# US 2014/0208253 A1 · Methods and apparatus to monitor tasks in a process system enterprise

> Agents: this data is available as JSON from the patentgrep API and MCP server — see https://patentgrep.com/llms.txt

- Number: US 2014/0208253 A1
- Document ID: US20140208253A1
- Status: Published application
- Kind: A1
- Application number: 13/748,090
- Filed: 2013-01-23
- Published: 2014-07-24
- Earliest claimed: 2013-01-23
- Assignees: Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc.
- Applicants: Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc.
- Inventors: Nathan William Pettus; Navin Rajashekar; Glenn Mclaughlin
- Web page: https://patentgrep.com/patent/US20140208253A1

## CPC

- G06F 3/04847: Interaction techniques to control parameter settings, e.g. interaction with sliders or dials
- G06T 11/26: Drawing of charts or graphs
- G06F 11/3055: {Monitoring arrangements for monitoring the status of the computing system or of the computing system component, e.g. monitoring if the computing system is on, off, available, not available (error or fault processing without redundancy G06F11/0703; error detection or correction by redundancy in data representation G06F11/08; error detection or correction of the data by redundancy in operations G06F11/14; error detection or correction by redundancy in hardware G06F11/16)}
- G06F 21/577: {Assessing vulnerabilities and evaluating computer system security}
- G06F: ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING (computer systems based on specific computational models G06N)
- G06T: IMAGE DATA PROCESSING OR GENERATION, IN GENERAL

## Abstract

Methods and apparatus to monitor tasks in a process system enterprise are disclosed. In one example, a method is disclosed that comprises analyzing, using a processor, tasks in an enterprise to determine a criticality of each task and an actionability of each task, ordering, using the processor, the tasks based on the criticality and the actionability of each of the tasks, and rendering, via a display, a first graphic representative of at least a portion of the ordered tasks.

## Claims

### Claim 1

A method, comprising:
analyzing, using a processor, tasks in an enterprise to determine a criticality of each task and an actionability of each task;
ordering, using the processor, the tasks based on the criticality and the actionability of each of the tasks; and
rendering, via a display, a first graphic representative of at least a portion of the ordered tasks.

### Claim 2 (depends on 1)

The method of claim 1, wherein the first graphic is a chart having a first axis corresponding to the criticality of the tasks and a second axis corresponding to the actionability of the tasks, and wherein markers, each representative of one or more tasks, are to be plotted on the chart.

### Claim 3 (depends on 2)

The method of claim 2, wherein a location of each marker plotted on the chart is based on a weighted average of the criticality and the actionability of the one or more tasks associated with each corresponding marker.

### Claim 4 (depends on 2)

The method of claim 2, wherein each marker corresponds to any of one or more sites, one or more systems, one or more areas, one or more units, one or more process cells, or one or more workstations within the enterprise.

### Claim 5 (depends on 4)

The method of claim 4, further comprising adjusting any one of a size, a shape, an outline, a color, or an intensity of each marker to indicate a corresponding size of the one or more sites, one or more systems, one or more areas, one or more units, one or more process cells, or one or more workstations associated with the marker.

### Claim 6 (depends on 4)

The method of claim 4, further comprising adjusting any one of a size, a shape, an outline, a color, or an intensity of each marker to indicate a number of tasks associated with the corresponding one or more sites, one or more systems, one or more areas, one or more units, one or more process cells, or one or more workstations.

### Claim 7 (depends on 1)

The method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the tasks is based at least in part on vendor specific information associated with any of software, firmware, or hardware associated with the corresponding tasks.

### Claim 8 (depends on 1)

The method of claim 1, further comprising
grouping the tasks into one or more categories; and
rendering, via the display, a second graphic indicative of a number, a status, or a characteristic of the tasks associated with each of the one or more categories.

### Claim 9 (depends on 8)

The method of claim 8, wherein the one or more categories correspond to any of information articles, hotfixes, operating system updates, technical support calls, lifecycle status, changes in lifecycle status, license utilizations, customer support expirations, warranty expirations, or registration status.

