WO2001093515A1

WO2001093515A1 - Method and device for correcting e-mail addresses

Info

Publication number: WO2001093515A1
Application number: PCT/SG2000/000078
Authority: WO
Inventors: Tralvex Yeap; James Lee; Horng Jyh Paul Wu; Ho Chung Lui
Original assignee: Kent Ridge Digital Labs; Mustard Technology Pte Ltd
Priority date: 2000-06-02
Filing date: 2000-06-02
Publication date: 2001-12-06

Abstract

A method, an apparatus and a computer program product for resolving an ambiguous recipient email address are disclosed. This process (300, 400) enables the delivery of an electronic message (506) to the right recipient(s) (520) even though the sender (502) does not type in the exact name string as required by current e-mail servers. The process involves the generation (404) of a confidence ranking table (532) followed by variations notification steps (408, 410, 414, 416) with a combination of three entities - the sending entity, the receiving entity(ies) and/or administrator entities in the delivery of the email message (506). This technique can be utilized in message routing systems, instant messaging system and any form of messaging system that involves a destination email address.

Description

METHOD AND DEVICE FOR CORRETING E-MAIL ADDRESSES

FIELD OF INVENTION This invention relates generally to the field of network communications and more particularly to electronic mail (e-mail) systems.

BACKGROUND

Electronic mail (email) is an application in networks or internetworks, e.g. the Internet, that permits the exchange of electronic messages. The proliferation of the Internet and numerous applications used on the Internet pervades private, commercial and government sectors of many countries. Beside computer or electronic networks, wireless networks and cellular telecommunications networks are becoming increasingly popular in the usage of email. Currently, third generation (3G) mobile phones are being developed that facilitate Internet connectivity in addition to providing cellular telecommunications capabilities in a single handheld device. Similarly, a number of handheld personal digital assistants (PDA) e.g. 3Com's Palm VII ™ permit Internet connection and access to e-mail by means of wireless communications or a modem used with the PDA. Email connectivity is a core function for numerous devices such as PDAs and handphones to name a few, beside computers.

E-mail has become one of the preferred methods of communicating by facilitating fast, easy and inexpensive communications and has become a business necessity, not a luxury. E-mail utilization has achieved ubiquitous status, thereby enabling users to stay connected with suppliers, customers and business partners, as well as family and friends. This can be done from the office, from home, or on the road. The speed, flexibility and efficiency of e-mail make e-mail one of the most important applications on the Internet.

Studies indicate that e-mail has surpassed the telephone in certain countries in 1998 as the most frequently used tool for corporate communications. The total number of e-mailboxes installed worldwide is thought to have reached approximately 112.4 million in 1998, up from 48.7 million in 1997. Another study suggests that the number is 263 million e-mailboxes in the world. Revenues generated by the e-mail server market are said to have reached $1.90 billion in 1998, up 145.5 percent from 1997. The corporate e-mail server market is slightly larger than the Internet Service

Provider (ISP) market, with 68.4 million users in 1998. The corporate market dwarfs the ISP market in terms of revenue, accounting for 91.8 percent of revenues in 1998.

Important driving factors in the corporate market include the increasing importance put on e-mail in business, the replacement of old systems, and the demand for functionality.

In the year 2000, it is expected there will be 108 million people using e-mail and 6.9 trillion messages will be sent electronically. It is also expected that 50 percent of the US population (135 million) will communicate via email by 2001.

In conventional email systems, a sender must type in the full user-id address of the recipient before the message can be delivered successfully to the right person.

In large organizations, user-ids (e-mail addresses) are typically assigned by the Information Technology (IT) department and generated according to certain rules or convention unique to the organization. For example, all the e-mail ids of a mathematics department of a certain university may adopt the prefix of 'math' and be followed by the initials of each person's name. Thus, the e-mail id for Rudy Tang may be 'mathrt@χχχχ'. Other organizations may create their own rules. Some popular ones are rtang@xxxx, or rudy@xxx, or tangr@χχχχ.

This poses a significant problem for the sender. Even though the sender knows the recipient's name full, the sender may not remember the exact spelling of the entire e- mail id string. Hence, this can create much frustration for the sender. Worst of all, such loss of opportunity in communications can translate into huge business cost. Also, even if the user-id is known, typographical errors may occur resulting in the failure of the email message being delivered. Instead, the email message may bounce back to the sender as undeliverable.

US Patent No. 5,938,725 issued to Hara on 17 August 1999 and entitled "Method and apparatus for determining destination address of email message from stored email messages" describes a method for transmitting/receiving an email among a number of computers connected to a network. This method involves a technique for determining an address of a transmission destination for an email. However, this does not work if the recipient email address is mistyped by the sender or is otherwise incorrect.

US Patent No. 5,703,783 issued to Allen et al on 30 December 1997 and entitled "Apparatus for intercepting and forwarding incorrectly addressed postal mail" describes an apparatus which attempts to resolve an ambiguous postal address within the manual postal system. The domain and operations of this apparatus are completely different from an electronic email system.

A Request For Comments (RFC) is a document that describes the specifications for a recommended technology. The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and other standards bodies use RFCs and since 1970s IETF has published more than 2500 RFCs, all of which can be viewed at www.ietf.org/rfc/.

RFC 1891 (1996) entitled "SMTP Service Extension for Delivery Status Notifications" describes an extension to SMTP (RFC 822), which allows an SMTP client to specify:

(a) that delivery status notifications (DSNs) should be generated under certain conditions,

(b) whether such notifications should return the contents of the message, and

(c) additional information, to be returned with a DSN, which allows the sender to identify both the recipient(s) for which the DSN was issued and the transaction in which the original message was sent. However, resolution of failed delivery due to an invalid recipient email address is not possible.

None of the foregoing documents is able to resolve an ambiguous or bad recipient email address to facilitate delivery of an email message. Thus, a need clearly exists for an improved email system capable of doing so.

