JP2002259291A - Collaborative evaluation method - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a collaborative evaluation method for components of an electronic device which allows evaluators to collaboratively evaluate the components and share the results obtained by the collaborative evaluation. SOLUTION: A Web server publishes a collaborative evaluation request including the evaluation schedule of a 1st evaluator to a homepage. A 2nd evaluator who has browsed the collaborative evaluation request through a terminal device sends a part that the 2nd evaluator shares as an answer to the Web server. The Web server publishes the part that the 2nd evaluator shares to the homepage. Then the 1st and 2nd evaluators send their evaluation results of the collaborative evaluation to the Web sever. The Web server publishes the received evaluation results to the homepage. The 1st and 2nd evaluators exchange the evaluation results through the homepage to share the collaboration evaluation results on the homepage.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0001]

[0001] The present invention relates to a joint evaluation method.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art Set makers of electronic devices such as personal computers
(Vendor: hereinafter referred to as “parts user”) is a hard disk drive (HDD) mounted on an electronic device as a product
(Components) such as a microprocessor and a microprocessor from a supplier (parts provider).

[0003] When a component user incorporates a component into an electronic device, he or she must ensure that the probability of a component failure occurring in the product field (use environment) is less than a certain level.

For this reason, the component user, that is, the evaluator,
In deciding whether or not to use a part, an evaluation condition and an evaluation item are set, and a sample of a predetermined number of parts is evaluated. At this time, if, for example, the evaluation result of the defect occurs for a number of samples that should not be adopted, the component provider, that is, the evaluation target provider is requested to improve the component.
The probability of occurrence of a failure in the field for the component to be evaluated can be calculated with higher accuracy as the number of samples of the component to be evaluated, the number of evaluation items, and the like increase.

[0005]

However, the contents of the evaluation that can be performed by one component user are limited due to the cost required for the evaluation, such as the number of man-hours for the evaluation, and the restrictions on the evaluation period. On the other hand, conventionally, component evaluation is performed independently for each component user, and the component users do not cooperate with each other.

[0006] It is an object of the present invention to provide a joint evaluation method in which a plurality of evaluators jointly evaluate an evaluation target, and a joint evaluation method in which a result obtained by the evaluation is shared.

[0007]

The present invention employs the following configuration to achieve the above object.

That is, the present invention is a joint evaluation method. The method includes: a first terminal device used by a first evaluator evaluating an evaluation target, transmitting a joint evaluation request including an evaluation plan of the evaluation target to a network;
A second terminal device used by a second evaluator receiving the joint evaluation request from the network; and the second terminal device transmitting a response to the joint evaluation request including the evaluation plan to be evaluated. Transmitting to the network, the first terminal device receiving the answer from the network, and the first terminal device is configured to perform the evaluation of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request by the first evaluator. Transmitting an evaluation result to the network, the second terminal device receiving from the network an evaluation result of the evaluation target by the first evaluator, and the second terminal device Transmitting an evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request by the evaluator to the network; and the first terminal device comprises: The evaluation results of evaluation of a subject with a serial second evaluator including the steps of receiving from the network.

[0009]

Embodiments of the present invention will be described below with reference to the drawings. The configuration of the embodiment is an exemplification, and the present invention is not limited to the configuration of the embodiment.

<System Configuration> FIG. 1 is a diagram showing a configuration example of a joint evaluation system according to an embodiment. As shown in FIG. 1, the system includes a World Wide Web server (WWW server) that provides a homepage (Web site).
A Web server S) and a plurality of terminal devices T (in FIG. 1, four terminal devices T are illustrated) functioning as WWW clients requesting the provision of a homepage are connected to a network (for example, the Internet). N. The Web server S corresponds to a server according to the present invention, and each terminal device T functions as a first terminal device (terminal device) and / or a second terminal device (other terminal device) according to the present invention.

