WO2004066180A1 - System and method for estimating web site - Google Patents

System and method for estimating web site Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2004066180A1
WO2004066180A1 PCT/KR2003/001558 KR0301558W WO2004066180A1 WO 2004066180 A1 WO2004066180 A1 WO 2004066180A1 KR 0301558 W KR0301558 W KR 0301558W WO 2004066180 A1 WO2004066180 A1 WO 2004066180A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
evaluation
web sites
information
service provider
web
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/KR2003/001558
Other languages
French (fr)
Inventor
Jae-Poong Shin
Original Assignee
Dmn It Co., Ltd.
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Dmn It Co., Ltd. filed Critical Dmn It Co., Ltd.
Priority to AU2003248493A priority Critical patent/AU2003248493A1/en
Publication of WO2004066180A1 publication Critical patent/WO2004066180A1/en

Links

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q30/00—Commerce
    • G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q50/00—Systems or methods specially adapted for specific business sectors, e.g. utilities or tourism
    • G06Q50/10—Services
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F16/00—Information retrieval; Database structures therefor; File system structures therefor
    • G06F16/90—Details of database functions independent of the retrieved data types
    • G06F16/95—Retrieval from the web
    • G06F16/958—Organisation or management of web site content, e.g. publishing, maintaining pages or automatic linking
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L67/00—Network arrangements or protocols for supporting network services or applications
    • H04L67/01—Protocols
    • H04L67/02—Protocols based on web technology, e.g. hypertext transfer protocol [HTTP]