SUMMARY

In accordance with a first aspect of the invention, there is disclosed a method for resolving an ambiguous electronic mail (e-mail) address to deliver an email message. The method includes the steps of: receiving an email message with an ambiguous email address; selecting at least one email address from a list of predetermined email addresses using a measure of similarity between the ambiguous email address and each email address in the list of predetermined email addresses; and delivering at least a portion of the email message with the ambiguous email address to the at least one selected email address.

Preferably, the method includes the step of checking the email address of the received email message against the list of predetermined email addresses to identify the email address of the email message as being ambiguous.

Preferably, the method includes the step of notifying at least one predetermined entity of the at least partial delivery of the email message with the ambiguous email address to the one or more selected email addresses. The one or more predetermined entities include a sending entity that sent the email message with the ambiguous email address, at least one receiving entity that received the at least a portion of the email message, a first administrator entity administering email for the sending entity, a second administrator entity administering email for the at least one receiving entity, or a combination of the foregoing entities. Optionally, the method includes the step of sending a notification email message to the first administrator entity, the second administrator entity, or both. The notification email message includes: a portion of the email message, or the entire email message. Preferably, the method includes the step of building a table of confidence measures using the list of predetermined email addresses. The similarity measure for each predetermined email address in respect of the ambiguous email address is a confidence measure. Optionally, the method includes the step of providing a qualitative output from the table of confidence measures used to determine a best matching email address from the list of predetermined email addresses. The qualitative output can be a numeric score value, an alphanumeric score value, a percentage value, or a combination thereof. Optionally, the method includes the step of providing at least one input parameter to the table of confidence measures. The input parameter can be the selected email address of a receiving entity, the name of the receiving entity, information in the email message with the ambiguous address that is related to the receiving entity, or a combination thereof.

Preferably, the method includes the step of determining at least one email address in the list of predetermined email addresses having a highest confidence measure. The method also preferably includes the step of comparing the highest confidence measure against a predetermined threshold value. If the highest confidence measure exceeds the predetermined threshold value, there is delivered to one selected email address having the highest confidence measure at least a portion of the email message. This portion can include: the email address and name of a sending entity, an email subject of the email message, or the entire email message. Optionally, the method includes the step of notifying the sending entity of: the selected email address, the name of a receiving entity, an alias of the selected email address of the receiving entity, or a combination thereof. Preferably, the method includes the step of delivering the portion of the email message with the ambiguous email address to two or more selected email addresses in the list of predetermined email addresses having a confidence measure with a specified value if the highest confidence measure does not exceed the predetermined threshold value. The delivered portion of the email message includes: the name of a sending entity and the email address, an email subject of the email message, the email message, or a combination thereof. The method may also include the step of notifying the sending entity of: the selected email addresses of two or more receiving entities, names of the receiving entities, aliases of the selected email addresses of the receiving entities, or a combination thereof.

In accordance with a second aspect of the invention, there is disclosed an apparatus for resolving an ambiguous electronic mail (e-mail) address to deliver an email message. The apparatus includes: a device for receiving an email message with an ambiguous email address; a device for selecting at least one email address from a list of predetermined email addresses using a measure of similarity between the ambiguous email address and each email address in the list of predetermined email addresses; and a device for delivering at least a portion of the email message with the ambiguous email address to the at least one selected email address.

In accordance with a third aspect of the invention, there is disclosed a computer program product having a computer usable medium having a computer readable program code means embodied therein for resolving an ambiguous electronic mail

(e-mail) address to deliver an email message. The computer program product includes: a computer readable program code module for receiving an email message with an ambiguous email address; a computer readable program code module for selecting at least one email address from a list of predetermined email addresses using a measure of similarity between the ambiguous email address and each email address in the list of predetermined email addresses; and a computer readable program code module for delivering at least a portion of the email message with the ambiguous email address to the at least one selected email address.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS A small number of embodiments of the invention are described hereinafter with reference to the drawings, in which: Fig. 1 is a block diagram of an electronic mail system in accordance with the embodiments of the invention;

Fig. 2 illustrates a notification combination preference table in accordance with the embodiments of the invention;

Fig. 3 illustrates a flowchart of the smart email process in accordance with the first embodiment of the invention;

Fig. 4 is a flowchart illustrating the ambiguous address resolution process in accordance with the first embodiment; and

Fig. 5 is a block diagram of an email system utilizing a representative confidence- ranking table in accordance with the first embodiment of the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

A method, an apparatus, and a computer program product for resolving an ambiguous recipient email address are described. In the following description, numerous details are set forth. It will be apparent to one skilled in the art, however, that the present invention may be practiced without these specific details. In other instances, well-known features are not described in detail so as not to obscure the present invention.

The embodiments are advantageously directed toward delivering an incorrectly or ambiguously addressed email message by processing a recipient e-mail address intelligently based on the similarity of the ambiguous e-mail address and potential recipient e-mail addresses. The embodiments of the invention are able to do so using several variants in implementation. From the following description of specific embodiments, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that modifications/changes can be made without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention. In addition, the general principles defined herein may be applied to other embodiments and applications without moving away from the scope and spirit of the invention. Consequently, the present invention is not intended to be limited to the embodiments shown, but is to be accorded the widest scope consistent with the principles and featured disclosed herein.

In the following description, components of the system are described as modules. A module, and in particular its functionality, can be implemented in either hardware or software. In the software sense, a module is a process, program, or portion thereof, that usually performs a particular function or related functions. In the hardware sense, a module is a functional hardware unit designed for use with other components or modules. For example, a module may be implemented using discrete electronic components, or it can form a portion of an entire electronic circuit such as an

Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC). Numerous other possibilities exist. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the system can also be implemented as a combination of hardware and software modules.