### Claim 10 (depends on 8)

The method of claim 8, further comprising
grouping the tasks in each of the one or more categories into first and second subcategories, the tasks associated with the first subcategory having a higher priority than the tasks associated with the second subcategory; and
rendering, via the display, a third graphic having information relating to each of the tasks associated with at least one of the first subcategory or the second subcategory within one of the one or more categories.

### Claim 11 (depends on 10)

The method of claim 10, further comprising
reordering the tasks based on user input weights; and
updating any of the first, second, or third graphics based on the reordered tasks.

### Claim 12 (depends on 11)

The method of claim 11, wherein the user input weights are to be applied to any of one or more of the tasks, one or more of the first or second subcategories, one or more of the categories, one or more of the sites, one or more systems, one or more areas, one or more units, one or more process cells, or one or more workstations.

### Claim 13

A system, comprising:
a processor to implement a system management application to
analyze tasks in an enterprise;
quantify a criticality for each of the tasks; and
quantify an actionability for each of the tasks; and
a display to render a first graphic representative of at least one of the criticality or actionability corresponding to at least a portion of the tasks in the enterprise.

### Claim 14 (depends on 13)

The system of claim 13, wherein the criticality for each task is based on at least one of a risk associated with each task on a safety or a reliability of at least a portion of the enterprise and an effect of the task on a probability of the risk being realized.

### Claim 15 (depends on 13)

The system of claim 13, wherein the first graphic is a chart having a first axis corresponding to the criticality of the tasks and a second axis corresponding to the actionability of the tasks, wherein markers representative of one or more of the tasks are to be plotted on the chart.

### Claim 16 (depends on 15)

The system of claim 15, wherein each marker corresponds to a component of the enterprise, the component corresponding to any one of one or more sites, one or more systems, one or more areas, one or more units, one or more process cells, or one or more workstations within the enterprise.

### Claim 17 (depends on 16)

The system of claim 16, wherein an appearance of the markers is to be indicative of a size of the component of the enterprise or a number of tasks associated with the component of the enterprise.

### Claim 18 (depends on 15)

The system of claim 15, wherein a location of each marker plotted on the chart is based on a weighted average of the criticality and the actionability of the one or more tasks associated with each corresponding marker.

### Claim 19 (depends on 18)

The system of claim 18, wherein weights associated with the criticality or actionability of each task or group of tasks are to be adjusted based on a user input.

### Claim 20

A tangible computer readable storage medium comprising instructions that, when executed, cause a machine to at least:
analyze tasks in an enterprise to determine a criticality of each task and an actionability of each task;
order the tasks based on the criticality and the actionability of each of the tasks; and
render, via a display, a first graphic representative of at least a portion of the ordered tasks.

### Claim 21 (depends on 20)

The computer readable storage medium of claim 20, wherein the first graphic is a chart having a first axis corresponding to the criticality of the tasks and a second axis corresponding to the actionability of the tasks, and wherein markers representative of one or more tasks are to be plotted on the chart.

### Claim 22 (depends on 21)

The computer readable storage medium of claim 21, wherein a location of each marker plotted on the chart is based on a weighted average of the criticality and the actionability of the one or more tasks associated with each corresponding marker.

### Claim 23 (depends on 20)

The computer readable storage medium of claim 20, wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the machine to:
group the tasks into one or more categories; and
render, via the display, a second graphic indicative of a number, a status, or a characteristic of the tasks associated with each of the one or more categories.

### Claim 24 (depends on 24)

The computer readable storage medium of claim 24, wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the machine to:
group the tasks in each of the one or more categories into first and second subcategories, the tasks associated with the first subcategory having a higher priority than the tasks associated with the second subcategory; and
render, via the display, a third graphic having information relating to each of the tasks associated with at least one of the first category or the second category within one of the one or more categories.