WO2002001476A2

WO2002001476A2 - Supermarket trolley equipped with automatic control system for the goods it contains

Info

Publication number: WO2002001476A2
Application number: PCT/IT2001/000228
Authority: WO
Inventors: Tommaso Innocenti
Original assignee: Tommaso Innocenti
Priority date: 2000-06-23
Filing date: 2001-05-10
Publication date: 2002-01-03
Also published as: AU2001262646A1; ITFI20000145A1; WO2002001476A3; ITFI20000145A0; IT1314964B1

Abstract

Trolley equipped with a computer capable of identifying and registering, one by one, the articles selected and put into a trolley by the customer, and then communicating the relative information to the central computer. The computer of the trolley continuously checks the correspondence between what has been registered and what has been actually put into the trolley, carrying out specific functions in the case this correspondence is not verified. When this trolley is used in a supermarket, said system permits to calculate directly the total amount of the expenditure.

Description

"SUPERMARKET TROLLEY EQUIPPED WITH AUTOMATIC CONTROL SYSTEM FOR THE GOODS IT CONTAINS"

Description Technical Field The present invention concerns the technical sector of the manufacturing of trolleys for carrying objects and goods, for industrial and/or commercial use. This invention relates also electronic systems for the check of the products. Background Art Common trolleys are known, for use in factories, warehouses or other places where work is carried out, inside which people put objects that must be collected or simply carried from one place to another. Said trolleys are formed by a frame and often by wheels for their movement, but they cannot identify at all the number and type of the products they contain, and the time they have been put in either, as said information can be obtained only contacting directly their user or doing a later check that is not always easy to realize. Supermarket trolleys are also known, which are used as follows. The customer, or consumer, takes a trolley at the entrance, brings it inside the store and places in several articles or products he/she wants to buy. At the checkout, the consumer takes the products placed into the trolley and lays them on a suitable conveyor or plane, in order to let them be reached by the cashier. Thus, the cashier scans one product at a time by a bar code system, and then places them (always one by one) on a suitable plane (which sometimes corresponds to the plane where the customer had placed the products), loose or directly inside specific containers. Once the cashier has finished to scan all the articles selected, the cash-computer will process the data acquired by the scan of the single UPCs and allow the cashier to communicate the total cost to the customer and deal with him/her the means of payment. Finally, the consumer takes the products from the plane where the cashier placed them, loose or in the suitable containers (packs, bags, boxes, etc.), and carries them away him/herself; otherwise he/she puts them again into the trolley and pushes it to the exit . Therefore, at present the trolley is used in such a way that every single article is handled at least four times (three times by the customer, one by the cashier) and follows a space itinerary also with four stops (trolley, pre-checkout plane, post-checkout plane and, often, trolley again) . As a matter of fact, trolleys known at present do not allow to automate the operation of calculating the sum to be paid, neither a phase of the operation of payment.

They are normally formed by a frame, generally consisting of metal tubes, assembled on wheels, usually four swivel wheels, and have such a shape and weight that a single person can easily carry it inside stores and place in the various goods on sale. Sometimes the supermarket trolleys have such a shape that permits to connect them in rows, one inside the other, in order to reduce their bulk when they are not used; they provide also a system to uncouple them from the rows, only after the insertion of coins, in order to limit their thefts. Nevertheless, trolleys capable of making the operation of payment easier, quicker and safer, without increasing the task of the consumer, do not still exist. Disclosure of invention The present invention principally aims at eliminating the above- mentioned and other drawbacks, supplying an automated trolley that permits to control the correspondence of the articles actually contained in the trolley with the ones registered by the cash- computer of the store and, in particular, allows the consumer to evaluate the real expenses, without the risks of frauds for the department store.

We reached this result realizing a system with the characteristics described in the separate claims. Other characteristics of this invention are the object of dependent claims. The advantages resulting from the present invention essentially consist of the fact that it's possible to quickly check the type and quantity of the goods put into the trolley; that the physical work and the time necessary for doing the shopping is considerably saved; that labour requirements are reduced too, as the cashiers might be even completely eliminated in the case the payment is fulfilled by credit card or other forms of virtual money; that the consumer has more time and quietness to accurately arrange the products in the trolley, possibly inserting them directly into specific containers (packs, bags, boxes, etc.); that it's possible to check in every moment the amount of the expenditure; that the risk of frauds or thefts is eliminated, as this system is equipped with a mechanism that permits to check the accuracy of the products put into the same trolley.

To the purposes of the following description, we want to clarify that the term "computer" indicates the programmable functional apparatus, formed by one or more processing units (units with one or more processors and internal memories) connected each other, controlled by internal stored programs, which can do various calculations, including many arithmetic and logical operations, without being essentially necessary human interaction during their working. It refers also to any machine able to accept structural input, to process it by a digital method (representing the values by means of discrete signals, the bits of the binary code 0 and 1) , according to prescribed rules, and to produce results as output. The term input peripheral or device indicates the hardware component used to provide information for the computer, whereas output peripheral or device means the hardware component used to receive information by the computer. Accordingly, the input-output peripheral or device indicates the hardware component used both to provide information for the computer and to receive information by the computer, according to the current situation.

The characters consist of a series of elements used for the representation, the organization or the control of data. The optical scanner or reader, refers to a computer input peripheral that uses devices capable of identifying the light in order to explore paper or other material, translate pale and dark, or colours, into digital signals that can be manipulated by the software, for the optical identification of the characters, or by graphic programs. In general, by the term scanner we refer to any device capable of exploring optically, for consecutive parts, a particular shape or configuration of elements, of producing analogue or digital signals, corresponding to the explored shape or configuration, and of transmitting them as data.

The bar code is the code that represents characters by means of configurations of parallel bars, of variable width and distance across, which can be optically read by means of a transverse scan. In general, it'-s also an identification code stamped as a series of vertical bars of different width and used to guarantee a fast input without errors in various situations, representing binary information that can be read by an optical reader. The codification may include numbers, letters and a combination of both of them; some codes include an internal check on the errors and can be read in either direction.