Overview

Fig. 1 is a block diagram of an e-mail system 100 utilizing the method for resolving an ambiguous electronic mail (e-mail) address to deliver an email message in accordance with the first embodiment of the invention. In broad terms, the e-mail system 100 involves a network 130 and at least one e-mail server denoted generally by dashed circle 150 and labeled Organization B. The e-mail server 150 provides e-mail services to one or more users, including a recipient user or simply User R 140. The user R 140 may directly access the server 150 by being a node on a local area network for example, or by means of a point-to-point connection such as a dial-in account. In the latter case, the user R 140 may access the server 150 using a modem (not shown) to establish a communications channel with the e-mail server 150.

The server 150 is able to communicate with other entities by means of the network 130. The network 130 can be a computer or electronic network, an Intranet, the Internet, some form of proprietary network, a wireless network, or the like. Many wireless networks utilize various types of technology including infrared, radio frequency, and microwave based technologies. Thus, no limitation is imposed on the type of network designated by network 130 other than it is capable of transporting e- mail messages.

Another server or entity 120 and labeled Organization A is also coupled to the network 130. In the following description, the embodiments of the invention are described in terms of the two servers 120 and 150, however, it will be apparent to one skilled in the art that the embodiments are equally applicable to the case where only a single server is involved in the e-mail message transmission.

The email server 150 includes a Mail Transport Agent module (MTA2) 152, a maildrop 154 denoted MailDroρ2, a user agent module (UA2) 158, and a post office protocol (POP) module 156. The MTA2 module 152 is responsible for transmitting and receiving e-mail messages transported via the network 130 and is the interface of the server 150 to the network 130. In the embodiments of the invention, the method of resolving ambiguously addressed e-mail messages is implemented in the MTA2 module 152. The MailDrop2 154 stores email messages for the server 150. The MailDroρ2 154 is bidirectionally coupled to the MTA2 module 152. The POP module 156 fetches e-mail messages stored in the MailDrop2 154 for delivery to the designated recipient. The POP2 module 156 provides the fetched email messages to the user agent module (UA2) 158, which is used to directly and bidirectionally interface with the user R 140. The user agent module (UA2) 158 is an e-mail application, by which the user R 140 receives and sends e-mail messages. The UA2 module 158 is also bidirectionally couple with the MailDrop2 154.

As shown in Fig. 1, the other email server 120 includes a Mail Transport Agent module (MTAl) 128, a maildrop 126 denoted MailDropl, a user agent module (UAl) 122, and a post office protocol (POP) module 124 and has the same configuration as the server 150, described hereinbefore. For the purposes of brevity only, the description of the functionality of each of the components of server 120 is not repeated, but reference is made to the description of the corresponding component in the server 150 instead. Preferably, the first server 120 with which the sending entity or user S 110 is coupled also has the ambiguous email address resolving method incorporated in its MTAl module 128, but need not. Of course, if it does not have an ambiguous email address resolving module, the server 120 cannot resolve ambiguously addressed email messages received by that server 120.

The conventional handling of email messages is first described with reference to user R 140 preparing and sending an email message to user S 110. For user R 140 in Organization B 150 to send an email message to user S 110 in Organization A 120, user R 140 composes an email message using the user agent or UA2 module 158. After saving the email message, the UA2 module 158 forwards the email message to the Maildrop2 154 of the server 150. The MTA2 module 152 retrieves the email message from the Maildrop2 154 and sends the email message via the network 130. The email message is sent to the message server 120 of the designated domain address of the user S 110 email address specified by the user R 140 in the email message.

Once the email message is received by the MTAl module 128 with which user S 110 is associated, the email message is deposited into the Maildropl 126 of the first server 120. If the email address of the user S 110 is correctly specified in the email message, the email message from user R 140 is kept in Maildrop2 111 awaiting retrieval by user S 110. To retrieve the email message left by the user R 140, the user S 110 accesses the UAl module 122 and via POP1 interface 124 fetches from Maildropl 126 email messages designated for user S 110. However, under conventional processing, what happens for the case of incorrectly addressed email messages is quite different.

If the email address of user S 110 is mistyped in the email message and this mistyped email address is not a valid email user of organization A 120, the email message upon receipt from the network 130 by the MTAl module 128 is sent back to user R 140 with a note that the email address specified in the email message is unknown in organization A 120 and therefore is undeliverable. In effect, the incorrectly or ambiguously addressed email message sent by user R 140 "bounces" back from the first server 120 as undeliverable to the specified email address. This is the case irrespective of the potentially minor discrepancy between the incorrect email address and the correct one. Consequently, in conventional email systems, the email address specified in the email message must be exactly correct. Otherwise, the message is undeliverable and returned with the cryptic message "User unknown" or a similar comment.

For the purposes of the following description to illustrate the embodiments of the invention, the user S 110 of the first server 120 sends via the network 130 an incorrectly or ambiguously addressed email message meant for user R 140 of the second server 150, but which would conventionally be undeliverable because the email address is not exactly correct. Alternatively, user S 110 and user R 140 are referred to as the sending entity and the receiving entity. The system administrators for the first server 120 and the second server 150 are likewise alternatively referred to as the first and second administrator entities, respectively. The functions of system administration for servers in general and email servers in particular are well known to those skilled in the art.

Rather than "bounce" back the email message, the second email server 150 resolves the ambiguously addressed email message so as to deliver the email message. This is done by means of the MTA2 module which incorporates an address resolution module in accordance with the first embodiment. The MTA2 module 152 maintains a list of known email addresses for the second server 150. Using this list, one or more email addresses in the list are selected using a measure of similarity between the ambiguous email address and the email addresses. At least a portion of the sent email message with the ambiguous email address is then delivered to one or more predetermined entities, which are preferably the at least one selected email address of the second server 150. However, the entityøes) that the portion of the email is delivered to is (are) dependent upon the configuration of the system.

