# US 2022/0092089 A1 · Evaluation response system and method

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

- Number: US 2022/0092089 A1
- Document ID: US20220092089A1
- Status: Published application
- Kind: A1
- Application number: 17/482,022
- Filed: 2021-09-22
- Published: 2022-03-24
- Earliest claimed: 2020-09-22
- Assignees: Briza, Inc.
- Applicants: Briza, Inc.
- Inventors: Rishi Sharma; Luiz Guilherme D'Abruzzo Pereira; David Horák; Charles R. Walden
- Web page: https://patentgrep.com/patent/US20220092089A1

## CPC

- G06Q 30/0283: Price estimation or determination
- G06F 16/215: Improving data quality; Data cleansing, e.g. de-duplication, removing invalid entries or correcting typographical errors
- G06F 16/2246: {Trees, e.g. B+trees}
- G06F 16/24556: {Aggregation; Duplicate elimination}
- G06F 16/258: {Data format conversion from or to a database}
- G06F 16/288: {Entity relationship models}
- G06Q 10/0639: Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
- G06Q 10/067: Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q 10/10: Office automation; Time management
- G06Q 30/0201: Market modelling; Market analysis; Collecting market data
- G06Q 40/00: Finance; Insurance; Tax strategies; Processing of corporate or income taxes
- G06Q 40/03: Credit; Loans; Processing thereof
- G06Q 50/2053: {Education institution selection, admissions, or financial aid}
- G06Q 40/08: Insurance
- 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
- G06F: ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING (computer systems based on specific computational models G06N)

## Abstract

A computer-implemented method, computer program product and computing system for obtaining a provider evaluation model from each of a plurality of providers, resulting in a plurality of provider evaluation models; generating a dynamic evaluation model based, at least in part, upon the plurality of provider evaluation models; receiving a request for an evaluation response; requesting applicant information based, at least in part, upon the dynamic evaluation model, thus defining dynamic applicant information; and revising the dynamic evaluation model to eliminate one or more non-compatible providers based, at least in part, upon a hypertree-based compatibility structure.

## Claims

### Claim 1

A computer-implemented method, executed on a computing device, comprising:
obtaining a provider evaluation model from each of a plurality of providers, resulting in a plurality of provider evaluation models;
generating a dynamic evaluation model based, at least in part, upon the plurality of provider evaluation models;
receiving a request for an evaluation response;
requesting applicant information based, at least in part, upon the dynamic evaluation model, thus defining dynamic applicant information; and
revising the dynamic evaluation model to eliminate one or more non-compatible providers based, at least in part, upon a hypertree-based compatibility structure.

### Claim 2 (depends on 1)

The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein the request for an evaluation response includes one or more of:
a loan application;
a funding application;
a credit application;
a grant application;
an educational institution application;
a rental application;
a mortgage application;
an employment application; and
an insurance application.

### Claim 3 (depends on 1)

The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein the plurality of providers includes one or more of:
a plurality of loan providers;
a plurality of funding providers;
a plurality of credit providers;
a plurality of grant providers;
a plurality of education providers;
a plurality of rental providers;
a plurality of mortgage providers;
a plurality of employment providers; and
a plurality of insurance providers.

### Claim 4 (depends on 3)

The computer-implemented method of claim 3 wherein:
the dynamic evaluation model includes a plurality of dynamically-defined information inquiries; and
the dynamic applicant information includes responses to one or more of the plurality of dynamically-defined information inquiries.

### Claim 5 (depends on 1)

The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein each of the plurality of provider evaluation models includes a plurality of information inquiries.

### Claim 6 (depends on 5)

The computer-implemented method of claim 5 wherein generating a dynamic evaluation model includes:
processing the plurality of provider evaluation models to remove redundant information inquiries defined within the plurality of provider evaluation models.

### Claim 7 (depends on 5)

The computer-implemented method of claim 5 wherein generating a dynamic evaluation model includes:
mapping one or more information inquiries within each of the plurality of provider evaluation models to one or more information inquiries within the dynamic evaluation model.

### Claim 8 (depends on 1)

The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein receiving a request for an evaluation response includes:
receiving the request for the evaluation response from a user.

### Claim 9 (depends on 1)

The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein receiving a request for an evaluation response includes:
receiving the request for the evaluation response from a remote computing device.

### Claim 10 (depends on 1)

The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein revising the dynamic evaluation model to eliminate one or more non-compatible providers based, at least in part, upon a hypertree-based compatibility structure includes:
comparing at least a portion of the dynamic applicant information to one or more compatibility/incompatibility criteria defined within the hypertree-based compatibility structure.

### Claim 11

A computer program product residing on a computer readable medium having a plurality of instructions stored thereon which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations comprising:
obtaining a provider evaluation model from each of a plurality of providers, resulting in a plurality of provider evaluation models;
generating a dynamic evaluation model based, at least in part, upon the plurality of provider evaluation models;
receiving a request for an evaluation response;
requesting applicant information based, at least in part, upon the dynamic evaluation model, thus defining dynamic applicant information; and
revising the dynamic evaluation model to eliminate one or more non-compatible providers based, at least in part, upon a hypertree-based compatibility structure.