The UPC, acronym for Universal Product Code, indicates a numeration of commercial products by means of bar codes composed by 12 digits: a system numerical character, a number of five digits given to the manufacturer, a product code given by the manufacturer and a check digit module 10.

The bar code scanner is a specific type of scanner that usually uses a laser ray to read and interpret bar codes. The scan of the UPCs in supermarkets is a typical example of such use of a bar code scanner. A two-way teletransmitter of data is an input-output peripheral that allows a computer to communicate, i.e. to transmit and receive data, with another computer, by methods of two-way off-transmission, such as infrared rays, radio waves, or the like.

The keyboard is a computer input peripheral formed by a series of switches identified by a corresponding series of keys. The electronic balance is an instrument for measuring the weight of the bodies, wherein the same weight causes a variation of the electrical features, resistance and capacity of suitable materials forming the sensitive part of the instrument. The mechanical load is converted into a proportional electrical signal that can be acquired and used by a computer (therefore, the electronic balance is an input device) .

Reduced to its essential structure and with reference to the figures of the enclosed drawings, a trolley equipped with a control system of the objects placed inside it, according to the invention, comprises: - means to identify the products put into the trolley, by a specific input peripheral capable of reading a code preset on the same product that contains at least the information relating its identification and weight;

- means to measure the weight of every product put into the trolley, by measuring the total weight of the goods placed in, with an electronic balance integrated into the trolley and connected to the computer;

- means to check the correspondence of the product actually inserted with the one resulting from the above-mentioned identification, comparing at least the information relating the weight of each object with the weight measured by the electronic balance, by a computer installed in the trolley and connected to said input peripheral, as well as to the balance. Conveniently, this system permits to identify the products put into the trolley, by means of the input peripheral capable of reading a code preset on the same product that contains the information relating its identification, and then communicating the identity of the scanned article to the computer installed in the trolley. Conveniently, this system permits to calculate the price of every single product and/or the total expenditure, by means of the computer that, identifying each single product, infers and register its weight, price and other data eventually preset by the department store.

Conveniently, this system permits to check the correspondence of the products actually placed in the trolley with the ones identified, by means of the computer, connected to the input peripheral and to the electronic balance, both installed in the trolley, which computer continuously compares the sum of the weights assigned to each identified article by the shopkeeper and registered by the same computer, with the value of the weight of the objects contained into the trolley, as really measured by the balance.

Conveniently, the selected articles are put into the trolley only one time, because, before their insertion, they are immediately identified and registered by the computer of the trolley that "recognizes" the various products by means of a specific input peripheral for the method of identification of the products at issue. Conveniently, the input peripheral is a bar code scanner that allows directly the customer to optically scan the identifying code of every product, only by passing it over the scanner integrated into the trolley.

Conveniently, the identification of the articles may be based on other technologies, such as magnetism or optical means different from bar code, therefore the scanner may be replaced with another suitable input peripheral, according to the identifying system that is used. Conveniently, on every scan of the product, the system will send out a sound and/or visual signal informing the customer about the effective and correct identification. Conveniently, whether the consumer wishes to insert the selected products directly into suitable containers (packs, bags, boxes, etc. ) , he/she has to identify them too (as at present the cashier does) , as well as in the case he/she buys services and/or needs to communicate money-off vouchers, customer cards (like "loyalty cards") or other, to the shopkeeper.

Conveniently, if the client wants no more an article already registered, it will be possible to cancel the computation, carrying out the following procedure:

- press a specific key; - take the unwanted product out from the trolley;

- identify it again (at this stage the computer preferably will emit a sound and/or visual signal informing the customer about the effective and correct identification) .

Conveniently, the measure of the encoded weight of every product, identified and registered by the computer, always corresponds to the real weight of the object (considering a minimum prefixed tolerance) and no article weighs as any other one. Conveniently, the trolley is formed by a frame, equipped with a computer and comprises the following elements:

- bar code scanner or other specific input device for the identification of the products; - possible two-way teletransmitter of data;

- keyboard;

- electronic balance;

- displays and/or leds and/or pilot lights and/or sound generators;

- battery for the electrical supply of all these electronic devices and a plug for recharging the same battery.

Conveniently, the computer includes the following input peripherals:

- the scanner, or other specific input device for the identification of the products;

- the keyboard, in order to receive data and instructions by the customer;

- the balance, for the evaluation of the weight contained into the trolley.

Conveniently, the computer input-output peripheral is the two-way teletransmitter, which communicates in either two directions with the central computer of the store or with other computers (such as the client's mobile phone or palmtop in order to facilitate the insertion of any personal identification/secret code) . The computer output peripherals include displays and/or leds and/or pilot lights and/or sound generators, which inform and alert the consumer. Conveniently, the input device for the identification of the products is located towards the inside, where the various articles are placed, on the side from which the trolley is pushed, in such a position that makes the operation of identification or scan of the products by the customer harmoniously integrated with the movement of their insertion into the trolley, which must remain natural and fluid, and that also makes it more difficult to get dirty and harmless for persons and/or things during its working.

Conveniently, the electronic balance is structured in such a way that it evaluates only and always the weight of the articles put into the trolley, with a prefixed sensitivity and maximum weight, minimizing all the possible interferences with the measure of the dynamic load. The keyboard is placed on the side where the trolley is pushed by the customer, in order to be conveniently used; on the same position we'll find the displays and/or leds and/or pilot lights and/or sound generators, in order to allow the sound and/or visual output to easily reach the consumer. The two-way teletransmitter of data has such a position that allows it to conveniently communicate with the corresponding peripherals of the central computer of the store or of other computers. The computer, the scanner, or other specific input device for the identification of the products, the electronic balance, the keyboard, the two-way teletransmitter, the displays and/or leds and/or pilot lights and/or sound generators, the battery and the plug for its recharging, are structured so as to minimize the external bulk, the weight and the risks of damage, following bumps, exposure to extreme temperatures, contacts with various liquids, and so as to maximize handling and ease of use of the trolley and conveniently permit maintenance operations. Conveniently, the various components have the best size, shape, weight and material suitable for their use and compatible with the rest of the trolley, according to the project criteria and the desired aims predetermined during their practical realization (like, for example, industriability, ergonomicity, design) .