Preferably, the system is configurable to permit notification of the at least partial delivery of the ambiguously addressed email message to one or more predetermined entities, which include the sending entity 110 that sent the ambiguously addressed email message, one or more receiving entities (e.g., 140) , the administrator of the sending email server 120, the administrator of the receiving email server 150, or two or more of the foregoing entities. Optionally, a notification email message including a portion of the email message or the entire email message can be sent to the first administrator, the second administrator, or both.

This "intelligence" built into the email server 150 advantageously overcomes disadvantages of conventional systems, which are not able to handle ambiguously addressed email messages other than to simply bounce such messages back to the source.

To begin with, the email server 150 checks the email address of the received email message against the list maintained by the server 150 to determine that the email address of the email message is ambiguous. The address resolution module of the MTA2 module 152 builds a confidence ranking table containing confidence measures, which indicating the degree of similarity between the ambiguous email address and the email addresses contained in the list. Normally, at least one parameter is input to the confidence ranking table. This input parameter can be the email address of a receiving entity, the name of the receiving entity, information in the ambiguously addressed email message that is related to the receiving entity, or a combination of the foregoing. Preferably, the confidence ranking table of the second server 150 provides a qualitative output. This qualitative output can be a numeric score value, an alphanumeric score value, a percentage value, or some combination of these values. The qualitative output can be used to determine the best matching email address known to the second server 150 from the list.

Dependent upon how strong the qualitative output or confidence measures are indicating the degree of similarity between the ambiguously addressed email message and known email addresses, the email server 150 handles the delivery of the email message differently. Also, the operation of the address resolution module is configurable by the system administrator of the second email server 150, or perhaps by the user R 140. The email server 150 attempts to determine an email address in the list of predetermined email addresses that has a highest confidence measure. In some instances, there may be a single email address that can be readily selected as the best match. However, in other instances, more that one email address in the list may be selected where there is not one that is clearly the best match.

The email address with the highest confidence measure is compared with a predetermined threshold value. If the highest confidence measure exceeds the predetermined threshold value, at least a portion of the email message is preferably delivered to the selected email address having the highest confidence measure. (e.g., user R 140 if the corresponding email address is the closest match). This portion of the email message can include: the email address and name of user S 110 (i.e., the sending entity), the subject line of the email message, or the entire email message. Other information can be forwarded to the selected email address without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention, as long as some form of notification is sent. The user S 110 or sending entity can also optionally be notified. Such a notification can include the selected email address to which the email message is going to be delivered, the name of the receiving entity, an alias of the selected email address of the receiving entity, or a combination of the foregoing.

Preferably, if the highest confidence measure does not exceed the predetermined threshold value, the portion of the email message with the ambiguous email address is delivered to two or more selected email addresses in the list known to the email server 150. The delivered portion of the email message optionally includes: the name of the sending entity and the email address, the subject line of the email message, the entire email message, or a combination thereof. Preferably, the sending entity is also notified of this circumstance and the following information can be provided to the sending entity: the selected email addresses of two or more receiving entities, names of the receiving entities, aliases of the selected email addresses of the receiving entities, or a combination thereof.

Embodiments of the invention are described hereinafter in greater detail with reference to Figs. 2-5. Configurability Table

Fig. 2 shows a notification combination preference table 200 by which various embodiments can be implemented to optionally choose how an ambiguously addressed recipient email address is resolve for delivery of the email message. The system can be configured as to which entities are notified that an ambiguously addressed email message has been sent. The preferred configuration according to the first embodiment of the invention is denoted by reference numeral 214, where the sending and receiving entities are notified and the administrator entities are not. The sending and receiving entities are at least informed of the circumstance that an ambiguously addressed email message has been sent. More preferably, the ambiguously addressed message is delivered to the receiving entity.

Other configurations that can optionally be configured include those designated by reference numerals 210, 212, and 216. In configuration 216, the sending, receiving and administrator entities are all at least notified. In configuration 210, only the sending entity is notified, but the administrator and receiving entities are not. In configuration 212, the sending and administrator entities are notified, but the receiving entity or entities are not. The remaining configurations 202-208 do not involve notifying the sending entity. For this reason, those configurations are considered to be less preferable for most organizations.

Flowchart of Ambiguous Email Address Resolution Processing Figs. 3 and 4 are detailed flowcharts illustrating the handling 300 of email messages by an email server and the process 400 of resolving ambiguous email addresses in accordance with the first embodiment of the invention.

Referring to Fig. 3, processing commences in step 302. In step 304, an email message is sent by the user agent of the sending entity. In step 306, the MTA module of the sending entity's email server receives the email message to be sent. In step 308, the MTA module of the sending entity forwards the email message to the receiving MTA module of the receiving email server. In step 310, the sent email message is received by the receiving MTA module. In decision block 312, a check is made to determine if the email address designated in the email message is known to the receiving server by checking if the email address is in the server's email list (i.e., the list of predetermined email addresses). If the designated email address is correct and known to the server, decision block 312 returns true (YES) and processing continues in step 314. In step 314, the mail is forwarded to the correctly specified receiving entity designated by the email address and stored in the maildrop of the receiving email server. The email message can be later retrieved by the recipient entity. Processing then terminates in step 316. Steps 314 and 316 constitute normal processing of a correctly addressed email message. However, if decision block 312 returns false (NO), processing continues with the ambiguous address resolution method 400 shown in Fig. 4.