Definitions

  • the present invention relates to a web site evaluation system and method. More specifically, the present invention relates to a web site evaluation system and method for evaluating reliabilities of a plurality of web sites on a network.
  • Web site evaluation methods have accordingly been disclosed, but the conventional methods evaluate the reliabilities of the web sites by depending on visits or evaluation of the users who access the web sites, and accordingly, the reliabilities are not guaranteed, and the evaluation results are not appropriately provided.
  • a method for evaluating a plurality of web sites connected to a network comprises: (a) collecting service provider information from the web sites, and examining them; (b) measuring evaluation on the web sites from users; (c) measuring the users' visit counts to the web sites to thus perform an access statistic process; (d) evaluating reliabilities on the web sites based on the examined and measured information; and (e) providing evaluation information on the web sites based on the evaluation results.
  • the step (a) comprises assigning evaluation scores when service provider information satisfies an evaluation value, and assigning no evaluation scores when the service provider information does not satisfy the evaluation value.
  • the service provider information is included in one of a service provider authenticate item, a reliability information authenticate item, a homepage authenticate item, and a representative product authenticate item.
  • the step (b) comprises evaluating consumers' satisfaction and dissatisfaction states on at least one of customer center management items for indicating how kindly and fast the services of the customer center are performed, product-related items for showing quickness and convenience of making a purchase by the customer, security and member management items for representing how securely personal information is managed, and homepage-related items for showing homepage design of the web site and excellence of contents configuration, and differently assigning satisfaction scores and dissatisfaction scores according to the customer's evaluation results.
  • the method further comprises receiving a recommendation on a web site from the user.
  • the step (c) comprises measuring visit counts of the clients accessing the web sites by area, sex, and age.
  • the method further comprises: determining ranks of the web sites for respective examination and evaluation items of the web sites; and providing different weights for each evaluation item and determining final ranks of the web sites on the total evaluations.
  • the step (e) comprises displaying evaluation information including at least one of the scores provided to the corresponding web site per evaluation, evaluation ranks occupied by the corresponding web site per item, and reliability evaluation scores and ranks.
  • a system for evaluating a plurality of web sites connected to a network comprises: a service provider information database for storing information on a plurality of service providers on the evaluated web sites; a user evaluation database for storing user evaluation information on the web sites; and an evaluation server including: a service provider information examiner for examining service provider information on the web sites; a user evaluation measurer for measuring user evaluation on the web sites; an access statistic processor for measuring the clients' visit counts on the web sites; a recommendation evaluator for measuring how many times the web sites are recommended by the users; and a reliability evaluator for evaluating the reliabilities of the corresponding web sites based on the examined and evaluated information.
  • the access statistic processor measures the visit counts of the clients accessing the web sites according to areas, sexes, and ages.
  • the evaluation server further comprises a rank measurer for establishing the web site ranks for respective evaluation items, the rank measurer determining ranks of the web sites for respective evaluation items, providing different weights for the respective evaluation items, and determining final ranks of the web sites regarding the total evaluations.
  • the system further comprises a retrieval server for providing information according to ranks of the web sites per evaluation item following requests by the users.
  • FIG. 1 shows a concept of a web site evaluation system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention
  • FIG. 2 shows a block diagram of a web site evaluation system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention
  • FIG. 3 shows an operational flowchart of a web site evaluation system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention
  • FIG. 4 shows a flowchart of a business information evaluation operation shown in FIG. 3;
  • FIG. 5 shows exemplified business information evaluated according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention
  • FIG. 6 shows a flowchart of a consumer evaluation measurement process according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention
  • FIG. 7 shows consumer evaluation items according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention
  • FIG. 8 shows exemplified reliability evaluations according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG. 9 shows an exemplified reliability evaluation grade and grade assignment contents according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG. 10 shows an exemplified ranking measurement process according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG. 1 1 shows exemplified retrieval results according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG. 1 shows an information system among a web site evaluation system, a service provider, and a user.
  • respective service providers providing various services on the network are evaluated.
  • they are evaluated for a plurality of items, users' evaluations on the items are measured, the reliabilities of the corresponding service providers are evaluated based on the users' web site visit counts and recommendations, the above-noted evaluation information is assigned with ranks for respective evaluation items according to the users' requests, and it is then provided.
  • FIG. 1 shows an information system among a web site evaluation system, a service provider, and a user.
  • a service provider registers the service provider's information to the web site evaluation system, and the web site evaluation system executes evaluation on the service provider as described above and provides reliability evaluation information to the service provider to consult the reliability of the service provider.
  • the users access the web site evaluation system to check service providers' reliabilities and ranks for respective evaluation items.
  • the service providers accordingly provide more improved services to the users based on the evaluation results by the web site evaluation system.
  • the web sites represent those from which the respective service providers provide various services through the network, and the web site evaluations indicate the evaluations of the corresponding service provider.
  • FIG. 2 shows the configuration of the web site evaluation system according to the preferred embodiment of the present invention.
  • the web site evaluation system 4 (referred to as an evaluation system hereinafter) is connected to a plurality of clients 1 to "I n and web sites 2 to 2n through a network 3 (including a wired network, a wireless network, and a future network).
  • a network 3 including a wired network, a wireless network, and a future network.
  • the clients 1 to 1 n represent user terminals accessible to the evaluation system though the network, and the user terminals comprise a computer accessible to the network 3 through a cable, a cable terminal including an Internet TV, a mobile phone wirelessly accessible to the network
  • the evaluation system 4 comprises an interface server 41 , an evaluation server 42, a retrieval server 43, and a database server 44.
  • the interface server 41 allows the clients 1 to 1 n and the web sites 2 to 2n to access the interface server 41 through the network 3, converts various categories of information provided through the evaluation server 42 or the retrieval server 43 into communication standard data to provide them to the clients 1 to 1 n or the web sites 2 to 2n, or receives information through the network 3 and provides the information to the evaluation server 42 or the retrieval server 43.
  • the interface server 41 can further comprise a data link device including a CGI (common gateway interface) for information communication with other systems, and a mail server for transmitting and receiving electronic mail. No detailed descriptions on the interface server will be provided since they are well known to a skilled person.
  • CGI common gateway interface
  • the evaluation server 42 evaluates the web sites, and comprises a service provider information examiner 421 for examining information on the service providers (web sites) for respective items; a recommendation evaluator 422 for measuring recommendation information including recommendation counts on predetermined web sites of the clients 1 to 1 n, and evaluating the web sites based on the measured recommendation information; a consumer evaluation measurer 423 for measuring the evaluation information on the respective web sites provided by the clients 1 to 1 n; an access statistic processor 424 for measuring usage rates of the web sites based on the clients' visit counts on the respective web sites; a reliability evaluator 425 for evaluating the reliabilities of the corresponding web sites based on the respective evaluation results; and a rank measurer 426 for establishing the web site ranks following the ranks or reliability evaluation results of the web sites per evaluation item.
  • a service provider information examiner 421 for examining information on the service providers (web sites) for respective items
  • a recommendation evaluator 422 for measuring recommendation information including recommendation counts on predetermined web sites of the clients 1 to 1
  • the database server 44 comprises a service provider information database 441 for storing information on the respective web sites, a consumer evaluation database 442 for storing information on the web sites evaluated by the users, and an evaluation result database 443 for storing evaluation results evaluated by the evaluation server 42 for each category.
  • the service provider information database 441 stores information provided by the web sites that desire to have their reliabilities evaluated or information on the web sites collected for evaluating the reliabilities. For example, the service provider information database 441 stores service provider information on a service provider title, a service provider category, a business registration number, and funds corresponding to IDs allocated to the web sites, reliability information on a damage insurance entrance state and a mail-order sale report state, homepage information on targets of web site management and server states, and representative product information on services sold or provided on the web sites.
  • the consumer evaluation database 442 stores the consumers' evaluation information on the respective web sites.
  • the consumer evaluation database 442 stores information on the consumers' satisfaction and dissatisfaction information on the management of customer centers, ease of ordering, returning of goods, security and member management such as personal information security, and homepage design and ease of retrieval corresponding to IDs allocated to the web sites.
  • the evaluation result database 443 stores evaluation results on the respective web sites for the respective evaluation items.
  • the evaluation result database 443 stores evaluation results on the service provider information examination, evaluation results by the users, access statistic results, reliability evaluation results, and ranking information for representing ranks of the web sites according to the respective evaluation results.
  • the retrieval server 43 finds desired information from the information stored in the database server 44 according to requests by the clients 1 to 1 n, and provides the information to the clients 1 to 1 n. Based on this configuration, a method for evaluating web sites will be described in detail.
  • FIG. 3 shows a flowchart of a method for evaluating web sites according to the preferred embodiment of the present invention.
  • respective web sites to be evaluated are registered.
  • the web sites 2 to 2n can request a consultation from the evaluation system 4 for more effective and reliable management, and the evaluation system 4 assigns an ID to the corresponding web site and stores information on the corresponding web site in the database server 44 to thus perform a registration process in step S10.
  • the web sites 2 to 2n that desire a consultation provide their service provider and site management information, and the evaluation system 4 stores information in the service provider information database 441 corresponding to the ID.
  • the above-noted information is provided by the web sites or obtained by access to the web site by the evaluation system 4.
  • the evaluation system 4 performs evaluation on the web sites that have requested the consultation, but without being restricted to this, the evaluation system 4 can perform evaluation on specific web sites according to a request by a third party.