Conveniently, every article sold in the stores where this invention is used must have a UPC or other system of identification, either based or not on a bar code, which allows the computer to recognize the product, specifying its encoded weight, i.e. the measure of the weight assigned to that product when it has been given its identity code, its price and all the other information the shopkeeper considers useful.

Conveniently, its practical realization can provide such a method of two-way teletransmission of data between the computer of the trolley and the central one (like radio waves) that allows them to communicate, not only in the phase of payment, but continuously and constantly, from the entrance in the store to the exit. Conveniently, the dialogue between the two computers facilitates even the phase of payment, not only thanks to the immediate computation of the products selected, but also because it permits a faster input of personal and financial data of the customer, as well as a quicker and more effective check of their accuracy. These operations are crucial especially if the consumer chooses to pay by credit card, debit card or other forms of virtual money, therefore their simplification can (the single choice is referred to the practical realization) allow the customer to pay autonomously, without any contact with the counter staff, except for explicit requests, using the devices already located on the trolley (the scanner or other identification devices for reading the cards, the display for showing the sum and other communications, the keyboard for the typing of possible personal secret codes; the possible print of receipts or other documentation can be carried out by means of a small printer placed on the trolley too, integrated with the output peripherals of the computer and powered by the same battery) .

Conveniently, the consumer may be allowed to access the information (like the partial expenditure, i.e. the cost of all the products selected until that moment) processed by the computer located on the trolley.

Conveniently, the trolley object of the present invention is mainly suggested to be used by customers of supermarkets, but can be used in any environment where the check and processing of the items put inside it is necessary.

Conveniently, the non-correspondence of the products actually inserted in the trolley with the ones identified, can be signalled only when it shows an excessive insertion of products or any other unidentified object compared to what has been registered, or even when it shows a removal of one or more products, previously contained into the trolley, without cancelling its/their computation carrying out the specific procedure.

Conveniently, this system provides the following stages: - the customer chooses the article, allows the computer to identify it, before its insertion into the trolley, by means of the bar code scanner located on the trolley, or by means of other technologies fulfilled with corresponding specific peripherals; - the computer identifies the product a_x, registers its encoded weight, its price and the time of its identification;

- the electronic balance weighs the total weight of the objects put into the trolley at any prefixed interval of time (preferably said interval must be as shorter as possible, compatible with the potentiality of the entire system) ;

- the computer, between an identification and the other, continuously compares the total weight of the objects placed into the trolley, supplied at short intervals by the balance, with the sum of the encoded weights of every article registered until that moment, so checking the correspondence between what the computer has calculated and what has been really put into the trolley;

- the computer keeps on informing the customer (by means of visual signs with leds, pilot lights, messages on the display and/or sound signals) about the possible irregularities between what has been registered and what the trolley really contains, until they are not regularized;

- once the fair customer behaviour has been verified, the computer allows the identification and the insertion of the next article into the trolley;

- the customer puts the next product into the trolley, while the computer and the balance monitor his/her behaviour as above described;

- once the customer has finished to place all the selected articles into the trolley, he/she pushes it towards the supermarket checkout, next to the exit, in order to pay; in this area, the central computer of the store receives from the computer located on the trolley all the data about the selected products and about the customer behaviour (which can be potentially reprocessed for any informative process), by means of a fixed two-way teletransmitter capable of communicating with the corresponding peripheral on the trolley.

Method for checking the goods put into a trolley and signalling any irregular behaviour, characterized by the fact that it provides the following stages:

- the computer (1) identifies the product a_x, (2) registers its encoded weight p_x, its price c_x and the time of its identification tj_. (date/hour/minutes/seconds) ;

- the electronic balance (3) measures and communicates to the computer the total weight of the objects put into the trolley (P_x), at any prefixed interval of time x, preferably as shorter as possible;

- the computer compares the total weight of the objects put into the trolley (P_x) , supplied by the balance at short intervals, with the sum of the encoded weights of the articles registered until that moment, i.e. Σ-,p- with j ranging from 1 to i, in order to monitor the correspondence between what has been registered and what has been really placed into the trolley. When the previous identification, registration and insertion (the i-lnth) is correct, then P_3.-₁ = Σ-p- with j ranging from 1 to i-1, consequently Σ-_jP- with j ranging from 1 to i is equal to Σ-p- with j ranging from 1 to i-1 plus the value of p_{l t} therefore the computer, during its check, can compare P_x with Pi-ι+p_x. - if P_x = P_x-i+Pi (4) (Sect.1) , it means that the customer has already placed into the trolley the article a_{ι r} which has just been registered; therefore, the comparison proves the fairness of his/her behaviour (4). At this stage, the computer examines whether the consumer is submitting a new identification, the i+lnth (5) : if "NO", it means that the customer has not submitted yet a new product for identification, so the computer carries on its check (in the flowchart, turn back to 3) ; if "YES", it means that the consumer has already submitted another article, a_1+i, and so the computer assigns to the last weight supplied by the balance (P_x) the value of reference weight (6) for the check of the next i+lnth identification. At this stage, the phase for the check of the inth valid identification (7) finishes.