Each terminal device T is used by a vendor (component user) who performs an evaluation test (evaluation) on a component of the electronic device as an evaluation target of the joint evaluation. In the example shown in FIG. 1, each terminal device T is a company A, B
, C and D respectively. A to D
Co., Ltd., through the joint evaluation system,
And / or a second evaluator.
In this embodiment, the part users A to D also serve as the evaluator, but the part user and the evaluator may be different persons.

The Web server S collects information to be used for joint evaluation of parts from each part user, and collects information to be used by each part user to view the joint evaluation alliance homepage (hereinafter simply referred to as a Web site). “Homepage”), and provides a homepage in response to Web access from each terminal device T.

The homepage is, in principle, a member (member) system homepage. If the user who has not registered the user name and password on the Web server S, the main W
Cannot access eb page. In principle, only component users who can evaluate components voluntarily or on request can register as members. The homepage is, for example, a management organization (manager) entrusted by members
It is managed and operated by

<Configuration of Web Server> FIG. 2 is a diagram showing a configuration example of the Web server S. The Web server S is configured by using a personal computer (PC), a workstation (WS), a host computer thereof, or a dedicated server machine.

The Web server S includes a CPU 2, a main memory (MM) 3, an auxiliary storage device 4, a communication interface (communication I / F) 5 connected to the Internet N through a communication line, and a display. (Display device) 6, Keyboard 7, Pointing device (PD) 8, and Database (DB) 9 are provided.
Hereinafter, the keyboard 7 and the PD 8 are collectively referred to as an input device 10.

The display 6 is constituted by using a cathode ray tube, a liquid crystal display, a plasma display and the like.
The PD 8 is configured using a mouse, a trackball, a joystick, a flat point, and the like. The auxiliary storage device 4 is configured using a readable and writable recording medium such as a hard disk, a floppy (registered trademark) disk, an optical disk, and a magneto-optical disk (MO).

The auxiliary storage device 4 holds a plurality of types of programs executed by the CPU 2 and data used for executing these programs. The plurality of programs include an operating system (OS), a communication protocol (TCP / IP, HTTP, FTP, SM
TP), WWW server programs (HTTP server program, CGI program, etc.). The data is, for example, HTML (Hypertext Markup Lan) for composing a homepage (Web site).
guage) files, text files, image files, video files, audio files, etc. A home page (Web site) is made up of a plurality of Web pages created according to an HTML file, and predetermined Web pages are linked by hyperlinks. DB9
Stores information used for joint evaluation of components collected from each terminal device T in a predetermined format such as text or image.

The MM3 is configured using a RAM or the like.
MM3 is used as a work area of CPU2. The MM 3 is used as a video memory (VRAM) for storing display data such as Web pages, texts, images, and the like displayed on the display 6.

The CPU 2 loads a program corresponding to a command or data input using the input device 10 from the auxiliary storage device 4 to the MM 3 and executes it. Also, CPU2
Reads out necessary data from the auxiliary storage device 4 to the MM 3 and uses it for executing the program.

As a result, the CPU 2 executes, for example, We
b. Processing related to communication between the server S and each terminal device T, processing for creating a Web page in response to a request from each terminal device T, and information collected from each terminal device T and used for joint evaluation are stored in the DB 9. Perform processing and the like.

Although FIG. 2 shows an example in which the Web server S is configured using one computer, the Web server S may be realized by distributed processing by a plurality of computers. good. For example, W
The eb server S may be composed of an HTTP server and an application server.

In the example shown in FIG. 2, the Web server S
Has a DB9, but the DB9 is held by another computer (for example, a database server),
The Web server S may access the database server and acquire necessary data from the DB.

(Terminal Device) FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a configuration example of each terminal device T. Each terminal device T is configured using a PC. However, any existing computer that can be used as a WWW client such as a WS, a mobile computer, a PDA (Personal Digital Assistant), and a car navigation terminal can be applied to the terminal device T.