Referring to Fig. 4, processing commences in step 402. In step 402, the local server email list is retrieved or load. In step 404, a confidence ranking table is built using the ambiguous email address in relation to the email addresses contained in the retrieved list. As indicated above, step 404 may optionally use additional information, e.g. the name of the desired receiving entity if this information is tagged to the email address. Again, this table contains measures of similarity or confidence between the ambiguous address and the predetermined email addresses of the list. Any of a number of string matching algorithms or techniques can be used to determine the measure of similarity or confidence between the ambiguous email address and the predetermined email addresses. Preferably, approximate string matching is employed to generate the similarly measure. Approximate string matching is known to those skilled in the art. For further information, reference is made to Myka, Andreas, and Guntzer, Ulrich, "Fuzzy Full-Text Searches in OCR Databases", in Adam, N., Bhargava, B., Halem, M., and Yesha, Y. (eds) Digital Libraries - Research and Technology Advances. ADL '95 Forum, McLean, Virginia, USA, May 1995, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1082, Springer- Verlag, 1996, pp. 131-145. Alternatively, the soundex algorithm can be employed for this purpose. Reference is made to the foregoing article for further information. Other techniques that can be employed include randomized and modified Boyer-Moore techniques as disclosed respectively in Attalah, M J, et al, "A Randomized Algorithm for

Approximate String Matching", CERIAS and Department of Computer Sciences,

Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA, IN 47907 (18 pages) - Technical

Report, and El-Mabrouk, N. and Crochemore, M., "Boyer-Moore Strategy to Efficient Approximate String Matching", in Hirschberg, Dans D. and Myers, G. (eds),

Proceedings ofCPM '96, Volume 1075 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1996, pp. 24-38.

Preferably, two important outputs provided by the confidence ranking table are 'score' and 'score%' as the confidence measures. Again, any of a number of string matching algorithms can be employed to generate the 'score' value. The parameter score% is generated using following equation:

score% = (CurrentRankScore / RankOneScore) * 100. (1)

Preferably, the ambiguous email address and each predetermined email address in the list are used as the input to generate score & score%. However, additional information present in the sender's email, such as recipient name information, can also be used.

In decision block 406, a check is made to determine if the top rank email address from the list (i.e., the email address with the highest confidence measure) exceeds predetermined threshold values, which in accordance with the first embodiment are a threshold score T_SCOre and a threshold score percentage T_score%. Both T_SCore and T_SCOre% thresholds are preferably administrator defined or configurable parameters.

If decision block 406 returns true (YES), processing continues at step 408. In step 408, at least a portion of the email message is sent to the top rank or best matching email address of the recipient (e.g., user R 140). Preferably, the portion sent to the recipient includes the email address and the name of the sending entity (e.g. user S 110), although other information including the entire email message may be sent. Processing then terminates in step 412. Otherwise, if decision block 406 returns false (NO), processing continues at step 414. In step 414, email notifications are sent to the top ranking (two or more) email addresses from the confidence ranking table. The number of email addresses chosen here is a configurable parameter that can be set by the system administrator or receiving entity, for example. The notifications include at least part of the ambiguously addressed email message. Preferably, the email address of the sending entity and related information are sent. Optionally, the entire email message may be sent to the selected receiving entities. In step 416, an email notification is sent to the sending entity (e.g., user S 110) about the at least partial delivery of the email message. Preferably, this notification states the email addresses of the top ranking receiving entities. Other information may also be provided, such as aliases of the receiving entities. As yet another option, step 416 may instead send pseudo-email addresses to the sending entity. For example, instead of sending a valid email address for a receiving entity (e.g. rtan@rec.net), a pseudo email address (e.g., rec_rt@rec.net) can be sent. The server can recognize that the pseudo email address is equivalent to the valid email address for the receiving entity for later processing purposes. Further detailed comments regarding the implementation of the method of Fig. 4 in the C programming language are set forth in Appendix A.

The foregoing embodiment corresponds with configuration 214 of Fig. 2

Illustrative Example

An illustrative example is described hereinafter with reference to the method of Figs. 3 and 4, and the email system 500 in Fig. 5.

In Fig. 5, a first user Userl 502 has the email address sandy@send.net and has an email server 504 at Organization A. Although not shown to simplify the drawing, this server 504 has the same configuration as that of server 110 in Fig. 1. For simplicity, the first user 502 is referred to as Sandy hereinafter. The receiving entity is User2

520 at the second email server 530 of Organization B. The receiving entity is referred to simply as Rudy hereinafter and has the email address, rtang^@rec.net. Likewise, the second email server 530 has the same configuration as the second email server 150 of

Fig. 1, but the full details are not shown in Fig. 5 to simplify the drawing.

For the case where the receiving entity's address (rtang@rec.net) is correctly specified, Sandy (sandy@send.net) sends an email message to Rudy (rtang@rec.net). Step 304 of Fig. 3 is carried out and the email message with the receiving entity address of rtang@rec.net is initially sent out from Sandy's UA (not shown - see module 122 of Fig. 1) in server 504. The email message is forwarded to Sandy's maildrop (not shown) and in step 306 the message is sent to her MTA. In step 308, the email message is forwarded to the recipient MTA (not shown) of the second email server 530 via the network 510. Next the MTA module of the second email server 530 checks in step 312 whether rtang@rec.net is in the server email list. Since rtang@rec.net is in the list, decision block 312 returns true (YES) and processing continues in step 314. In step 314, the MTA of the second server 530 then forwards the email to Rudy's maildrop (not shown). Processing then terminates in step 316. The message can be retrieved by Rudy 520 from the maildrop.

For the case where the Rudy's email address is incorrectly specified as rudytang@rec.net, steps 304-310 of Fig. 3 are again repeated and the ambiguously addressed email message 506 shown in Fig. 5 is sent from the first server 504 to the second email server 530. The exemplary email message is (incorrectly) addressed to rudytang@rec.net as the receiver and Sandy's email address of sandy@send.net is specified as the sender. The second email server 530 carries out the processing of decision block 312 and the MTA of server 530 checks whether rudytang@rec.net is in the server's email list. Decision block 312 returns false (NO) since the specified receiving entity email address is not known to the second email server 530 and processing continues at step 402.

In step 402, the server email list is loaded. In step 404, a confidence ranking table 532 is built with respect to the ambiguous email address. The confidence ranking table has entries for individuals named Rudy Tang, Rodney Tang, Rudy Sim, ..., Peck Book, and Bob Sim arranged according to confidence ranking. The entries contain the relevant predetermined receiving entity's email address, score and score%. The entries for Rudy Tang, Rodney Tang, and Rudy Sim are the top three entries 534, 536, and 538, respectively, based on their confidence ranking.