- If the computer finds out that P_x ≠ Pi-i+P_a., it means that the customer has not put yet into the trolley the identified product, so the computer carries on its control by checking if P_x < Pι-ι+Pι (8) (Sect.2) : if not so, it means that the consumer has inserted a heavier article than the one submitted for identification, or he/she has put into the trolley another article without letting the scanner read it, anyway this behaviour is irregular (more specifically, it potentially damages the shopkeeper) and consequently, the computer activates a suitable alarm (visual and/or sound) informing the customer of the problem found (9) and, in fact, inviting him/her to take the relative measures; - if, on the contrary, P_x < Pj_.-₁+pj_. (Sect .3) , the computer checks if P_x = P_χ-₁, and if so, it realizes that the customer has neither placed any product into the trolley, nor removed from it a regularized article, therefore it carries out the same check as (10), i.e. the comparison between the same values with equivalent logical results (in the flowchart, pass to 10) : as a matter of fact, if the computer finds out that the consumer has not submitted another product for identification, it continues its check and leaves him/her enough time to insert the identified article a_x (in the flowchart, turn back to 3) , otherwise it cancels (11) the i+lnth identification, alerting the customer, and then repeats the entire procedure (in the flowchart, turn back to 3) ; if, on the contrary, P_x ≠ Pi-i, the computer realizes that the consumer has acted in an indefinite anomalous way and activates a suitable alarm (9) . Method for checking the goods put into a trolley and signalling only any irregular behaviour adverse to the shopkeeper, characterized by the fact that it provides the following stages: - implementation of the same stages according to the previous method, plus the following stages: - If Px < Pi-i+Pi (Sect .3) , the computer compares P_x with Pj-i (12), checking if P_x = Pj_.-ι:

1. if "YES" (undersection.1) , it means that the customer has neither placed any product into the trolley, nor removed from it a regularized article, therefore the computer carries out the same check as (5) and, if it finds out that the consumer has not submitted another product for identification, it continues its check and leaves him/her enough time to insert the identified article a_x (in the flowchart, turn back to 3) , otherwise (6) it assigns to the last weight supplied by the balance (P_x) the value of reference weight for the check of the i+lnth identification (P which starts immediately (7). In this way, with P_x = P^i = Pj_., the customer passes to the next i+lnth identification without any signalling. 2. if "NO" (i.e. if P_x ≠ P^i) , the computer checks if P_x > Pj-i (13), and if so (undersection.2) , it means either that the consumer has put into the trolley a different, lighter product than the one registered, or that he/she has inserted an article without letting the scanner read it, after having removed one or more regularized products without cancelling the relative computation. As they are both anomalies potentially adverse to the shopkeeper, the computer activates a suitable alarm (in the flowchart, pass to 9) . If on the contrary, P_x < Pj._ι (undersection.3) , the computer realizes that the customer has certainly removed a regularized product from the trolley without cancelling the relative computation, then, for further elaboration, checks if a value P_κ has been already assigned (14), which is, each time, the value of the total weight of the objects inside the trolley after the computer has found this kind of irregular behaviour by the user. If the value P_κ is not assigned, it means that the consumer has removed, for the first time, after the inth identification, a regularized article without cancelling the relative computation. Such a conduct, even if anomalous, is potentially advantageous to the shopkeeper, so the computer tends to foster it, creating P_κ equal to the last weight measured by the balance (P_x) so as P_κ = P_x (15), and carrying out the same check as (5), i.e. the comparison between the same values with equivalent logical results (in the flowchart, pass to 5) . If on the contrary, a value has been already assigned to P_κ, the computer realizes that the customer had already removed from the trolley a regularized article without cancelling the relative computation and therefore it verifies three hypothesis: the consumer has neither inserted nor removed any object, or he/she keeps on removing regularized products without cancelling the relative computation, or he/she has inserted another different object, i.e. P_x = P_κ or P_x < P_κ or P_κ < P_x < P_H . - The computer checks if P_x = P_κ (16) .

1. if "YES", the computer realizes that such an irregular conduct is potentially advantageous to the shopkeeper, therefore it carries out the same check as (5), i.e. the comparison between the same values with equivalent logical results (in the flowchart, pass to 5) .

2. if on the contrary P_x ≠ P_κ, the computer checks if P_x < P_κ (17) . If so, it realizes not only that such an irregular conduct by the customer is advantageous to the shopkeeper, but even that it's becoming more and more advantageous (as the regularized articles that have been removed without cancelling the relative computation are at least two) , therefore the computer decides to foster it, associating the last weight measured by the balance (P_x) to P_κ, i.e. P_x = P_κ (in the flowchart, pass to 18), then carrying out for the above the same check as (5) (in the flowchart, pass to 5) .

3. Finally, if P_κ < P_x, it means that the customer, after having removed from the trolley one or more regularized articles without cancelling the relative computation, has inserted another one, involving an anomalous conduct. The computer, by the only check of (17), cannot distinguish whether the object inserted is one of the products that the client is allowed to place inside (as the registered one a_x and the regularized articles erroneously removed) or a different one, therefore, referring the elaboration to the entire logical process, considers this anomaly potentially adverse to the shopkeeper and activates a suitable alarm (in the flowchart, pass to 9) . Brief description of drawings

We are now going to describe this invention with reference to the enclosed drawings.

Figures 1, 2 and 3 show the orthogonal projections of the schematic trolley, Figures 4 and 5 show an overall view of the same trolley, with or without the basket, Figures 6 and 7 show the flowchart illustrating how the program for the check of the customer behaviour, inside the computer of the trolley, works. The trolley is shown in the first five figures deliberately schematised for explanatory purposes; therefore particulars, proportions and forms may differ from the practical realization.

Figs. 1, 2, 3 show respectively the top, side and front view of the frame (A) of the trolley, formed by a weaving of ten tubes of rectangular section and four swivel wheels (B, C, D, E) , which supports a basket (F) (the part where the products can be placed) . The trolley is depicted parallel to the frontal plane compared with our point of view, so that it's pushed from right to left compared with the same point of view. The drawings show also the handlebar (G) , the bar code scanner (H) or other specific input device for the identification of the products, the keyboard (I), the display (J) , the point (L) where the component of the electronic balance sensitive to the dynamic load is located, the container (M) comprising the other components of the electronic balance, the computer, the two-way teletransmitter of data, the battery for the electrical supply and the plug for its recharging.