  • the evaluation server 42 examines service provider information, measures recommendation evaluations, measures consumer evaluations, processes client access statistics, and evaluates reliabilities. Processing orders of the evaluation methods according to the preferred embodiment of the present invention are not restricted to the subsequent description orders.
  • the service provider information examiner 421 of the evaluation server 42 performs evaluation on the web sites for all registered information in step S20.
  • FIG. 4 shows a flowchart of a process for examining service provider information
  • FIG. 5 shows service provider information to be evaluated.
  • the service provider information examiner 421 takes information on the corresponding web site from the service provider information database 411 of the database server 44, evaluates how much the corresponding web site satisfies the requirements for the respective items, and records evaluation results. That is, as shown in FIG. 4, evaluation scores are assigned in steps
  • the evaluation scores following the respective items of the service provider information are differently assigned according to satisfaction states of the evaluation values, or scores can be equally assigned according to satisfaction states of the evaluation values.
  • the service provider information can be classified as a service provider information authenticate item, a reliability information authenticate item, a homepage authenticate item, and a representative product authenticate item.
  • the evaluation scores can be differently assigned according to exceeded states.
  • the reliability information authenticate item when the corresponding web site has damage insurance, a predetermined score is identically assigned to the web site at the time of examining entrance states of the damage insurance by the web site, and when the web site has no damage insurance, no score is provided.
  • the service provider information examiner 421 calculates service provider authenticate scores corresponding to the total score based on the evaluation scores per item, and the scores are stored in the evaluation result database 443 to be used later in steps S150 to S180.
  • the recommendation evaluator 422 of the evaluation server 42 collects evaluations of specific web sites from the clients 1 to 1 n in step S30. For example, the recommendation evaluator 422 provides web pages for inquiring whether to recommend the web sites evaluated by the accessing clients 1 to 1 n, and when the clients 1 to 1 n select a specific web site from the web page, the recommendation evaluator 422 determines that as a recommendation for the specific web site, and records it. That is, the recommendation evaluator 422 stores recommendation counts in a recommendation evaluation item of the evaluation result database 443 in correspondence to an ID of the corresponding web site, and additionally receives recommendation reasons from the client and records them.
  • the recommendation evaluator 422 receives recommendations on the web sites from the clients accessing the evaluation system 4 to perform recommendation evaluations, and it uses favorite search word information provided from other search sites as recommendation evaluation information. For example, the recommendation evaluator 422 receives favorite search word information input by many users during a predetermined time frame from search sites such as Empas and Naver, measures how many times the names of the web sites that are to be evaluated are requested to be retrieved based on the information, and uses measurement results as recommendation evaluation information. The information can additionally be classified as favorite search word information and stored in the evaluation result database 443.
  • the consumer evaluation measurer 423 of the evaluation server 42 measures evaluations on the web sites per consumer evaluation item in step S40.
  • FIG. 6 shows a process for measuring consumers' evaluations
  • FIG. 7 shows exemplified consumer evaluation items.
  • the consumer evaluation items cover various states that the consumers meet while using the web sites, including: customer center management items for indicating how kindly and fast the services of the customer center are performed, such as kind serving of a customer center in the web site, and rates of feeding back on the services and solving problems; product-related items for showing quickness and convenience of making a purchase, such as quickness, ease of settlement, and convenience of ordering on making a purchase, canceling a purchase, returning a purchase, and delivery; security and member management items for representing how securely personal information is managed; homepage- related items for showing homepage design of the web site, and excellence of contents configuration; and other items for indicating how fast the access rate to the web site is.
  • information corresponding to the above-noted evaluation items is provided from the corresponding web site.
  • the consumer evaluation measurer 423 evaluates consumers' satisfaction and dissatisfaction for the respective items, and differently assigns satisfaction scores and dissatisfaction scores according to the consumers' evaluation results.
  • the consumer evaluation measurer 423 resets consumer evaluation scores V on a specific web site, calculates an improvement request process score V1 for indicating the customer center's processing state of the dissatisfaction of the consumers, and adds the improvement request process score V1 to the consumer evaluation score V in steps S200 to S220; calculates consumer satisfaction scores V2 obtained from evaluations of the respective items, and adds the consumer satisfaction scores V2 to the consumer evaluation score V in step S230; subtracts consumer dissatisfaction scores V3 from the consumer evaluation scores V in step S240; calculates evaluation scores V4 on the contents provided by the web site, and adds the evaluation scores V4 to the consumer evaluation scores V in step S250; calculates web site design evaluation scores V5, and adds the web site design evaluation scores V5 to the consumer evaluation scores V in step S260; and calculates site convenience evaluation scores V6 for indicating web site usage convenience and adds the site convenience evaluation scores V6 to the consumer evaluation scores V in step S270.
  • the calculated consumer evaluation scores V are stored in the consumer evaluation items of the evaluation result database 443 corresponding to the ID of the corresponding web site.
  • the access statistic processor 424 of the evaluation server 42 measures visit counts of the clients for each web site in step S50. That is, the access statistic processor 424 monitors the clients' visit counts for a predetermined period for each registered web site, and performs an access statistic process based on the monitoring results. For example, when the clients 1 to 1 n access a predetermined web site, the access statistic processor 424 measures the visit counts by using a process of recording the user's access log file on the web server of the corresponding web site. That is, the access statistic processor 424 receives an access log file of a client from the corresponding web site, stores the access log file, and measures the web site visit count of the clients based on the number of the received log files.
  • the access statistic processor 424 measures the visit counts of the clients who access the web site according to areas, sex, and ages to determine how many times consumers from specific areas and with what sex and age visit the corresponding web sites.
  • the statistic process results are stored in the access statistic process items of the evaluation result database 443 corresponding to the ID of the corresponding web site.
  • the reliability evaluator 425 of the evaluation server 42 evaluates the reliabilities of the corresponding web site based on the evaluation results, and provides a rank to the web site according to the evaluation results in step S60.
  • FIG. 8 shows exemplified reliability evaluations according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention
  • FIG. 9 shows an exemplified reliability evaluation grade and grade assignment contents according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
  • the reliability scores of the corresponding web site are obtained based on a service provider authenticate score ratio M1 of the corresponding service provider (a web site) on the total service provider authenticate scores obtained by examining the service provider information, a consumer evaluation score ratio M2 of the corresponding web site on the total consumer evaluation scores obtained by the consumer evaluation measurement, a recommendation score ratio M3 of the corresponding web site on the total recommendation scores obtained by the recommendation evaluation measurement, and a visit count ratio M4 of the corresponding web site on the total visit counts obtained by the access count statistic process.
  • the weights can be provided in the order of service provider information, consumer evaluation, recommendation evaluation, and visit priority mostly influencing the reliabilities of the web sites, thereby improving the reliabilities of the reliability evaluation.
  • additional points are provided to the reliability scores obtained by totaling the respective evaluation item scores to produce a total reliability score, and a credit rank is provided to the corresponding web site based on the produced total reliability score.
  • a rank can be assigned from among the total of eight ranks based on stableness of a service provider, service and protection states for the consumers, and the total of evaluation scores for the respective items.
  • the reliability evaluation results are stored in the reliability evaluation items of the evaluation result database 443 corresponding to the ID of the corresponding web site.
  • the ranks are assigned to the web sites according to the evaluation items so that the consumers may check the evaluation results of the web sites in step S70.
  • the rank measurer 426 allocates the ranks to the web sites per item based on the evaluation results.
  • FIG. 10 shows an exemplified ranking measurement process according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
  • the rank measurer 426 of the evaluation server 42 sets web site ranks per item based on the evaluation results stored in the evaluation result database 443. For example, as shown in FIG. 10, reliability scores are assigned to the respective web sites based on the reliability evaluation results to measure the ranks per reliability score in R1 , favorite search word scores are assigned based on the favorite search word information to measure the ranks per favorite search word site in R2, recommendation scores are assigned based on the recommendation evaluation results to measure the ranks per recommendation site in R3, ranks per visit counts are measured based on the statistic processing results in R4, and consumer evaluation scores are assigned based on the consumer evaluation measurement results to measure the ranks per evaluation rank in R5.
  • the ranks of the web sites per item can be measured and assigned based on the evaluation results per item, and the web site ranks according to all the evaluation results can be measured based on the ranks.
  • different weights are provided according to features of the respective items so as to perform fair rank measuring. For example, more weights are provided to the reliability evaluation ranks than the ranks caused by visit counts so as to perform accurate evaluation and rank assignment on the web sites.
  • the ranks of the respective items to which the weights are assigned are summed to produce the final evaluation ranks (R: rank scores).
  • the results on the respective evaluation items on the web sites are processed and displayed so that the users may know the results.
  • scores given to the corresponding web site, an evaluated rank occupied by the corresponding web site per item, reliability evaluation scores, and rank are displayed for each evaluation item (e.g., service provider information examination, consumer evaluation, recommendation evaluation, and an access statistic process).
  • the retrieval server 43 provides evaluation results according to a request by an accessing client 1.
  • FIG. 11 shows exemplified retrieval results provided by the evaluation system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
  • the evaluation system 4 provides web site information in the order of reliabilities according to requests by the clients 1 to 1 n, according to order of ranks following the final ranks, according to ranks per evaluation item (category), or according to orders of newly registered web sites. Therefore, the consumers can easily know what rank a specific web site has for the reliability evaluation; what evaluation results it has for provided contents, homepage design, and convenience; and how many times consumers have visited the web site according to their living areas, sex, and ages.
  • the reliabilities of the web sites are evaluated by evaluating the service provider information of the web sites in addition to the users' evaluation on the online web sites, thereby allowing more reliable web site evaluation.
  • the users can access the optimized web sites based on the reliable evaluation information. Also, since ranks of the web sites are determined by the respective evaluation items and then provided to the users, the users can easily know which sites are reliable per item.

