artifact with embedded first and second individual records in a second storage entity as a second updated version of the existing machine learning process artifact.

10 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 9 , wherein the first and second process are selected from a group consisting of duplicating, training, serving, deploying, producing, storing and using the existing machine learning process artifact.

11 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 9 , wherein the first and second individual records containing the first and second metadata are injected into the existing machine learning process artifact at different times, thereby creating an audit trail related to the existing machine learning process artifact.

12 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 9 , wherein the first and second processes are performed by one or more processing entities selected from a group consisting of instrumented and un-instrumented processing entities.

13 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 12 , wherein first and second metadata generated by processes performed by an instrumented processing entity is encoded and embedded within the existing machine learning process artifact by the instrumented processing entity.

14 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 13 , wherein first and second metadata generated by a process performed by an un-instrumented processing entity is collected by a supervising entity wherein the supervising entity encodes and embeds the metadata within the existing machine learning process artifact on behalf of the un-instrumented processing entity.

15 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 9 , wherein the first storage entity and the second storage entity are the same storage entity.

16 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 9 , wherein the first storage entity and the second storage entity are different storage entities.

17 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 9 , wherein the existing machine learning process artifact is selected from a group consisting of data, code and model artifacts.

18 . A computer-implemented method for automating access to and use of machine learning process artifact-related metadata from one or more sources by one or more processing frameworks, comprising:

generating metadata related to an existing machine learning process artifact, wherein the existing machine learning process artifact is embodied in a predetermined structure;

encoding the metadata in accordance with the predetermined structure;

embedding the metadata within the existing machine learning process artifact in accordance with the predetermined structure, wherein the embedded metadata is delineated within the predetermined structure as one or more individual records;

storing the existing machine learning process artifact with embedded one or more individual records in a first source at a first time, wherein the first source includes a storage entity with an associated query engine for receiving queries related to the existing machine learning process artifact including the metadata embedded therein, and further wherein the storing results in creation of storage entity metadata associated with the existing machine learning process artifact wherein the storage entity metadata is encoded in accordance with the predetermined structure of the existing machine learning process artifact, embedded within the existing machine learning process artifact and stored as part of the existing machine learning process artifact as an individual record in the first source at a second time;

providing by the query engine, a notification regarding a change to the existing machine learning process artifact, including changes to the metadata embedded therein at the first time and changes to the associated storage entity metadata at the second time;

wherein receipt of the notification triggers an action related to the existing machine learning process artifact responsive to an indication of a change.

19 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 18 , wherein providing the notification by the query engine is responsive to a first query from a first entity to the query engine.

20 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 19 , wherein the first entity is a processing entity for performing one or more processes selected from a group consisting of duplicating, training, serving, deploying, producing, storing and using the existing machine learning process artifact.

21 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 18 , wherein providing the notification by the query engine is generated automatically by the query engine when the change occurs.

22 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 8 , wherein a change to the existing machine learning process artifact's associated storage entity metadata includes a change to an existing machine learning process artifact's version ID.

23 . The computer-implemented method according to claim 18 , wherein the existing machine learning process artifact is selected from a group consisting of data, code and model artifacts.

24 . At least one non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a computer, perform a method for injecting metadata into an existing machine learning process artifact, the method comprising:

generating metadata related to an existing machine learning process artifact during one or more processes related to the existing machine learning process, wherein the existing machine learning process artifact is embodied in a predetermined structure and further wherein the metadata is generated at multiple distinct times;

encoding the metadata at each distinct time in accordance with the predetermined structure; and

embedding the metadata at each distinct time within the existing machine learning process artifact in accordance with the predetermined structure, wherein the embedded metadata at each distinct time is delineated within the predetermined structure as a separate individual record;

storing the existing machine learning process artifact with embedded separate individual records in a storage entity after each distinct time as a distinct version.

25 . The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 24 , the method further comprising wherein the processes related to the existing machine learning process artifact are selected from a group consisting of duplicating, training, serving, deploying, producing, storing and using the existing machine learning process artifact.

26 . The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 24 , the method further comprising wherein the separate individual records containing the metadata are injected into the existing machine learning process artifact over time to create an audit trail.

27 . The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26 , the method further comprising wherein the separate individual records are injected sequentially to the existing machine learning process artifact over time.

28 . The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 24 , the method further comprising wherein the one or more processes are performed by one or more processing entities selected from a group consisting of instrumented and un-instrumented processing entities.

29 . The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 28 , the method further comprising wherein metadata generated by a process performed by an instrumented processing entity is encoded and embedded within the existing machine learning process artifact by the instrumented processing entity.