Figs. 4 and 5 show a perspective view of the trolley with (Fig. 4) or without (Fig. 5) the basket. More specifically, Fig. 5 permits to highlight, also thanks to the smaller inclination of the central part of the frame, the particular shape of the lower part of the frame (V) : the connection of three tubes forms an isosceles trapezium without the greater base, i.e. three consecutive segments, the first and the third one of equal size, with two equal obtuse angles in the two common vertexes . This Figure permits to highlight also the structure of the central part (U) of the same frame, with a weaving of four tubes corresponding to the trapezium shape of the lower part, which not only supports the basket, but even holds the container (M) (in this figure it's depicted with medium dotted lines). The two flowcharts of Figs. 6 and 7 propose two different embodiments (simplified as an example) of the logical structure of the operations for the check of the correspondence between what the customer has made identified and registered and what has been really placed into the trolley; their final definition is therefore referred to the practical realization of the invention.

Fig. 6 shows the flowchart illustrating the logical structure for the check of the customer behaviour in case the shopkeeper chose to alert the consumer to any irregularity; on the contrary, Fig. 7 shows the corresponding flowchart in case the shopkeeper chose to signal only the behaviour damaging him/herself. Flowchart of Fig. 6: a_x is the generic inth selected product that the consumer allows the computer to identify (1) , with i ranging from 1 to n (a_x is the first article selected by the customer, a_n is the last one) . The inth identification will be valid, when the previous i-lnth identification, registration and insertion of the product are correct. The computer identifies the product a_{ι r} registers (2) its encoded weight p_{ι r} its price c_x and the time of its identification t_x (date/hour/minutes/seconds) . It has been established that the value of the encoded weight p_x of every product, identified and registered by the computer, always corresponds to the real weight of the object (considering a minimum prefixed tolerance) and two different articles cannot have the same weight. A product identified, correctly registered and placed into the trolley in the previous i-1 identifications and there remained, is "regularized". For market surveys, it's important to know which article has been placed into the trolley (a , when (t and in what order (i) .

The electronic balance measures and communicates to the computer the total weight of the objects placed into the trolley (P_x) , at any prefixed interval of time x, preferably as shorter as possible (3) . P_α_ι is the total weight of the regularized objects, i.e. of the objects put into the trolley as resulted from the previous identification, registration and insertion of the product a -_{l r} or even the P_x at the latest interval x before the inth identification (therefore at the beginning, for example, when 1 = 1, it will be Pι_ι, in this case indicated with P₀, void because the trolley is empty) . Between the generic inth identification and the next one (the i+lnth) , the computer continuously compares the total weight of the objects placed into the trolley (P_x) , supplied by the balance at short intervals, with the sum of the encoded weights of the articles registered until that moment, i.e. Σ-p- with j ranging from 1 to i, in order to monitor the correspondence between what has been registered and what has been really placed into the trolley. When the previous identification, registration and insertion (the i- lnth) is correct, then Pj_ι = Σ-p- with j ranging from 1 to i-1, consequently Σ-p- with j ranging from 1 to i is equal to ∑.p- with j ranging from 1 to i-1 plus the value of p_x, therefore the computer, during its check, can compare P_x with Pj-i+Pi. Accordingly, the possibilities are three: P_x = Pi-i+Pj_. or P_x > P_J.-₁+P_J. or Px < P.-i+Pi'' on the first hypothesis it passes to Section 1, on the second one to Section 2, on the third one to Section 3. Initially, the computer controls if P_x = P_x-i+Pj. (4): if "YES" (Sect.1) , it means that the customer has already placed into the trolley the article a , which has just been registered; therefore, the comparison (4) proves the fairness of his/her behaviour. At this stage, the computer examines whether the consumer is submitting a new identification, the i+lnth: (5) . - if "NO", it means that the customer has not submitted yet a new product for identification, so the computer carries on its check (in the flowchart, turn back to 3) ; - if "YES", it means that the consumer has already submitted another article, a₁₊₁, and so the computer assigns to the last weight supplied by the balance (P_x) the value of reference weight (6) for the check of the next i+lnth identification. At this stage, the phase for the check of the inth valid identification (7) finishes. If the computer finds out that P_x ≠

(8) : if "NO" (Sect .2) , it means that the consumer has inserted a heavier article than the one submitted for identification, or he/she has put into the trolley another article without letting the scanner read it, anyway this behaviour is irregular (more specifically, it potentially damages the shopkeeper) and consequently, the computer activates a suitable alarm (visual and/or sound) informing the customer of the problem found (9) and, in fact, inviting him/her to take the relative measures. At this stage, the computer examines whether the consumer, despite the alarm, is submitting a new identification, the i+lnth: in order to do so, it carries out a check (10) similar to the (5) (similar but not identical because the logical results are different) .

- if "NO", it means that the customer has not submitted yet a new product for identification, so the computer carries on its check

(in the flowchart, turn back to 3) and leaves the consumer enough time to correct his/her behaviour (in this case, it's sufficient to remove the article not identified and possibly placed into the trolley the product registered) . - if "YES", it means that, despite the alarm, the customer has already submitted another article, a₁₊₁, therefore the computer cancels (11) the latest identification, the i+lnth, alerting the customer with a visual and/or sound signal, and leaves him/her enough time to correct his/her behaviour (in the flowchart, turn back to 3) . On the contrary, if P_x < Pi-i+p_± (Sect.3) , the computer checks if P_x = i-i:

- if "YES", the computer realizes that the customer has neither placed any product into the trolley, nor removed from it a regularized article, therefore it carries out the same check as (10), i.e. the comparison between the same values with equivalent logical results (in the flowchart, pass to 10) : as a matter of fact, if the computer finds out that the consumer has not submitted another product for identification, ("NO") it continues its check and leaves him/her enough time to insert the identified article a_x (in the flowchart, turn back to 3) ; otherwise ("YES") it cancels (11) the i+lnth identification, alerting the customer, and then repeats the entire procedure (in the flowchart, turn back to 3) .