In decision block 406, a check is made to see if the top rank 534 (i.e., Rudy Tang's entry) in the confidence ranking table exceeds both the administrator defined T_SCOre and T_score% thresholds. If decision block 406 returns true (YES), that is the top rank 534 exceeds both the administrator defined T_SCOre and T_SCore% thresholds, processing continues at step 408 and an email notification is sent to the top rank email address (e.g. rtang@rec.net) 534 with a note containing Sandy's email address

(sandy@send.net) and Sandy's name. As described hereinbefore, a possible variation to this notification is to send the subject field information in Sandy's email to the receiving entity 520. Another variation is that the entire email message from Sandy 502 is forwarded to Rudy 520. These possibilities depend on the configuration of the smart email server by the system administrator.

Next, an email is sent in step 410 to Sandy containing the top rank email address (eg. rtang@rec.net 507). In a case where the Organization B wants to protect its users' email addresses from disclosure via the smart email process, one variation is for the smart email server to send a pseudo email address for the top rank email address to Sandy 502 in step 410. For example, instead of sending rtang@rec.net, the pseudo email address rec_rt@rec.net can be sent. This pseudo email address is an alias to the original email address. In other words, subsequent communication from the public, e.g. Sandy 502 to the pseudo email address (eg. rec_rt@rec.net) reaches the mailbox of the actual recipient (eg. rtang@rec.net) but the actual email address is not disclosed. Processing terminates in step 412.

Otherwise, if decision block 406 returns false (NO), that is the top rank 534 falls below both the administrator defined T_SCOre and^* T_score% threshold values, an email notification is sent in step 414 to the top, administrator-defined Ni email addresses from the confidence ranking table 506 with a note containing Sandy's email address and Sandy's name. For example, if Ni is set to a value of three, rtang@rec.net 534, rodtang@rec.net 536 and rsim@rec.net 538 are sent an email note containing Sandy's email address and Sandy' s name. A variation to the notification is to send the subject field information in Sandy's email message 506 to these receiving entities. Still another variation is for the entire email message 506 from Sandy to be forwarded to the three receiving entities. Again, these variations depend on the configuration of the smart email server 530 by the system administrator. In step 416, an email message is sent to Sandy 502 containing the top N₂ rank email addresses. For example, if N₂ is set to two, email information for rtang@rec.net 534 and rodtang@rec.net 536 are sent to Sandy 502. Similarly, a pseudo email address scheme can be employed. Processing ends in step 412.

The embodiments of the invention are able to advantageously resolve an ambiguous or bad recipient email address to enable delivery of an email message. Preferably, the embodiments of the invention are implemented as software implemented by a computer. In particular, the processes of Figs. 1-5 can be implemented as software, or a computer program, executing on a computer acting as an email server (e.g. 150 or 530). The method or process steps for resolving an ambiguous e-mail address to deliver an email message are effected by instructions in the software that are carried out by the computer. The software may be implemented as one or more modules for implementing the process steps. Again, a module can be a part of a computer program that usually performs a particular function or related functions.

In particular, the software may be stored in a computer readable medium, including the storage devices described below. The software is preferably loaded into the computer from the computer readable medium and then carried out by the computer. A computer program product includes a computer readable medium having such software or a computer program recorded on it that can be carried out by a computer. The use of the computer program product in the computer preferably effects an advantageous apparatus for resolving an ambiguous e-mail address to deliver an email message in accordance with the embodiments of the invention. A typical computer system includes a computer, a video display, and input devices.

In addition, the computer system can have any of a number of other output devices including line printers, laser printers, plotters, and other reproduction devices connected to the computer. The computer system can be connected to one or more other computers via a communication interface using an appropriate communication channel such as a computer network, a modem communications path, or the like. The computer network may include a local area network (LAN), a wide area network

(WAN), an Intranet, and/or the Internet.

The computer itself consists of a central processing unit(s) (simply referred to as a processor hereinafter), a memory which may include random access memory (RAM) and read-only memory (ROM), input/output (IO) interfaces, a video interface, and one or more storage devices. The storage device(s) can be one or more of the following: a floppy disc, a hard disc drive, a magneto-optical disc drive, CD-ROM, magnetic tape or any other of a number of non- volatile storage devices well known to those skilled in the art. Each of the foregoing components is typically connected to one or more of the other devices via a bus that in turn can consist of data, address, and control buses.

The video interface is connected to the video display and provides video signals from the computer for display on the video display. User input to operate the computer can be provided by one or more input devices. For example, an administrator can use the keyboard and or a pointing device such as the mouse to provide input to the computer.

The foregoing described system is simply provided for illustrative purposes and other configurations can be employed without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention. Computers with which the embodiments can be practiced include IBM- PC/ATs or compatibles, one of the Macintosh (TM) family of PCs, Sun Sparcstation (TM), a workstation or the like. Numerous other types of computers and hardware can be utilized. The foregoing are merely exemplary of the types of computers with which the embodiments of the invention may be practiced. Typically, the processes of the embodiments, described hereinafter, are resident as software or a program recorded on a hard disk drive as the computer readable medium, and read and controlled using the processor. Intermediate storage of the program and pixel data and any data fetched from the network may be accomplished using the semiconductor memory, possibly in concert with the hard disk drive.

In some instances, the program may be supplied to the user encoded on a CD-ROM or a floppy disk (both generally depicted by block), or alternatively could be read by the user from the network via a modem device connected to the computer, for example. Still further, the software can also be loaded into the computer system from other computer readable medium including magnetic tape, a ROM or integrated circuit, a magneto-optical disk, a radio or infra-red transmission channel between the computer and another device, a computer readable card such as a PCMCIA card, and the Internet and Intranets including email transmissions and information recorded on websites and the like. The foregoing are merely exemplary of relevant computer readable mediums. Other computer readable mediums may be practiced without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention.