30 . The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 29 , the method further comprising wherein metadata generated by a process performed by an un-instrumented processing entity is collected by a supervising entity wherein the supervising entity encodes and embeds the metadata within the existing machine learning process artifact on behalf of the un-instrumented processing entity.

31 . The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 24 , the method further comprising wherein the existing machine learning process artifact is selected from a group consisting of data, code and model artifacts.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 25, 2020
From: MUTCH, KARL
To: COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS U.S. CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 053595/0523 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20230041582A1 · Feb 9, 2023
References Cited (57)
US 9176961B2 · Klein, Jr. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9396037B2 · Morsi et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 10324923B1 · Chinthagunti · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 10459881B2 · Barth et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10528332B2 · Atkinson et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 11036492B2 · Lakshminarayanan · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20070203874A1 · Cave · 2007 [cited by examiner]
US 20130282952A1 · Miyamae · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20140304215A1 · Masinter · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20160364146A1 · Kuttner · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20180032423A1 · Bull · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180341631A1 · Verma · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20190286613A1 · Bramante · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190392001A1 · Carothers · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200019882A1 · Sunil et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200067789A1 · Bharat et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200097851A1 · Alvarez · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200160229A1 · Atcheson · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200177455A1 · Tkaczyk · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210073618A1 · Boussarov · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210107141A1 · Shrivastava · 2021 [cited by examiner]
Riley, Jenn. “Understanding metadata.” Washington DC, United States: National Information Standards Organization (http://www. niso. org/publications/press/UnderstandingMetadata. pdf) 23 (2017): 7-10. (Year: 2017). [cited by examiner]
Popp, Matthias. Comprehensive support of the lifecycle of machine learning models in model management systems. MS thesis. 2019. (Year: 2019). [cited by examiner]
Drori, Iddo, et al. “Automl using metadata language embeddings.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.03698 (2019). (Year: 2019). [cited by examiner]
“From Data to Metadata For Machine Learning Platforms” [online], May 15, 2020 [retrieved on Jul. 23, 2020], Inside BigData, 7 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://www.printfriendly.com/p/g/WLj9gV. [cited by applicant]
Jim Dowling, “Guide to File Formats For Machine Learning: Columnar, Training, Inferencing, and the Feature Store” [online], Oct. 25, 2019 [retrieved on Jul. 23, 2020], Towards Data Science, 15 pp., Retrieved From the In… [cited by applicant]
“MinIO Quickstart Guide” [online], [retrieved Aug. 10, 2020], 8 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://docs.minio.io. [cited by applicant]
Tal Joffe, “SQL Query Engines—Intro and Benchmark” [online] Nov. 1, 2019 [retrieved on Aug. 10, 2020], 8 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://medium.com/nmc-techblog/sql-query-engines-intro-and-benchmark-44a658b478… [cited by applicant]
Iker, “BigData SQL Query Engine Benchmark” [online], Jun. 25, 2018 [retrieved on Aug. 10, 2020], 9 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://medium.com/@mitxino77/bigdata-sql-query-engine-benchmark-e8605f355464. [cited by applicant]
Alex Castrounis, Innoarchtech, “Python vs. R for AI, Machine Learning, and Data Science,” published by O'Reilly Media, Copyright InnoArchiTech LLC 2020. [cited by applicant]
Alex Castrounis, Innoarchtech, “Production vs. Development AI and Machine Learning,” published by O'Reilly Media, Copyright InnoArchiTech LLC 2020. [cited by applicant]
Alex Castrounis, Innoarchtech, “Advanced Analytics Packages, Frameworks, and Platforms,” published by O'Reilly Media, Copyright InnoArchiTech LLC 2020. [cited by applicant]
“CX, Model Training Automation and the Feature Store Problem” [online], 2019 [retrieved on Aug. 26, 2020] O'Reilly Strata Data Conference 2019, New York, New York, 3 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://www.oreilly… [cited by applicant]