Abstract

Disclosed is a method for evaluating a plurality of web sites connected to a network, which comprises: collecting service provider information from the web sites, and examining them; measuring evaluation on the web sites from users; measuring the users’ visit counts to the web sites to thus perform an access statistic process; evaluating reliabilities on the web sites based on the examined and measured information; and providing evaluation information on the web sites based on the evaluation results. Since the reliabilities of the web sites are evaluated by evaluating service provider information provided to the web sites in addition to users’ evaluations on the web sites online, more reliable web site evaluations are allowed.

Description

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ESTIMATING WEB SITE
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
(a) Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a web site evaluation system and method. More specifically, the present invention relates to a web site evaluation system and method for evaluating reliabilities of a plurality of web sites on a network.
(b) Description of the Related Art
The webs have recently created brand-new businesses through cyber space, and as existing service providers have come to understand the webs as a new market, a huge number of web sites have accordingly appeared. The advent of many web sites confuses users in selecting desired web sites, and the users cannot know what information the respective web sites provide, whether the information is reliable, and whether the transactions processed by the corresponding web site are reliably executed.
Therefore, objective evaluation of the web sites is required in which people manually evaluate the huge categories of information provided by the web sites and the reliabilities, but it is impossible to manually evaluate the continuously increasing number of web sites.
Web site evaluation methods have accordingly been disclosed, but the conventional methods evaluate the reliabilities of the web sites by depending on visits or evaluation of the users who access the web sites, and accordingly, the reliabilities are not guaranteed, and the evaluation results are not appropriately provided.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
It is an advantage of the present invention to improve evaluation reliabilities on the web sites on the web, and objectively provide the results to increase efficiencies of web site retrieval. It is another advantage of the present invention to evaluate the web sites more effectively and reliably and provide the evaluation as retrieval results.
In one aspect of the present invention, a method for evaluating a plurality of web sites connected to a network comprises: (a) collecting service provider information from the web sites, and examining them; (b) measuring evaluation on the web sites from users; (c) measuring the users' visit counts to the web sites to thus perform an access statistic process; (d) evaluating reliabilities on the web sites based on the examined and measured information; and (e) providing evaluation information on the web sites based on the evaluation results.
The step (a) comprises assigning evaluation scores when service provider information satisfies an evaluation value, and assigning no evaluation scores when the service provider information does not satisfy the evaluation value. The service provider information is included in one of a service provider authenticate item, a reliability information authenticate item, a homepage authenticate item, and a representative product authenticate item. The step (b) comprises evaluating consumers' satisfaction and dissatisfaction states on at least one of customer center management items for indicating how kindly and fast the services of the customer center are performed, product-related items for showing quickness and convenience of making a purchase by the customer, security and member management items for representing how securely personal information is managed, and homepage-related items for showing homepage design of the web site and excellence of contents configuration, and differently assigning satisfaction scores and dissatisfaction scores according to the customer's evaluation results. The method further comprises receiving a recommendation on a web site from the user.
The step (c) comprises measuring visit counts of the clients accessing the web sites by area, sex, and age.
The method further comprises: determining ranks of the web sites for respective examination and evaluation items of the web sites; and providing different weights for each evaluation item and determining final ranks of the web sites on the total evaluations.
The step (e) comprises displaying evaluation information including at least one of the scores provided to the corresponding web site per evaluation, evaluation ranks occupied by the corresponding web site per item, and reliability evaluation scores and ranks.
In another aspect of the present invention, a system for evaluating a plurality of web sites connected to a network comprises: a service provider information database for storing information on a plurality of service providers on the evaluated web sites; a user evaluation database for storing user evaluation information on the web sites; and an evaluation server including: a service provider information examiner for examining service provider information on the web sites; a user evaluation measurer for measuring user evaluation on the web sites; an access statistic processor for measuring the clients' visit counts on the web sites; a recommendation evaluator for measuring how many times the web sites are recommended by the users; and a reliability evaluator for evaluating the reliabilities of the corresponding web sites based on the examined and evaluated information.
The access statistic processor measures the visit counts of the clients accessing the web sites according to areas, sexes, and ages.
The evaluation server further comprises a rank measurer for establishing the web site ranks for respective evaluation items, the rank measurer determining ranks of the web sites for respective evaluation items, providing different weights for the respective evaluation items, and determining final ranks of the web sites regarding the total evaluations.
The system further comprises a retrieval server for providing information according to ranks of the web sites per evaluation item following requests by the users.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of the specification, illustrate an embodiment of the invention, and, together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the invention:
FIG. 1 shows a concept of a web site evaluation system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 2 shows a block diagram of a web site evaluation system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 3 shows an operational flowchart of a web site evaluation system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention; FIG. 4 shows a flowchart of a business information evaluation operation shown in FIG. 3;
FIG. 5 shows exemplified business information evaluated according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 6 shows a flowchart of a consumer evaluation measurement process according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 7 shows consumer evaluation items according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 8 shows exemplified reliability evaluations according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 9 shows an exemplified reliability evaluation grade and grade assignment contents according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 10 shows an exemplified ranking measurement process according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention; and
FIG. 1 1 shows exemplified retrieval results according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS
In the following detailed description, only the preferred embodiment of the invention has been shown and described, simply by way of illustration of the best mode contemplated by the inventor(s) of carrying out the invention. As will be realized, the invention is capable of modification in various obvious respects, all without departing from the invention.
Accordingly, the drawings and description are to be regarded as illustrative in nature, and not restrictive.
FIG. 1 shows an information system among a web site evaluation system, a service provider, and a user. In the preferred embodiment of the present invention, respective service providers providing various services on the network are evaluated. In order to improve reliability of the evaluation results on the service providers, they are evaluated for a plurality of items, users' evaluations on the items are measured, the reliabilities of the corresponding service providers are evaluated based on the users' web site visit counts and recommendations, the above-noted evaluation information is assigned with ranks for respective evaluation items according to the users' requests, and it is then provided. As shown in FIG. 1 , a service provider registers the service provider's information to the web site evaluation system, and the web site evaluation system executes evaluation on the service provider as described above and provides reliability evaluation information to the service provider to consult the reliability of the service provider. The users access the web site evaluation system to check service providers' reliabilities and ranks for respective evaluation items. The service providers accordingly provide more improved services to the users based on the evaluation results by the web site evaluation system.
The web sites represent those from which the respective service providers provide various services through the network, and the web site evaluations indicate the evaluations of the corresponding service provider.
A configuration and an operation of the web site evaluation system will now be described in detail.
FIG. 2 shows the configuration of the web site evaluation system according to the preferred embodiment of the present invention.
As shown, the web site evaluation system 4 (referred to as an evaluation system hereinafter) is connected to a plurality of clients 1 to "I n and web sites 2 to 2n through a network 3 (including a wired network, a wireless network, and a future network).