### Claim 12 (depends on 11)

The computer program product of claim 11 wherein the request for an evaluation response includes one or more of:
a loan application;
a funding application;
a credit application;
a grant application;
an educational institution application;
a rental application;
a mortgage application;
an employment application; and
an insurance application.

### Claim 13 (depends on 11)

The computer program product of claim 11 wherein the plurality of providers includes one or more of:
a plurality of loan providers;
a plurality of funding providers;
a plurality of credit providers;
a plurality of grant providers;
a plurality of education providers;
a plurality of rental providers;
a plurality of mortgage providers;
a plurality of employment providers; and
a plurality of insurance providers.

### Claim 14 (depends on 13)

The computer program product of claim 13 wherein:
the dynamic evaluation model includes a plurality of dynamically-defined information inquiries; and
the dynamic applicant information includes responses to one or more of the plurality of dynamically-defined information inquiries.

### Claim 15 (depends on 11)

The computer program product of claim 11 wherein each of the plurality of provider evaluation models includes a plurality of information inquiries.

### Claim 16 (depends on 15)

The computer program product of claim 15 wherein generating a dynamic evaluation model includes:
processing the plurality of provider evaluation models to remove redundant information inquiries defined within the plurality of provider evaluation models.

### Claim 17 (depends on 15)

The computer program product of claim 15 wherein generating a dynamic evaluation model includes:
mapping one or more information inquiries within each of the plurality of provider evaluation models to one or more information inquiries within the dynamic evaluation model.

### Claim 18 (depends on 11)

The computer program product of claim 11 wherein receiving a request for an evaluation response includes:
receiving the request for the evaluation response from a user.

### Claim 19 (depends on 11)

The computer program product of claim 11 wherein receiving a request for an evaluation response includes:
receiving the request for the evaluation response from a remote computing device.

### Claim 20 (depends on 11)

The computer program product of claim 11 wherein revising the dynamic evaluation model to eliminate one or more non-compatible providers based, at least in part, upon a hypertree-based compatibility structure includes:
comparing at least a portion of the dynamic applicant information to one or more compatibility/incompatibility criteria defined within the hypertree-based compatibility structure.

### Claim 21

A computing system including a processor and memory configured to perform operations comprising:
obtaining a provider evaluation model from each of a plurality of providers, resulting in a plurality of provider evaluation models;
generating a dynamic evaluation model based, at least in part, upon the plurality of provider evaluation models;
receiving a request for an evaluation response;
requesting applicant information based, at least in part, upon the dynamic evaluation model, thus defining dynamic applicant information; and
revising the dynamic evaluation model to eliminate one or more non-compatible providers based, at least in part, upon a hypertree-based compatibility structure.

### Claim 22 (depends on 21)

The computing system of claim 21 wherein the request for an evaluation response includes one or more of:
a loan application;
a funding application;
a credit application;
a grant application;
an educational institution application;
a rental application;
a mortgage application;
an employment application; and
an insurance application.

### Claim 23 (depends on 21)

The computing system of claim 21 wherein the plurality of providers includes one or more of:
a plurality of loan providers;
a plurality of funding providers;
a plurality of credit providers;
a plurality of grant providers;
a plurality of education providers;
a plurality of rental providers;
a plurality of mortgage providers;
a plurality of employment providers; and
a plurality of insurance providers.

### Claim 24 (depends on 23)

The computing system of claim 23 wherein:
the dynamic evaluation model includes a plurality of dynamically-defined information inquiries; and
the dynamic applicant information includes responses to one or more of the plurality of dynamically-defined information inquiries.

### Claim 25 (depends on 21)

The computing system of claim 21 wherein each of the plurality of provider evaluation models includes a plurality of information inquiries.

### Claim 26 (depends on 25)

The computing system of claim 25 wherein generating a dynamic evaluation model includes:
processing the plurality of provider evaluation models to remove redundant information inquiries defined within the plurality of provider evaluation models.

### Claim 27 (depends on 25)

The computing system of claim 25 wherein generating a dynamic evaluation model includes:
mapping one or more information inquiries within each of the plurality of provider evaluation models to one or more information inquiries within the dynamic evaluation model.

### Claim 28 (depends on 21)

The computing system of claim 21 wherein receiving a request for an evaluation response includes:
receiving the request for the evaluation response from a user.

### Claim 29 (depends on 21)

The computing system of claim 21 wherein receiving a request for an evaluation response includes:
receiving the request for the evaluation response from a remote computing device.

### Claim 30 (depends on 21)

The computing system of claim 21 wherein revising the dynamic evaluation model to eliminate one or more non-compatible providers based, at least in part, upon a hypertree-based compatibility structure includes:
comparing at least a portion of the dynamic applicant information to one or more compatibility/incompatibility criteria defined within the hypertree-based compatibility structure.