Thus, a method, an apparatus and a computer program product for resolving an ambiguous recipient email address are described. While only a small number of embodiments have been described, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that changes and/or modifications can be made without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention in view of the disclosure herein.

APPENDIX A

(semail.c)

sandy@send.net ' Sender's email address

200 ' score nun threshold (0-n)

80 ' score% nun threshold (0-100)

7 ' FwdMethod (1-8)

2 ' EmailSearchMethod (1,2,4,8,16)

3 ' nl [406]

2 ' n2 [407]

5 ' Display top N entry m CRT

No ' Pseudo-Recipient Email Usage?

Detail Comments on Configuration field:

a Fwd Method (Fig. 2)

Sender Receiver Administrator Preference

1 M N N Least Preferred

2 N N Y Least Preferred

3 N Y N Least Preferred

4 N Y Y Least Preferred

5 Y N N Preferred

6 Y N Y Preferred

7 Y Y N Most Prefered

8 Y Y Y Preferred

PS: Methods 2 & 7 are coded.

b. Email Search Method

1. QualString ordScoπng: Algorithm that does qualitative word matching

2. QualStrmgWeiWordSconng: Method 1 with weightage on each pos of name 4. QualStringSimDNACharScoring: Approx String match by character

PS: Can combine methods to give an overall score egl. To use Method 1&4, put 5 eg2. To use Method 2&8, put 10

c. If top rank is BELOW threshold Tscore & Tscore% for nl [406] : Send an email to top nl email addresses from the confidence ranking table with

(1) sender email address and (2) name information for n2 [407] : Send an email to Sender with top n2 email addresses from confidence ranking table

d. CRT = Confidence Ranking Table

e. If Pseudo-Recipient Email Usage = Yes, sender is only notified of an alias of recipent email address eg. instead of receiving a valid note that the recipient he is interested in is adeline@krdl.org.sg, an alias of krdl_ad@krdl . org. sg is use. This alias is recorded by recipient MTA.

Claims

CLAIMS:

1. A method for resolving an ambiguous electronic mail (e-mail) address to deliver an email message, said method including the steps of: receiving an email message with an ambiguous email address; selecting at least one email address from a list of predetermined email addresses using a measure of similarity between said ambiguous email address and each email address in said list of predetermined email addresses; and delivering at least a portion of said email message with said ambiguous email address to said at least one selected email address.

2. The method according to claim 1, further including the step of checking said email address of said received email message against said list of predetermined email addresses to identify said email address of said email message as being ambiguous.

3. The method according to claim 1, further including the step of notifying at least one predetermined entity of said at least partial delivery of said email message with said ambiguous email address to said at least one selected email address.

4. The method according to claim 3, wherein said at least one predetermined entity is selected from the group of entities comprising of a sending entity that sent said email message with said ambiguous email address, at least one receiving entity that received said at least a portion of said email message, a first administrator entity administering email for said sending entity, and a second administrator entity administering email for said at least one receiving entity.

5. The method according to claim 4, further including the step of sending a notification email message to said first administrator entity, said second administrator entity, or both, wherein said notification email message includes information selected from the group comprising of: a portion of said email message; and said entire email message.

6. The method according to claim 1, further including the step of building a table of confidence measures using said list of predetermined email addresses, said similarity measure for each predetermined email address in respect of said ambiguous email address being a confidence measure.

7. The method according to claim 6, further including the step of providing a qualitative output from said table of confidence measures used to determine a best matching email address from said list of predetermined email addresses, said qualitative output selected from the group comprising of: a numeric score value; an alphanumeric score value; and a percentage value.

8. The method according to claim 6, further including the step of providing at least one input parameter to said table of confidence measures, said input parameter selected from the group comprising of: said selected email address of a receiving entity; the name of said receiving entity; and information in said email message with said ambiguous address that is related to said receiving entity.

9. The method according to claim 6, further including the step of determining at least one email address in said list of predetermined email addresses having a highest confidence measure.

10. The method according to claim 9, further including the step of comparing said highest confidence measure against a predetermined threshold value.

11. The method according to claim 10, further including the step of delivering, if said highest confidence measure exceeds said predetermined threshold value, to one selected email address having said highest confidence measure said at least a portion of said email message selected from the group comprising of: said email address and name of a sending entity; an email subject of said email message; and said entire email message.

12. The method according to claim 11, further including the step of notifying said sending entity with information selected from the group comprising of: said selected email address; the name of a receiving entity; and an alias of said selected email address of said receiving entity.

13. The method according to claim 10, further including the step of delivering said portion of said email message with said ambiguous email address to two or more selected email addresses in said list of predetermined email addresses having a confidence measure with a specified value if said highest confidence measure does not exceed said predetermined threshold value.

14. The method according to claim 13, wherein said delivered portion of said email message is selected from the group comprising of: the name of a sending entity and said email address; an email subject of said email message; and said email message.

15. The method according to claim 14, further including the step of notifying said sending entity with information selected from the group comprising of: said selected email addresses of two or more receiving entities; names of said receiving entities; and aliases of said selected email addresses of said receiving entities.

16. An apparatus for resolving an ambiguous electronic mail (e-mail) address to deliver an email message, said apparatus including: means for receiving an email message with an ambiguous email address; means for selecting at least one email address from a list of predetermined email addresses using a measure of similarity between said ambiguous email address and each email address in said list of predetermined email addresses; and means for delivering at least a portion of said email message with said ambiguous email address to said at least one selected email address.

17. The apparatus according to claim 16, further means for checking said email address of said received email message against said list of predetermined email addresses to identify said email address of said email message as being ambiguous.

18. The apparatus according to claim 16, further means for notifying at least one predetermined entity of said at least partial delivery of said email message with said ambiguous email address to said at least one selected email address.