The clients 1 to 1 n represent user terminals accessible to the evaluation system though the network, and the user terminals comprise a computer accessible to the network 3 through a cable, a cable terminal including an Internet TV, a mobile phone wirelessly accessible to the network
3, and a PDA.
The evaluation system 4 comprises an interface server 41 , an evaluation server 42, a retrieval server 43, and a database server 44.
The interface server 41 allows the clients 1 to 1 n and the web sites 2 to 2n to access the interface server 41 through the network 3, converts various categories of information provided through the evaluation server 42 or the retrieval server 43 into communication standard data to provide them to the clients 1 to 1 n or the web sites 2 to 2n, or receives information through the network 3 and provides the information to the evaluation server 42 or the retrieval server 43. The interface server 41 can further comprise a data link device including a CGI (common gateway interface) for information communication with other systems, and a mail server for transmitting and receiving electronic mail. No detailed descriptions on the interface server will be provided since they are well known to a skilled person. The evaluation server 42 evaluates the web sites, and comprises a service provider information examiner 421 for examining information on the service providers (web sites) for respective items; a recommendation evaluator 422 for measuring recommendation information including recommendation counts on predetermined web sites of the clients 1 to 1 n, and evaluating the web sites based on the measured recommendation information; a consumer evaluation measurer 423 for measuring the evaluation information on the respective web sites provided by the clients 1 to 1 n; an access statistic processor 424 for measuring usage rates of the web sites based on the clients' visit counts on the respective web sites; a reliability evaluator 425 for evaluating the reliabilities of the corresponding web sites based on the respective evaluation results; and a rank measurer 426 for establishing the web site ranks following the ranks or reliability evaluation results of the web sites per evaluation item.
The database server 44 comprises a service provider information database 441 for storing information on the respective web sites, a consumer evaluation database 442 for storing information on the web sites evaluated by the users, and an evaluation result database 443 for storing evaluation results evaluated by the evaluation server 42 for each category.
The service provider information database 441 stores information provided by the web sites that desire to have their reliabilities evaluated or information on the web sites collected for evaluating the reliabilities. For example, the service provider information database 441 stores service provider information on a service provider title, a service provider category, a business registration number, and funds corresponding to IDs allocated to the web sites, reliability information on a damage insurance entrance state and a mail-order sale report state, homepage information on targets of web site management and server states, and representative product information on services sold or provided on the web sites.
The consumer evaluation database 442 stores the consumers' evaluation information on the respective web sites. For example, the consumer evaluation database 442 stores information on the consumers' satisfaction and dissatisfaction information on the management of customer centers, ease of ordering, returning of goods, security and member management such as personal information security, and homepage design and ease of retrieval corresponding to IDs allocated to the web sites. The evaluation result database 443 stores evaluation results on the respective web sites for the respective evaluation items. For example, the evaluation result database 443 stores evaluation results on the service provider information examination, evaluation results by the users, access statistic results, reliability evaluation results, and ranking information for representing ranks of the web sites according to the respective evaluation results.
The retrieval server 43 finds desired information from the information stored in the database server 44 according to requests by the clients 1 to 1 n, and provides the information to the clients 1 to 1 n. Based on this configuration, a method for evaluating web sites will be described in detail.
FIG. 3 shows a flowchart of a method for evaluating web sites according to the preferred embodiment of the present invention. As shown, respective web sites to be evaluated are registered. For example, the web sites 2 to 2n can request a consultation from the evaluation system 4 for more effective and reliable management, and the evaluation system 4 assigns an ID to the corresponding web site and stores information on the corresponding web site in the database server 44 to thus perform a registration process in step S10.
That is, the web sites 2 to 2n that desire a consultation provide their service provider and site management information, and the evaluation system 4 stores information in the service provider information database 441 corresponding to the ID. The above-noted information is provided by the web sites or obtained by access to the web site by the evaluation system 4. The evaluation system 4 performs evaluation on the web sites that have requested the consultation, but without being restricted to this, the evaluation system 4 can perform evaluation on specific web sites according to a request by a third party.
As described, when the information registration on the evaluated web sites is performed, the evaluation server 42 examines service provider information, measures recommendation evaluations, measures consumer evaluations, processes client access statistics, and evaluates reliabilities. Processing orders of the evaluation methods according to the preferred embodiment of the present invention are not restricted to the subsequent description orders.
First, the service provider information examiner 421 of the evaluation server 42 performs evaluation on the web sites for all registered information in step S20.
FIG. 4 shows a flowchart of a process for examining service provider information, and FIG. 5 shows service provider information to be evaluated. The service provider information examiner 421 takes information on the corresponding web site from the service provider information database 411 of the database server 44, evaluates how much the corresponding web site satisfies the requirements for the respective items, and records evaluation results. That is, as shown in FIG. 4, evaluation scores are assigned in steps
S100 to S130 when the information on the service providers for the specific items satisfies evaluation values, and a dissatisfaction result is recorded in step S140 when the information fails to satisfy the evaluation values. Here, the evaluation scores following the respective items of the service provider information are differently assigned according to satisfaction states of the evaluation values, or scores can be equally assigned according to satisfaction states of the evaluation values.
For example, as shown in FIG. 5, the service provider information can be classified as a service provider information authenticate item, a reliability information authenticate item, a homepage authenticate item, and a representative product authenticate item. When the funds of the service provider corresponding to the service provider information authenticate item exceeds the established evaluation value (a predetermined price) in the case the service provider information is classified as above, the evaluation scores can be differently assigned according to exceeded states. As to the reliability information authenticate item, when the corresponding web site has damage insurance, a predetermined score is identically assigned to the web site at the time of examining entrance states of the damage insurance by the web site, and when the web site has no damage insurance, no score is provided.
When the above-noted evaluation process is executed on all the items of the service provider information, the service provider information examiner 421 calculates service provider authenticate scores corresponding to the total score based on the evaluation scores per item, and the scores are stored in the evaluation result database 443 to be used later in steps S150 to S180.
As shown in FIG. 3, the recommendation evaluator 422 of the evaluation server 42 collects evaluations of specific web sites from the clients 1 to 1 n in step S30. For example, the recommendation evaluator 422 provides web pages for inquiring whether to recommend the web sites evaluated by the accessing clients 1 to 1 n, and when the clients 1 to 1 n select a specific web site from the web page, the recommendation evaluator 422 determines that as a recommendation for the specific web site, and records it. That is, the recommendation evaluator 422 stores recommendation counts in a recommendation evaluation item of the evaluation result database 443 in correspondence to an ID of the corresponding web site, and additionally receives recommendation reasons from the client and records them.
As described above, the recommendation evaluator 422 receives recommendations on the web sites from the clients accessing the evaluation system 4 to perform recommendation evaluations, and it uses favorite search word information provided from other search sites as recommendation evaluation information. For example, the recommendation evaluator 422 receives favorite search word information input by many users during a predetermined time frame from search sites such as Empas and Naver, measures how many times the names of the web sites that are to be evaluated are requested to be retrieved based on the information, and uses measurement results as recommendation evaluation information. The information can additionally be classified as favorite search word information and stored in the evaluation result database 443.
As shown in FIG. 3, the consumer evaluation measurer 423 of the evaluation server 42 measures evaluations on the web sites per consumer evaluation item in step S40. FIG. 6 shows a process for measuring consumers' evaluations, and FIG. 7 shows exemplified consumer evaluation items.