Each terminal device T includes a CPU 12, an MM 13, an auxiliary storage device 14,
It comprises a communication I / F 15, a display 16, an input device 20 comprising a keyboard 17 and a PD 18, and a DB 19.

The auxiliary storage device 14 is a program for the OS and the terminal device T to function as a Web client.
(For example, a program that implements a communication protocol related to communication with a Web browser and a Web server S) and the like, and data necessary for executing each program.

The CPU 12 executes a program corresponding to a command or data input by using the input
And run it. Further, the CPU 12 copies necessary data from the auxiliary storage device 14 to the MM 13 and uses the data for executing the program.

Thus, the CPU 12 requests the Web server S to provide a home page, displays the Web page provided by the Web server S on the display 16, and transmits data input through the Web page to the Web server S. It performs processing such as transmission.

The connection form of each terminal device T to the Internet N is a dial-up connection using a telephone line,
Any existing connection form such as connection to ISDN and connection using a dedicated line can be applied.

<Web System> Next, a Web system realized by cooperation of each terminal device T and Web server S will be described. In the Web system, a Web client accesses a Web server S through Web access (HTTP (Hy
pertext Transfer Protocol)
This is a system that accesses a desired homepage and receives information posted on the homepage. Further, in the Web system, a user of the Web client T can input necessary data through a homepage, and transmit the input data to the Web server S. Hereinafter, We
A general operation when the b server S and the terminal device T function as a Web system will be described.

When receiving the homepage from the Web server S, the operator of the terminal device T inputs a start command of the Web browser to the terminal device T using the input device 20. Then, the CPU 12 of the terminal device T makes the We stored in the auxiliary storage device 14 in accordance with the start command.
The browser b is executed, the operation screen of the web browser is displayed on the display 16, and the terminal device T is connected to the Internet N.

Subsequently, the operator of the terminal device T requests a homepage address (URL: Uniform Resource Lo
cator) using the input device 20, the CPU 12
Transmits a request to provide a home page including the specified URL to the Web server S via the communication I / F 15.

The web server S sends the above-mentioned provision request to the communication I /
Upon reception at F5, the CPU 2 of the Web server S
The HTML file corresponding to the URL included in the received provision request is read from the auxiliary storage device 4 to the MM 3 by executing the web server program. Or CP
U2 creates an HTML file corresponding to the URL. The HTML file obtained as described above is transmitted to the corresponding terminal device T through the communication I / F5.

CPU 2 of terminal device T (Web browser)
Receives the HTML file, displays a Web page in a predetermined area of the display 16 according to the description. Thereby, the text described in the HTML is displayed.

Further, the Web browser receives the received HTM
An image file associated with the L file, and / or
Alternatively, a video file is obtained from the web server S, and an image and / or video based on the image file and / or the video file is displayed at a predetermined position in the web page. The operator (user) of the terminal device T
The required information can be obtained by browsing the texts, images, and videos posted on the page.

Further, the operator can use the input device 20 to input information to be transmitted to the Web server S in accordance with the information posted on the Web page. The input information (input information) is temporarily stored in the MM 13, for example. Thereafter, when the operator inputs a transmission instruction of the input information, the CPU 12 transmits the input information temporarily stored in the MM 13 to the Web server S. When the Web server S receives the input information, the CPU 2 stores the received input information in a predetermined storage area provided in the auxiliary storage device 4 or the DB 9.

Also, buttons, texts, images, and the like in which hyperlinks are set in advance are posted on the Web page. When the operator wants to proceed to the linked web page, the operator uses the PD 18 to click a button or the like corresponding to the linked destination. Then, the CPU 12 transmits a request for providing a linked Web page to the Web server S via the communication I / F 15.

When the Web server S receives the provision request through the communication I / F 5, the CPU 2 creates the screen data of the linked Web page and transmits it to the corresponding terminal device T in the same manner as described above. Thereafter, the same operation and processing as described above are performed.