19. The apparatus according to claim 18, wherein said at least one predetermined entity is selected from the group of entities comprising of a sending entity that sent said email message with said ambiguous email address, at least one receiving entity that received said at least a portion of said email message, a first administrator entity administering email for said sending entity, and a second administrator entity administering email for said at least one receiving entity.

20. The apparatus according to claim 19, further means for sending a notification email message to said first administrator entity, said second administrator entity, or both, wherein said notification email message includes information selected from the group comprising of: a portion of said email message; and said entire email message.

21. The apparatus according to claim 16, further including means for building a table of confidence measures using said list of predetermined email addresses, said similarity measure for each predetermined email address in respect of said ambiguous email address being a confidence measure.

22. The apparatus according to claim 21, further including means for providing a qualitative output from said table of confidence measures used to determine a best matching email address from said list of predetermined email addresses, said qualitative output selected from the group comprising of: a numeric score value; an alphanumeric score value; and a percentage value.

23. The apparatus according to claim 21, further including means for providing at least one input parameter to said table of confidence measures, said input parameter selected from the group comprising of: said selected email address of a receiving entity; the name of said receiving entity; and information in said email message with said ambiguous address that is related to said receiving entity.

24. The apparatus according to claim 21, further including means for determining at least one email address in said list of predetermined email addresses having a highest confidence measure.

25. The apparatus according to claim 24, further including means for comparing said highest confidence measure against a predetermined threshold value.

26. The apparatus according to claim 25, further including means for delivering, if said highest confidence measure exceeds said predetermined threshold value, to one selected email address having said highest confidence measure said at least a portion of said email message selected from the group comprising of: said email address and name of a sending entity; an email subject of said email message; and said entire email message.

27. The apparatus according to claim 26, further including means for notifying said sending entity with information selected from the group comprising of: said selected email address; the name of a receiving entity; and an alias of said selected email address of said receiving entity.

28. The apparatus according to claim 25, further including means for delivering said portion of said email message with said ambiguous email address to two or more selected email addresses in said list of predetermined email addresses having a confidence measure with a specified value if said highest confidence measure does not exceed said predetermined threshold value.

29. The apparatus according to claim 28, wherein said delivered portion of said email message is selected from the group comprising of: the name of a sending entity and said email address; an email subject of said email message; and said email message.

30. The apparatus according to claim 29, further including means for notifying said sending entity with information selected from the group comprising of: said selected email addresses of two or more receiving entities; names of said receiving entities; and aliases of said selected email addresses of said receiving entities.

31. A computer program product having a computer usable medium having a computer readable program code means embodied therein for resolving an ambiguous electronic mail (e-mail) address to deliver an email message, said computer program product including: computer readable program code means for receiving an email message with an ambiguous email address; computer readable program code means for selecting at least one email address from a list of predetermined email addresses using a measure of similarity between said ambiguous email address and each email address in said list of predetermined email addresses; and computer readable program code means for delivering at least a portion of said email message with said ambiguous email address to said at least one selected email address.

32. The computer program product according to claim 31 , further including computer readable program code means for checking said email address of said received email message against said list of predetermined email addresses to identify said email address of said email message as being ambiguous.

33. The computer program product according to claim 31 , further including computer readable program code means for notifying at least one predetermined entity of said at least partial delivery of said email message with said ambiguous email address to said at least one selected email address.

34. The computer program product according to claim 33, wherein said at least one predetermined entity is selected from the group of entities comprising of a sending entity that sent said email message with said ambiguous email address, at least one receiving entity that received said at least a portion of said email message, a first administrator entity administering email for said sending entity, and a second administrator entity administering email for said at least one receiving entity.

35. The computer program product according to claim 34, further including computer readable program code means for sending a notification email message to said first administrator entity, said second administrator entity, or both, wherein said notification email message includes information selected from the group comprising of: a portion of said email message; and said entire email message.

36. The computer program product according to claim 31 , further including computer readable program code means for building a table of confidence measures using said list of predetermined email addresses, said similarity measure for each predetermined email address in respect of said ambiguous email address being a confidence measure.

37. The computer program product according to claim 36, further including computer readable program code means for providing a qualitative output from said table of confidence measures used to determine a best matching email address from said list of predetermined email addresses, said qualitative output selected from the group comprising of: a numeric score value; an alphanumeric score value; and a percentage value.

38. The computer program product according to claim 36, further including computer readable program code means for providing at least one input parameter to said table of confidence measures, said input parameter selected from the group comprising of: said selected email address of a receiving entity; the name of said receiving entity; and information in said email message with said ambiguous address that is related to said receiving entity.

39. The computer program product according to claim 36, further including computer readable program code means for determining at least one email address in said list of predetermined email addresses having a highest confidence measure.

40. The computer program product according to claim 39, further including computer readable program code means for comparing said highest confidence measure against a predetermined threshold value.

41. The computer program product according to claim 40, further including computer readable program code means for delivering, if said highest confidence measure exceeds said predetermined threshold value, to one selected email address having said highest confidence measure said at least a portion of said email message selected from the group comprising of: said email address and name of a sending entity; an email subject of said email message; and said entire email message.

42. The computer program product according to claim 41, further including computer readable program code means for notifying said sending entity with information selected from the group comprising of: said selected email address; the name of a receiving entity; and an alias of said selected email address of said receiving entity.

43. The computer program product according to claim 40, further including computer readable program code means for delivering said portion of said email message with said ambiguous email address to two or more selected email addresses in said list of predetermined email addresses having a confidence measure with a specified value if said highest confidence measure does not exceed said predetermined threshold value.

44. The computer program product according to claim 43, wherein said delivered portion of said email message is selected from the group comprising of: the name of a sending entity and said email address; an email subject of said email message; and said email message.

45. The computer program product according to claim 44, further including computer readable program code means for notifying said sending entity with information selected from the group comprising of: said selected email addresses of two or more receiving entities; names of said receiving entities; and aliases of said selected email addresses of said receiving entities.