The consumer evaluation items cover various states that the consumers meet while using the web sites, including: customer center management items for indicating how kindly and fast the services of the customer center are performed, such as kind serving of a customer center in the web site, and rates of feeding back on the services and solving problems; product-related items for showing quickness and convenience of making a purchase, such as quickness, ease of settlement, and convenience of ordering on making a purchase, canceling a purchase, returning a purchase, and delivery; security and member management items for representing how securely personal information is managed; homepage- related items for showing homepage design of the web site, and excellence of contents configuration; and other items for indicating how fast the access rate to the web site is. Here, information corresponding to the above-noted evaluation items is provided from the corresponding web site. The consumer evaluation measurer 423 evaluates consumers' satisfaction and dissatisfaction for the respective items, and differently assigns satisfaction scores and dissatisfaction scores according to the consumers' evaluation results.
For example, as shown in FIG. 6, the consumer evaluation measurer 423 resets consumer evaluation scores V on a specific web site, calculates an improvement request process score V1 for indicating the customer center's processing state of the dissatisfaction of the consumers, and adds the improvement request process score V1 to the consumer evaluation score V in steps S200 to S220; calculates consumer satisfaction scores V2 obtained from evaluations of the respective items, and adds the consumer satisfaction scores V2 to the consumer evaluation score V in step S230; subtracts consumer dissatisfaction scores V3 from the consumer evaluation scores V in step S240; calculates evaluation scores V4 on the contents provided by the web site, and adds the evaluation scores V4 to the consumer evaluation scores V in step S250; calculates web site design evaluation scores V5, and adds the web site design evaluation scores V5 to the consumer evaluation scores V in step S260; and calculates site convenience evaluation scores V6 for indicating web site usage convenience and adds the site convenience evaluation scores V6 to the consumer evaluation scores V in step S270.
Accordingly, the calculated consumer evaluation scores V are stored in the consumer evaluation items of the evaluation result database 443 corresponding to the ID of the corresponding web site.
As shown in FIG. 3, the access statistic processor 424 of the evaluation server 42 measures visit counts of the clients for each web site in step S50. That is, the access statistic processor 424 monitors the clients' visit counts for a predetermined period for each registered web site, and performs an access statistic process based on the monitoring results. For example, when the clients 1 to 1 n access a predetermined web site, the access statistic processor 424 measures the visit counts by using a process of recording the user's access log file on the web server of the corresponding web site. That is, the access statistic processor 424 receives an access log file of a client from the corresponding web site, stores the access log file, and measures the web site visit count of the clients based on the number of the received log files.
In particular, the access statistic processor 424 measures the visit counts of the clients who access the web site according to areas, sex, and ages to determine how many times consumers from specific areas and with what sex and age visit the corresponding web sites.
Click counts and other general methods for measuring the web site visits can be used for indexes of generating the visit counts. The statistic process results are stored in the access statistic process items of the evaluation result database 443 corresponding to the ID of the corresponding web site.
As described, as shown in FIG. 3, when the service provider information of the web site is evaluated, consumer recommendations are measured, consumers' per-item evaluations are measured, and clients' access statistics for respective web sites are processed, the reliability evaluator 425 of the evaluation server 42 evaluates the reliabilities of the corresponding web site based on the evaluation results, and provides a rank to the web site according to the evaluation results in step S60.
FIG. 8 shows exemplified reliability evaluations according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, and FIG. 9 shows an exemplified reliability evaluation grade and grade assignment contents according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention. As shown in FIG. 8, the reliability scores of the corresponding web site are obtained based on a service provider authenticate score ratio M1 of the corresponding service provider (a web site) on the total service provider authenticate scores obtained by examining the service provider information, a consumer evaluation score ratio M2 of the corresponding web site on the total consumer evaluation scores obtained by the consumer evaluation measurement, a recommendation score ratio M3 of the corresponding web site on the total recommendation scores obtained by the recommendation evaluation measurement, and a visit count ratio M4 of the corresponding web site on the total visit counts obtained by the access count statistic process. In this instance, it is desirable to provide different weights to the reliability scores according to importance of the evaluation items at the time of producing the ratios of the respective evaluation items so as to improve reliabilities of the sites. For example, the weights can be provided in the order of service provider information, consumer evaluation, recommendation evaluation, and visit priority mostly influencing the reliabilities of the web sites, thereby improving the reliabilities of the reliability evaluation.
As described, additional points are provided to the reliability scores obtained by totaling the respective evaluation item scores to produce a total reliability score, and a credit rank is provided to the corresponding web site based on the produced total reliability score.
As shown in FIG. 9, a rank can be assigned from among the total of eight ranks based on stableness of a service provider, service and protection states for the consumers, and the total of evaluation scores for the respective items. The reliability evaluation results are stored in the reliability evaluation items of the evaluation result database 443 corresponding to the ID of the corresponding web site. Also, the ranks are assigned to the web sites according to the evaluation items so that the consumers may check the evaluation results of the web sites in step S70. For this, the rank measurer 426 allocates the ranks to the web sites per item based on the evaluation results. FIG. 10 shows an exemplified ranking measurement process according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention. The rank measurer 426 of the evaluation server 42 sets web site ranks per item based on the evaluation results stored in the evaluation result database 443. For example, as shown in FIG. 10, reliability scores are assigned to the respective web sites based on the reliability evaluation results to measure the ranks per reliability score in R1 , favorite search word scores are assigned based on the favorite search word information to measure the ranks per favorite search word site in R2, recommendation scores are assigned based on the recommendation evaluation results to measure the ranks per recommendation site in R3, ranks per visit counts are measured based on the statistic processing results in R4, and consumer evaluation scores are assigned based on the consumer evaluation measurement results to measure the ranks per evaluation rank in R5.
The ranks of the web sites per item can be measured and assigned based on the evaluation results per item, and the web site ranks according to all the evaluation results can be measured based on the ranks. In this instance, different weights are provided according to features of the respective items so as to perform fair rank measuring. For example, more weights are provided to the reliability evaluation ranks than the ranks caused by visit counts so as to perform accurate evaluation and rank assignment on the web sites. Hence, the ranks of the respective items to which the weights are assigned are summed to produce the final evaluation ranks (R: rank scores).
As described above, the results on the respective evaluation items on the web sites are processed and displayed so that the users may know the results.
For example, scores given to the corresponding web site, an evaluated rank occupied by the corresponding web site per item, reliability evaluation scores, and rank are displayed for each evaluation item (e.g., service provider information examination, consumer evaluation, recommendation evaluation, and an access statistic process).
The retrieval server 43 provides evaluation results according to a request by an accessing client 1.
FIG. 11 shows exemplified retrieval results provided by the evaluation system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
As shown, the evaluation system 4 provides web site information in the order of reliabilities according to requests by the clients 1 to 1 n, according to order of ranks following the final ranks, according to ranks per evaluation item (category), or according to orders of newly registered web sites. Therefore, the consumers can easily know what rank a specific web site has for the reliability evaluation; what evaluation results it has for provided contents, homepage design, and convenience; and how many times consumers have visited the web site according to their living areas, sex, and ages.
According to the present invention, the reliabilities of the web sites are evaluated by evaluating the service provider information of the web sites in addition to the users' evaluation on the online web sites, thereby allowing more reliable web site evaluation. Hence, the users can access the optimized web sites based on the reliable evaluation information. Also, since ranks of the web sites are determined by the respective evaluation items and then provided to the users, the users can easily know which sites are reliable per item.
While this invention has been described in connection with what is presently considered to be the most practical and preferred embodiment, it is to be understood that the invention is not limited to the disclosed embodiments, but, on the contrary, is intended to cover various modifications and equivalent arrangements included within the spirit and scope of the appended claims.