As described above, according to the Web system,
Web server S responds to a request from terminal device T
Serve pages. Thus, the user of the terminal device T can receive desired information. On the other hand, the user inputs input information (for example,
(Information to be posted on the Web page) to the Web server S. Thereby, for example, the input information is transmitted to a desired partner through the Web server S, or the input information is transmitted to the Web server S.
and can be posted on page b.

In the following, when the Web system is described, the Web system is used in order for the user to view the Web page.
Internal processing and communication performed by server S and terminal device T
(Processes related to download) and internal processes and communication (processes related to upload) executed by the terminal device T and the Web server S to save the data input through the Web page in the Web server S are omitted.

<Operation Example> Next, an operation example of the joint evaluation system will be described. FIG. 4 is a diagram showing W that realizes a joint evaluation system.
It is a flowchart which shows the homepage provided by eb system. In the following, the operation example is a new evaluation request,
The explanation is divided into answering of the examination result, evaluation status report, and evaluation result browsing.

(New Joint Evaluation Request) In FIG. 4, each component user (company A, company B, company C, company D shown in FIG. 1):
4 shows only the company A and the company B), operates the terminal device T to start a Web browser, and connects (accesses) to a homepage provided from the Web server S (step S).
01).

Thus, the Web system is started between the terminal device T connected to the Web server S and the Web server. Hereinafter, as an example, it is assumed that the company user (operator) of the part user is operating the terminal device T.

When the Web system is started, first, the display 16 of the terminal device T displays a type selection page P1 as a top page of the homepage (step S02).

FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a screen display example of the product selection page P1. As shown in FIG. 5, the product selection page P
1 includes, as main menus for selecting a type of a component to be evaluated, a cathode ray tube (CRT), a liquid crystal display (LCD), a power supply, and a hard disk drive (HD).
D), CD-ROM, digital video disk (DV
D), buttons 21 to 29 indicating components of the electronic device such as a floppy disk drive (FDD) are displayed.

Company A refers to the product selection page P1 and
A type is selected (step S03). That is, Company A is PD
The user operates a cursor (not shown) displayed on the product type selection page P1 using 18 and clicks (presses) one of the buttons 21 to 29. As a result, the type of the component to be evaluated by Company A is selected and specified.

When any one of the buttons 21 to 29 is pressed,
A user authentication screen (not shown) is displayed on the display 16. Company A inputs a user name and a password registered in the Web server S in advance on the user authentication screen, and inputs a transmission instruction thereof.

Then, the user name and the password are transmitted from the terminal device T to the Web server S. Web server S
CPU2 performs user authentication by determining whether the user name and password received by the Web server S match the user name and password registered as a member of the homepage (member).

When determining that the user authentication is "OK", the CPU 2 creates screen data of the evaluation status page P2 of the type corresponding to the pressed button and transmits it to the terminal device T.
As a result, the display 16 displays the evaluation status page P2 of the selected type instead of the type selection page P1.
Is displayed.

FIG. 6 is a diagram showing a screen display example of the evaluation status page P2. FIG. 6 shows, as an example, an HDD evaluation status page P2 displayed when the “HDD” button 24 is pressed on the product type selection page P1.

The evaluation status page P2 includes “1. New evaluation request”, “2.
Display columns 30 to 3 for displaying information on each item of “4. Evaluation result” and “5.
4 and a new evaluation request button 35 are provided.

In each of the display fields 30 to 33, a record as an index indicating an outline of information on each item is displayed. In the display column 34, information to be notified to each company is displayed.

Here, the company A pushes a new evaluation request button 35 when it desires joint evaluation with another component user. As a result, Company A can select a new evaluation request (Step S05).

Then, the evaluation request sheet page P3 is displayed on the display 16 instead of the evaluation status page P2 as a link destination set in the new evaluation request button 35 (step S06).

FIG. 7 is a diagram showing a screen display example of the evaluation request sheet page P3. The evaluation request sheet page P3 includes a plurality of entry fields 36 to 38 for inputting information for requesting an evaluation as an evaluation request sheet, and a transmission button 39.
Are provided.