- if, on the contrary, P_x ≠ Pι-ι, the computer realizes that the consumer has acted in an indefinite anomalous way (for example he/she has placed into the trolley a different, lighter product than the one registered, and/or has removed one or more regularized products without cancelling the relative computation) and activates a suitable alarm (9). The flowchart of Fig. 7 shows the logical structure for the check of the customer behaviour in case the shopkeeper chose to signal only the conducts damaging him/herself, so it differs from the flowchart of Fig. 6 only as regards the operations concerning the irregularities advantageous to the store. Flowchart of Fig. 7:

Since the logical processes relating the irregular behaviour advantageous to the shopkeeper are all included in Section 3, the description of the flowchart of Figure 7 is limited solely to this last Section, with reference to the description of the flowchart of Figure 6 for the remaining two Sections.

If P_x < i-i+Pi (Sect.3) , the computer compares P_x with Pi-_± (12), checking if P_x = Pj-i:

- if "YES" (undersection.1) , it means that the customer has neither placed any product into the trolley, nor removed from it a regularized article, therefore the computer carries out the same check as (5) and, if it finds out that the consumer has not submitted another product for identification, it continues its check and leaves him/her enough time to insert the identified article ai (in the flowchart, turn back to 3), otherwise (6) it assigns to the last weight supplied by the balance (P_x) the value of reference weight for the check of the i+lnth identification (P) which starts immediately (7) . In this way, with P_x = P^ = Pi, to the shopkeeper advantage, the customer passes to the next i+lnth identification, without any signalling that the article a_if even if it's not inside the trolley, is however computed.

- if "NO" (i.e. if P_x ≠ Pi_ι) , the computer checks if P_x > V ._x (13): - if "YES" (undersection.2) , it means either that the consumer has placed into the trolley a different, lighter product than the one registered, or that he/she has inserted an article without letting the scanner read it, after having removed one or more regularized products without cancelling the relative computation. As they are both anomalies potentially adverse to the shopkeeper, the computer activates a suitable alarm (in the flowchart, pass to 9) .

- if "NO" (undersection.3) , the computer realizes that the customer has certainly removed a regularized product from the trolley without cancelling the relative computation, then, for further elaboration, checks if a value P_κ has been already assigned (14), which is, each time, the value of the total weight of the objects inside the trolley after the computer has found this kind of irregular behaviour by the user.

If the value P_κ is not assigned, it means that the consumer has removed, for the first time, after the inth identification, a regularized article without cancelling the relative computation. Such a conduct, even if anomalous, is potentially advantageous to the shopkeeper, so the computer tends to foster .it, creating P_κ equal to the last weight measured by the balance (P_x) so as P_κ = Px (15) , and carrying out the same check as (5), i.e. the comparison between the same values with equivalent logical results (in the flowchart, pass to 5) .

If on the contrary, a value has been already assigned to P_κ, the computer realizes that the customer had already removed from the trolley a regularized article without cancelling the relative computation and therefore it verifies three hypothesis: the consumer has neither inserted nor removed any object, or he/she keeps on removing regularized products without cancelling the relative computation, or he/she has inserted another different object, i.e. P_x = P_κ or P_x < P_κ or P_κ< P_x < Pi-,. The computer initially checks if P_x = P_κ (16) :

- if "YES", the computer realizes that such an irregular conduct is potentially advantageous to the shopkeeper, since neither new insertion nor new removal has been carried out, therefore it does the same check as (5), i.e. the comparison between the same values with equivalent logical results (in the flowchart, pass to 5) .

- if on the contrary P_x ≠ P_κ, the computer checks if P_x < P_κ (17) :

- if "YES", it realizes not only that such an irregular conduct by the customer is advantageous to the shopkeeper, but even that it's becoming more and more advantageous (as the regularized articles that have been removed without cancelling the relative computation are at least two) , therefore the computer decides to foster it, associating the last weight measured by the balance (P_x) to P_κ, i.e. P_x = P_κ (in the flowchart, pass to 18), then carrying out for the above the same check as (5) (in the . flowchart, pass to 5) .

- Finally, if P_κ < P_x, it means that the customer, after having removed from the trolley one or more regularized articles without cancelling the relative computation, has inserted another one, involving an anomalous conduct. The computer, by the only check of (17), cannot distinguish whether the object inserted is one of the products that the client is allowed to place inside (as the registered one a_{i t} and the regularized articles erroneously removed) or a different one, therefore, referring the elaboration to the entire logical process, considers this anomaly potentially adverse to the shopkeeper and activates a suitable alarm (in the flowchart, pass to 9) .

In practice, the constructing details may, however, vary, but still remain within the range of the idea proposed as a -solution and, consequently, within the limits of the protection granted by this patent for invention.