Claims

WHAT IS CLAIMED IS:
1 . A method for evaluating a plurality of web sites connected to a network, comprising:
(a) collecting service provider information from the web sites, and examining it;
(b) measuring evaluation on the web sites from users;
(c) measuring the users' visit counts to the web sites to thus perform an access statistic process;
(d) evaluating reliabilities on the web sites based on the examined and measured information; and
(e) providing evaluation information on the web sites based on the evaluation results.
2. The method of claim 1 , wherein (a) comprises assigning evaluation scores when service provider information satisfies an evaluation value, and assigning no evaluation scores when the service provider information does not satisfy the evaluation value, the service provider information being included in one of a service provider authenticate item, a reliability information authenticate item, a homepage authenticate item, and a representative product authenticate item.
3. The method of claim 1 , wherein (b) comprises evaluating consumers' satisfaction and dissatisfaction states on at least one customer center management item for indicating how kindly and fast the services of the customer center are performed, product-related items for showing quickness and convenience of making a purchase by the customer, security and member management items for representing how securely personal information is managed, and homepage-related items for showing homepage design of the web site and excellence of contents configuration, and differently assigning satisfaction scores and dissatisfaction scores according to the customer's evaluation results.
4. The method of claim 1 , further comprising receiving a recommendation on a web site from the user.
5. The method of claim 1 , wherein (c) comprises measuring visit counts of the clients accessing the web sites by area, sex, and age.
6. The method of one of claims 1 to 5, further comprising: determining ranks of the web sites for respective examination and evaluation items of the web sites; and providing different weights for each evaluation item and determining final ranks of the web sites on the total evaluations.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein (e) comprises displaying evaluation information including at least one of the scores provided to the corresponding web site per evaluation, evaluation ranks occupied by the corresponding web site per item, and reliability evaluation scores and ranks.
8. A system for evaluating a plurality of web sites connected to a network, comprising: a service provider information database for storing information on a plurality of service providers on the evaluated web sites; a user evaluation database for storing user evaluation information on the web sites; and an evaluation server including: a service provider information examiner for examining service provider information on the web sites; a user evaluation measurer for measuring user evaluation on the web sites; an access statistic processor for measuring the clients' visit counts on the web sites; a recommendation evaluator for measuring how many times the web sites are recommended by the users; and a reliability evaluator for evaluating the reliabilities of the corresponding web sites based on the examined and evaluated information.
9. The system of claim 8, wherein the access statistic processor measures the visit counts of the clients accessing the web sites according to areas, sexes, and ages.
10. The system of one of claims 8 and 9, wherein the evaluation server further comprises a rank measurer for establishing the web site ranks for respective evaluation items, the rank measurer determining ranks of the web sites for respective evaluation items, providing different weights for the respective evaluation items, and determining final ranks of the web sites regarding the total evaluations.
1 1 . The system of claim 10, further comprising a retrieval server for providing information according to ranks of the web sites per evaluation item following requests by the users.
PCT/KR2003/001558 2003-01-24 2003-08-01 System and method for estimating web site WO2004066180A1 (en)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
AU2003248493A AU2003248493A1 (en) 2003-01-24 2003-08-01 System and method for estimating web site

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
KR10-2003-0004791 2003-01-24
KR1020030004791A KR20040067587A (en) 2003-01-24 2003-01-24 System and method for estimating web site

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2004066180A1 true WO2004066180A1 (en) 2004-08-05

Family

ID=32768556

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/KR2003/001558 WO2004066180A1 (en) 2003-01-24 2003-08-01 System and method for estimating web site

Country Status (3)

Country Link
KR (1) KR20040067587A (en)
AU (1) AU2003248493A1 (en)
WO (1) WO2004066180A1 (en)

Cited By (16)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2007056031A1 (en) * 2005-11-03 2007-05-18 Microsoft Corporation Using popularity data for ranking
WO2008112446A1 (en) 2007-03-09 2008-09-18 Microsoft Corporation Media content search results ranked by popularity
US8112403B2 (en) 2006-05-19 2012-02-07 Symantec Corporation Providing a rating for a web site based on weighted user feedback
AU2007202252B2 (en) * 2006-05-19 2012-03-15 Symantec Corporation Providing a rating for a web site based on weighted user feedback
EP2584415A1 (en) * 2011-10-19 2013-04-24 Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Method for operating an automation device for accessing a documentation storage facility
US9075861B2 (en) 2006-03-06 2015-07-07 Veveo, Inc. Methods and systems for segmenting relative user preferences into fine-grain and coarse-grain collections
US9166714B2 (en) 2009-09-11 2015-10-20 Veveo, Inc. Method of and system for presenting enriched video viewing analytics
US9191722B2 (en) 1997-07-21 2015-11-17 Rovi Guides, Inc. System and method for modifying advertisement responsive to EPG information
US9319735B2 (en) 1995-06-07 2016-04-19 Rovi Guides, Inc. Electronic television program guide schedule system and method with data feed access
US9426509B2 (en) 1998-08-21 2016-08-23 Rovi Guides, Inc. Client-server electronic program guide
US9736524B2 (en) 2011-01-06 2017-08-15 Veveo, Inc. Methods of and systems for content search based on environment sampling
US9749693B2 (en) 2006-03-24 2017-08-29 Rovi Guides, Inc. Interactive media guidance application with intelligent navigation and display features
US10631066B2 (en) 2009-09-23 2020-04-21 Rovi Guides, Inc. Systems and method for automatically detecting users within detection regions of media devices
US10832279B2 (en) 2016-08-17 2020-11-10 International Business Machines Corporation Aggregation of unique user invocations in an online environment
CN114357347A (en) * 2021-12-28 2022-04-15 拓尔思信息技术股份有限公司 Method for estimating total access quantity of Internet documents
CN114357347B (en) * 2021-12-28 2024-04-26 拓尔思信息技术股份有限公司 Method for estimating total access amount of internet documents

Families Citing this family (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
KR100714429B1 (en) * 2004-12-07 2007-05-04 (주) 프람트 Method and system for providing decision information for supplier selection
KR100704404B1 (en) * 2006-10-13 2007-04-09 임흥근 Method for providing information on evaluation of services and system thereof
KR100941140B1 (en) * 2007-01-16 2010-02-09 넷다이버(주) Method and Apparatus for evaluating Blog
KR100913905B1 (en) * 2007-04-12 2009-08-26 엔에이치엔비즈니스플랫폼 주식회사 Method and system for analyzing blog
KR101035327B1 (en) * 2009-01-09 2011-05-20 심플렉스 인터넷 주식회사 Method and System for Providing Auto Evolution Type Webpage Using Log Analysis
KR101234419B1 (en) * 2011-06-08 2013-02-18 정종수 Method for online real name web accessibility certification assessment management

Citations (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
KR20010000781A (en) * 2000-10-19 2001-01-05 안종선 A method and system for providing web site estimate screen based on network
KR20010084841A (en) * 2000-02-29 2001-09-06 신병석 System and method for estimating web sites and method therefor
KR20010104579A (en) * 2000-05-15 2001-11-26 배동국 estimation method of website for the internet
KR20010108877A (en) * 2000-06-01 2001-12-08 이민행 Method For Evaluating A Web Site

Family Cites Families (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
KR20010109744A (en) * 2000-06-02 2001-12-12 이종헌 Ranking appraisement method for website
JP2002024702A (en) * 2000-07-07 2002-01-25 Fujitsu Ltd System and method for information rating, and computer- readable recording medium having information rating program recorded therein
KR20020017538A (en) * 2000-08-30 2002-03-07 박민서 How to operate a directory search site that engages Internet users in the directory database management of a directory search site by rewarding Internet users for website evaluation and link error website reporting
JP2002175240A (en) * 2000-12-06 2002-06-21 Fuji Xerox Co Ltd Website evaluation system, website evaluation method and recording medium
KR20020069892A (en) * 2001-02-28 2002-09-05 주식회사 인터넷과 꿈 A methode of offer for appraisal information by internet site