Danilo Sato, et al., “Continuous Delivery for Machine Learning—Automating the End-to-End Lifecycle of Machine Learning Applications” [online], Sep. 19, 2019 [retrieved on Aug. 25, 2020], 34 pp., Retrieved From the Inter… [cited by applicant]
Microsoft, “MLOps: Model Management, Deployment, and Monitoring With Azure Machine Learning” [online], Mar. 17, 2020 [retrieved on Aug. 25, 2020], 9 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azu… [cited by applicant]
Sebastian Schelter, “On Challenges in Machine Learning Model Management,” Amazon Research, Copyright 2018, 11 pp. [cited by applicant]
Ibm, “Managing Model” [online], Aug. 11, 2020 [retrieved on Aug. 25, 2020], 2 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://dataplatform.cloud.ibm.com/docs/content/wsj/analyze-data/ml-manage-models.html. [cited by applicant]
Google Cloud, “MLOps: Continuous Delivery and Automation Pipelines in Machine Learning” [online], Last updated Jul. 27, 2020 [retrieved Aug. 26, 2020], Retrieved From the Internet: https://cloud.google.com/solutions/mac… [cited by applicant]
Matei Zaharia, “MLflow: A Platform for Managing the Machine Learning Lifecycle” [online], Jul. 17, 2018 [retrieved on Aug. 26, 2020], 10 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://www.oreilly.com/content/mlflow-a-platfor… [cited by applicant]
Jim Dowling, “MLOps With a Feature Store” [online], Mar. 5, 2020 [retrieved on Aug. 26, 2020], 15 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://towardsdatascience.com/mlops-with-a-feature-store-816cfa5966e9. [cited by applicant]
Eduardo Melo, “How to Accelerate DevOps With Machine Learning Lifecyle Management” [online], Apr. 9, 2019 [retrieved on Aug. 26, 2020], Microsoft Azure, Retrieved From the Internet: https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blo… [cited by applicant]
Emmanuel Raj, “Robust and Scalable Machine Learning Lifecycle For a High Performing AI Team” [online], Dec. 20, 2019 [retrieved on Aug. 26, 2020], 7 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://www.tietoevry.com/en/blog/20… [cited by applicant]
Isaac Sacolick, “What is CI/CD? Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery Explained” [online], Jan. 17, 2020 [retrieved on Aug. 26, 2020], 9 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://www.infoworld.com/article/32711… [cited by applicant]
Microsoft, “DevOps For a Data Ingestion Pipeline” [online], Jun. 23, 2020 [retrieved on Aug. 26, 2020], 16 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://dofcs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/machine-learning/how-to-cicd-data-inge… [cited by applicant]
Alex Breshears, “Introducing MLOps and SDX For Models in Cloudera Machine Learning” [online], May 6, 2020 [retrieved on Aug. 26, 2020], 17 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://blog.cloudera.com/introducing-mlops-an… [cited by applicant]
Lakshmi Randall, “Together, Metadata and Machine Leaning Can Help Automate Data Integration” [online], Oct. 12, 2017 [retrieved on Aug. 26, 2020], 13 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://thenewstack.io/using-metada… [cited by applicant]
Matthew Arnold, et al., “Towards Automating the AI Operations Lifecycle,” Mar. 28, 2020, MLOps Workshop at MLSys 2020, arXiv: 2003.12808v1, 6 pp. [cited by applicant]
Hewletter Packard, “HPE EZMERAL ML OPS” [online], [retrieved on Aug. 26, 2020], 9 pp., Retrieved From the Internet: https://www.hpe.com/us/en/solutions/machine-learning-operations.html. [cited by applicant]
Jingyan Jiang, et al., “BACombo—Bandwidth-Aware Decentralized Federated Learning,” Electronics 2020, 9, 440, doi: 10.3390/electronics9030440, Feb. 2, 2020, 15 pp. [cited by applicant]
D. Sculley, et al., “Hidden Technical Debt in Machine Learning Systems,” NIPS '15, Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 2, pp. 2503-2511, Dec. 2015. [cited by applicant]
“2020 State of Enterprise Machine Learning,” Algorithmia, Inc., Copyright 2019, 29 pp. [cited by applicant]
Matthias Popp, “Comprehensive Support of the Lifecycle of Machine Learning Models in Model Management Systems,” Master Thesis, Institute of Parallel and Distributed Systems, University of Stuttgart, Commenced: May 4, 20… [cited by applicant]
Sebastian Schelter, et al. “Automatically Tracking Metadata and Provenance of Machine Learning Experiments,” Machine Learning Systems Workshop at NIPS 2017, Long Beach, CA, USA, 8 pp. [cited by applicant]
Canadian Examination Report for Application No. CA 3,124,812, dated Nov. 23, 2023, 7 pp. [cited by applicant]
Indian Examination Report for Application No. 202144030387, dated Mar. 15, 2022, 5 pp. [cited by applicant]
Indian Hearing Notice for Appplication No. 202144030387, dated Jan. 16, 2024, 2 pp. [cited by applicant]
European Search Report for Application No. EP 21 19 2260, dated Jan. 24, 2022, 8 pp. [cited by applicant]