Claims

CLAIMS1) Trolley with control system of the goods placed inside, characterized by the fact that it comprises:- means to identify the products put into the trolley, by a specific input peripheral capable of reading a code preset on the same product that contains at least the information relating its identification and weight;- means to measure the weight of every product placed into the trolley, by measuring the total weight of the goods put in, with an electronic balance integrated into the trolley and connected to the computer;- means to check the correspondence of the product actually inserted with the one resulting from the above-mentioned identification, comparing at least the information relating the weight of each object with the weight registered by the electronic balance, by a computer installed in the trolley and connected to said input peripheral, as well as to the balance.2) Trolley according to claim 1, characterized by the fact that it is formed by a frame, equipped with a computer and comprises the following elements:- bar code scanner or other specific input device for the identification of the products;- possible two-way teletransmitter of data;- keyboard; — electronic balance;- displays and/or leds and/or pilot lights and/or sound generators; - battery for the electrical supply of all these electronic devices and a plug for recharging the same battery.3) Trolley according to claim 2, characterized by the fact that the main input peripheral is a bar code scanner that allows directly the customer to optically scan the identifying code of every product, only by passing it over the scanner integrated into the trolley.4) Trolley according to claim 2, characterized by the fact that the computer input-output peripheral is the two-way teletransmitter, which communicates in either two directions with the central computer of the store and with other computers . The computer output peripherals include displays and/or leds and/or pilot lights and/or sound generators, which inform and alert the consumer. 5) Trolley according to claim 2, characterized by the fact that the input device for the identification of the products is located towards the inside, where the various articles are placed, in such a position that makes the operation of identification or scan of the products by the customer easy. 6) Trolley according to claim 2, characterized by the fact that the electronic balance is structured in such a way that it evaluates only and always the weight of the articles put into the trolley, with a prefixed sensitivity and maximum weight, minimizing all the possible interferences with the measure of the dynamic load. 7) Trolley according to claim 2, characterized by the fact that the keyboard is placed on the side where the trolley is pushed by the customer, in order to be conveniently used; on the same position we'll find the displays and/or leds and/or pilot lights and/or sound generators, in order to allow the sound and/or visual output to easily reach the consumer.8) Trolley according to claim 2, characterized by the fact that the two-way teletransmitter of data has such a position that' allows it to conveniently communicate with the corresponding peripherals of the central computer of the store or other computers.9) Control system of the goods put into the trolley according to any of the previous claims, characterized by the fact that it permits to identify the products placed into the trolley, by means of the input peripheral capable of reading a code preset on the same product that contains the information relating its identification, and then communicating the identity of the scanned article to the computer installed in the trolley. 10) Control system of the goods put into the trolley according to claim 9, characterized by the fact that it permits to calculate the price of every single product and/or the total expenditure, by means of the computer that, identifying each product, ■ evaluates and registers its weight, its price and other data possibly assigned by the shopkeeper.11) System according to claim 9, characterized by the fact that each article that can be bought or just taken, has a UPC or other system of identification, either based or not on a bar code, which allows the computer to recognize the product, therefore specifying its encoded weight, i.e. the measure of the weight assigned to that product by the shopkeeper, its price and all the other useful information, as the encoded weight always corresponds to the real weight of the object, so that no article weighs as any other one.12) System according to claim 9, characterized by the fact that it permits to check the correspondence between the identified products and the ones really placed into the trolley, by means of the computer, connected to the input peripheral as well as to the electronic balance integrated into the trolley, which continuously compares the sum of the weights assigned to every product by the shopkeeper and registered by the same computer, with the value of the weight of the products inserted, as actually evaluated by the balance.13) System according to claim 9, characterized by the fact that the selected articles are put into the trolley only one time, because, before their insertion, they are immediately identified and registered by the computer of the trolley that "recognizes" the various products by means of a specific input peripheral for the method of identification of the products at issue.14) System according to claim 9, characterized by the fact that on every scan of the product, the device will send out a sound and/or visual signal informing the customer about the effective and correct identification.15) System according to claim 9, characterized by the fact that, in order to remove an object from the trolley and cancel its computation, it's possible to cancel the entire operation of registration by carrying out the following procedure:- press a specific key;- take the unwanted product out from the trolley; - identify it again (at this stage the computer preferably will emit a sound and/or visual signal informing the customer about the effective and correct identification) .16) System according to claim 9, characterized by the fact that the non-correspondence between the articles registered by the computer and the ones actually placed into the trolley can be signalled only when it shows an excessive insertion of products, or however the insertion of non-identified products, compared with what has been registered, or even when it shows that one or more objects have been inserted and then removed from the trolley without cancelling the relative computation by means of the specific procedure.17) System according to claim 9, characterized by the fact that it provides the following stages: - the customer chooses the article, allows the computer to identify it, before its insertion into the trolley, by means of the bar code scanner located on the trolley, or by means of other technologies fulfilled with corresponding specific peripherals;- the computer identifies the product a , registers its encoded weight, its price and the time of its identification;- the electronic balance weighs the total weight of the objects placed into the trolley at any prefixed interval of time(preferably said interval must be as shorter as possible, compatible with the potentiality of the entire system) ; - the computer, between an identification and the other, continuously compares the total weight of the objects put into the trolley, supplied at short intervals by the balance, with the sum of the encoded weights of every article registered until that moment, so checking the correspondence between what the computer has calculated and what has been really placed into the trolley;- the computer keeps on informing the customer (by means of visual signs with leds, pilot lights, messages on the display and/or sound signals) about the possible irregularities registered between what has been registered and what has been actually inserted, until they are not regularized;- once the fair customer behaviour has been verified, the computer allows the identification and the insertion of the next article into the trolley;- the customer places the next product into the trolley, while the computer and the balance monitor his/her behaviour as above described; - once the customer has finished to place all the selected articles into the trolley, he/she pushes it towards the checkout of the store, next to the exit, in order to pay; in this area, the central computer of the store receives from the computer located on the trolley all the data about the selected products and about the customer behaviour (which can be potentially reprocessed for any informative process), by means of a fixed two-way teletransmitter capable of communicating with the corresponding peripheral on the trolley.18) Method for checking the goods put into a trolley and signalling any irregular behaviour, characterized by the fact that it provides the following stages: - the computer (1) identifies the product ax, (2) registers its encoded weight pι r its price cx and the time of its identification t± (date/hour/minutes/seconds) ;- the electronic balance (3) measures and communicates to the computer the total weight of the objects placed into the trolley(Px) , at any prefixed interval of time x, preferably as shorter as possible;- the computer compares the total weight of the objects put into the trolley (Px) , supplied by the balance at short intervals, with the sum of the encoded weights of the articles registered until that moment, i.e. ΣDp-, with j ranging from 1 to i, in order to monitor the correspondence between what has been registered and what has been really placed into the trolley (when the previous identification, registration and insertion, the i-lnth, is correct, then P^i = Σ-,p.j with j ranging from 1 to i-1, consequently Σ-iP-, with j ranging from 1 to i is equal to ∑:p-, with j ranging from 1 to i-1 plus the value of plf therefore the computer, during its check, can compare Px with Pα.-1+Pι) ;- if Px = Px-i+Pi (4) (Sect .1) , it means that the customer has already put into the trolley the article a l which has just been registered; therefore, the comparison proves the fairness of his/her behaviour (4). At this stage, the computer examines whether the consumer is submitting a new identification, the i+lnth (5) : if "NO", it means that the customer has not submitted yet a new product for identification, so the computer carries on its check (in the flowchart, turn back to 3) ; if "YES", it means that the consumer has already submitted another article, a1+i, and so the computer assigns to the last weight supplied by the balance (Px) the value of reference weight (6) for the check of the next i+lnth identification. At this stage, the phase for the check of the inth valid identification (7) finishes. - If the computer finds out that Px ≠ Pi-i+Pi, it checks if Px < Pi-i+pi (8) (Sect .2) : if not so, it means that the consumer has inserted a heavier article than the one submitted for identification, or he/she has placed into the trolley another article without letting the scanner read it, anyway this behaviour is irregular (more specifically, it potentially damages the shopkeeper) and consequently, the computer activates a suitable alarm (visual and/or sound) informing the customer of the problem found (9) and, in fact, inviting him/her to take the relative measures;- if, on the contrary, Px < Pi-i+Pi (Sect.3) , the computer checks if Px = Pi-i, and if so, it realizes that the customer has neither placed any product into the trolley, nor removed from it a regularized article, therefore it carries out the same check as (10), i.e. the comparison between the same values with equivalent logical results (in the flowchart, pass to 10) : as a matter of fact, if the computer finds out that the consumer has not submitted another product for identification, it continues its check and leaves him/her enough time to insert the identified article ai (in the flowchart, turn back to 3), otherwise it cancels (11) the i+lnth identification, alerting the customer, and then repeats the entire procedure (in the flowchart, turn back to 3) ; if, on the contrary, Px ≠ Pi-i, the computer realizes that the consumer has acted in an indefinite anomalous way and activates a suitable alarm (9). 19) Method for checking the goods put into a trolley and signalling any irregular behaviour adverse to the shopkeeper, characterized by the fact that it provides the following stages:— implementation of the same stages according to claim 18, plus the following stages:- If Px < Pi-i+Pi (Sect.3) , the computer compares Px with Pj._ι (12), checking if Px = Pj.-ι:

1. if "YES" (undersection.1) , it means that the customer has neither placed any product into the trolley, nor removed from it a regularized article, therefore the computer carries out the same check as (5) and, if it finds out that the consumer has not submitted another product for identification, it continues its check and leaves him/her enough time to insert the identified article a (in the flowchart, turn back to 3) , otherwise (6) it assigns to the last weight supplied by the balance (P_x) the value of reference weight for the check of the i+lnth identification (P which starts immediately (7). In this way, with P_x = P-i = P_{ι r} the customer passes to the next i+lnth identification without any signalling. 2. if "NO" (i.e. if P_x ≠ Pj_.__x) , the computer checks if P_x > P^x (13), and if so (undersection.2) , it means either that the consumer has placed into the trolley a different, lighter product than the one registered, or that he/she has inserted an article without letting the scanner read it, after having removed one or more regularized products without cancelling the relative computation. As they are both anomalies potentially adverse to the shopkeeper, the computer activates a suitable alarm (in the flowchart, pass to 9) . If on the contrary, P_x < P_±_ _! (undersection.3) , the computer realizes that the customer has certainly removed a regularized product from the trolley without cancelling the relative computation, then, for further elaboration, checks if a value P_κ has been already assigned (14), which is, each time, the value of the total weight of the objects inside the trolley after the computer has found this kind of irregular behaviour by the user. If the value P_κ is not assigned, it means that the consumer has removed, for^' the first time, after the inth identification, a regularized article without cancelling the relative computation. Such a conduct, even if anomalous, is potentially advantageous to the shopkeeper, so the computer tends to foster it, creating P_κ equal to the last weight measured by the balance (P_x) so as P_κ = P_x (15), and carrying out the same check as (5), i.e. the comparison between the same values with equivalent logical results (in the flowchart, pass to 5) . If on the contrary, a value has been already assigned to P_κ, the computer realizes that the customer had already removed from the trolley a regularized article without cancelling the relative computation and therefore it verifies three hypothesis: the consumer has neither inserted nor removed any object, or he/she keeps on removing regularized products without cancelling the relative computation, or he/she has inserted another different object, i . e . Px = P_κ or Px < P_κ or P_κ < P_x < P_w . computer checks if P_x = P_κ (16) .

3. Finally, if P_κ < P_x, it means that the customer, after having removed from the trolley one or more regularized articles without cancelling the relative computation, has inserted another one, involving an anomalous conduct. The computer, by the only check of (17), cannot distinguish whether the object inserted is one of the products that the client is allowed to place inside (as the registered one ai and the regularized articles erroneously removed) or a different one, therefore, referring the elaboration to the entire logical process, considers this anomaly potentially adverse to the shopkeeper and activates a suitable alarm (in the flowchart, pass to 9) . 0) Trolley according to all previous claims, characterized by the fact that, even if it's mainly suggested to be used by customers of supermarkets, it can be used in any environment where the check and processing of the items placed inside it is necessary.