Patent Citations (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
KR20010084841A (en) * 2000-02-29 2001-09-06 신병석 System and method for estimating web sites and method therefor
KR20010104579A (en) * 2000-05-15 2001-11-26 배동국 estimation method of website for the internet
KR20010108877A (en) * 2000-06-01 2001-12-08 이민행 Method For Evaluating A Web Site
KR20010000781A (en) * 2000-10-19 2001-01-05 안종선 A method and system for providing web site estimate screen based on network

Cited By (26)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US9319735B2 (en) 1995-06-07 2016-04-19 Rovi Guides, Inc. Electronic television program guide schedule system and method with data feed access
US9191722B2 (en) 1997-07-21 2015-11-17 Rovi Guides, Inc. System and method for modifying advertisement responsive to EPG information
US9426509B2 (en) 1998-08-21 2016-08-23 Rovi Guides, Inc. Client-server electronic program guide
KR101343222B1 (en) * 2005-11-03 2013-12-18 마이크로소프트 코포레이션 Using popularity data for ranking
US7783632B2 (en) 2005-11-03 2010-08-24 Microsoft Corporation Using popularity data for ranking
WO2007056031A1 (en) * 2005-11-03 2007-05-18 Microsoft Corporation Using popularity data for ranking
CN101297285B (en) * 2005-11-03 2012-05-30 微软公司 Object ranking system and method capable of improving search result and efficiency
US9128987B2 (en) 2006-03-06 2015-09-08 Veveo, Inc. Methods and systems for selecting and presenting content based on a comparison of preference signatures from multiple users
US10984037B2 (en) 2006-03-06 2021-04-20 Veveo, Inc. Methods and systems for selecting and presenting content on a first system based on user preferences learned on a second system
US9075861B2 (en) 2006-03-06 2015-07-07 Veveo, Inc. Methods and systems for segmenting relative user preferences into fine-grain and coarse-grain collections
US9092503B2 (en) 2006-03-06 2015-07-28 Veveo, Inc. Methods and systems for selecting and presenting content based on dynamically identifying microgenres associated with the content
US9749693B2 (en) 2006-03-24 2017-08-29 Rovi Guides, Inc. Interactive media guidance application with intelligent navigation and display features
US8112403B2 (en) 2006-05-19 2012-02-07 Symantec Corporation Providing a rating for a web site based on weighted user feedback
AU2007202252B2 (en) * 2006-05-19 2012-03-15 Symantec Corporation Providing a rating for a web site based on weighted user feedback
US9326025B2 (en) 2007-03-09 2016-04-26 Rovi Technologies Corporation Media content search results ranked by popularity
US7801888B2 (en) 2007-03-09 2010-09-21 Microsoft Corporation Media content search results ranked by popularity
US8478750B2 (en) 2007-03-09 2013-07-02 Microsoft Corporation Media content search results ranked by popularity
WO2008112446A1 (en) 2007-03-09 2008-09-18 Microsoft Corporation Media content search results ranked by popularity
US10694256B2 (en) 2007-03-09 2020-06-23 Rovi Technologies Corporation Media content search results ranked by popularity
US9166714B2 (en) 2009-09-11 2015-10-20 Veveo, Inc. Method of and system for presenting enriched video viewing analytics
US10631066B2 (en) 2009-09-23 2020-04-21 Rovi Guides, Inc. Systems and method for automatically detecting users within detection regions of media devices
US9736524B2 (en) 2011-01-06 2017-08-15 Veveo, Inc. Methods of and systems for content search based on environment sampling
EP2584415A1 (en) * 2011-10-19 2013-04-24 Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Method for operating an automation device for accessing a documentation storage facility
US10832279B2 (en) 2016-08-17 2020-11-10 International Business Machines Corporation Aggregation of unique user invocations in an online environment
CN114357347A (en) * 2021-12-28 2022-04-15 拓尔思信息技术股份有限公司 Method for estimating total access quantity of Internet documents
CN114357347B (en) * 2021-12-28 2024-04-26 拓尔思信息技术股份有限公司 Method for estimating total access amount of internet documents

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
AU2003248493A1 (en) 2004-08-13
KR20040067587A (en) 2004-07-30

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
WO2004066180A1 (en) System and method for estimating web site
US6739508B2 (en) Evaluation apparatus with voting system, evaluation method with voting system, and a computer product
US8655949B2 (en) Correlated information recommendation
US20090048859A1 (en) Systems and methods for sales lead ranking based on assessment of internet behavior
US8694350B1 (en) Automatically generating task recommendations for human task performers
US20160337217A1 (en) Social graph data analytics
US20050033734A1 (en) Performance prediction system with query mining
US20090234727A1 (en) System and method for determining relevance ratings for keywords and matching users with content, advertising, and other users based on keyword ratings
KR20100091669A (en) Personalized recommendation system for e-commerce service
KR20080097751A (en) System and method of recommending real-time counselor corresponding to search information
EP2751765A2 (en) System and method of social commerce analytics for social networking data and related transactional data
WO2002037796A2 (en) Method and system for determining the popularity of a subject
CN102934113A (en) Information provision system, information provision method, information provision device, program, and information recording medium
CN107949843A (en) Item recommendation system, item recommendation method and program
KR20140087175A (en) Apparatus and method for recommending friend
KR20180075852A (en) System and method for intelligent marketing analysis through processing non-fixed form bigdata
JP2001282675A (en) Method for attracting customer by electronic bulletin board, system using electronic bulletin board, and server used for the same
KR100366772B1 (en) Method for Implementing Information and Knowledge Providing Service Through Internet
KR20180095476A (en) System and method for proividin marketing imfomation
KR20150121305A (en) System for consultation service upon online and method for consultation service upon online therefor
KR100478924B1 (en) Community search service system and method using a plurality of searching criterion
KR20160130206A (en) System for recommending commodity information based on social network service and service method of the same
JP2002297924A (en) Question accepting method and question system
JP2005063164A (en) History collection method, method and system for transmitting analysis result, and program and storge medium therefor
JP4649525B1 (en) RECOMMENDATION DEVICE, RECOMMENDATION METHOD, AND RECOMMENDATION PROGRAM

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AK Designated states

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): AE AG AL AM AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BY BZ CA CH CN CO CR CU CZ DE DK DM DZ EC EE ES FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KP KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MA MD MG MK MN MW MX MZ NI NO NZ OM PG PH PL PT RO RU SC SD SE SG SK SL SY TJ TM TN TR TT TZ UA UG US UZ VC VN YU ZA ZM ZW

AL Designated countries for regional patents

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): GH GM KE LS MW MZ SD SL SZ TZ UG ZM ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR HU IE IT LU MC NL PT RO SE SI SK TR BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GQ GW ML MR NE SN TD TG

121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application
32PN Ep: public notification in the ep bulletin as address of the adressee cannot be established

Free format text: COMMUNICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 69 EPC (EPO FORM 1205A OF 051005)

122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase
NENP Non-entry into the national phase

Ref country code: JP

WWW Wipo information: withdrawn in national office

Country of ref document: JP