Company A refers to the evaluation request sheet P3 and
The necessary items are entered in the entry column 36 (step S07). The entry field 36 is a part to be evaluated (in this example, HDD)
This is a column for entering the specific information, the scheduled evaluation start date, and the scheduled evaluation completion date. In this example, the manufacturer name and the model name are entered as part specific information.

Next, the company A enters necessary items in the entry column 37 (step S08). The entry column 37 is a column for entering information on the requester (requester). In this example, the company name, affiliation, name, contact information (for example, address, telephone number), and e-mail address are entered as information regarding the request source.

Next, the company A fills in the necessary fields in the entry column 38 (step S09). The entry column 38 is a column for entering the contents of evaluation from the requestor, that is, the evaluation items to be implemented by the company A, and has a plurality of (10 in this example) input columns for the evaluation items. In the input columns of the respective evaluation items, item numbers are assigned and displayed.

FIG. 8 is a diagram showing an evaluation request sheet page P3 for company A.
It is a figure which shows a mode that required items were filled in each of the entry fields 36-38 using. FIG. 8 shows “moisture resistance test”, “high temperature running”, “heat shock”, “high evaluation”,
"Low temperature operation" is displayed in the entry column 38 as an evaluation item for the component to be evaluated.

The item number assigned to each evaluation item is set with a hyperlink for proceeding to the condition detail page P4 corresponding to the item number, and each item number functions as a button 40 for proceeding to the condition detail page P4. .

Company A can select and designate an evaluation item in which detailed conditions are to be entered by pressing a button 40 corresponding to an entry column in which an evaluation item name is entered. When the company A presses the button 40, the condition detail page P4 corresponding to the pressed button 40 is displayed on the display 16 instead of the evaluation request sheet page P3.

FIG. 9 is a diagram showing a screen display example of the condition detail page P4. The condition details page P4 is displayed in a display field 41.
, Entry fields 42, 42, and a return button 44. The display column 41 displays the contents entered in the entry column 37 of the evaluation request sheet page P3.

The entry field 42 is for the evaluation request sheet page P3
Has a plurality of input fields for detailed conditions corresponding to the evaluation item selected in. In the example shown in FIG. 9, the input fields of the detailed conditions for the evaluation item “moisture resistance test” include “number of samples”, “temperature”, “humidity”, “temperature gradient”, “humidity gradient”, and “standing time”. , "Operating time", and "input voltage" are provided. Box 4
Numeral 3 is an entry column for the evaluation process, which is provided with input columns for an evaluation start date and a scheduled completion date.

Company A refers to the condition detail page P4, and enters, in each of the detailed condition input fields provided in the entry field 42,
Enter the detailed conditions to be set in the evaluation by Company A
(Step S10). Thereafter, the operator presses the return button 44 after completing the input of each detailed condition. Then, the evaluation request sheet page P3 (FIG. 8) is changed to the condition detail page P4.
Is displayed on the display 16 again (step S09).

After that, the company A presses the button 40 corresponding to another evaluation item, and thereby the other condition detail page P
4 and input the detailed condition corresponding to the evaluation item. When the user inputs the detailed conditions for all of the evaluation items performed by the company A, the user presses the send button 39 (step S11).

As a result, the evaluation request sheet page P3
The content (evaluation request content) entered in each condition detail page P4 is transmitted from the terminal device T to the Web server S. The transmitted evaluation request content is the CP of the Web server S.
It is stored in the DB 9 by U2 (FIG. 2).

When the transmission button 39 is pressed and the contents of the evaluation request are transmitted to the Web server S, the evaluation status page P2
Is displayed again on the display 16 in place of the evaluation request sheet page P3 (step S04).

At this time, the display column 3 of the evaluation status page P2
0, as shown in FIG.
A record (evaluation request record 45) relating to the contents of the evaluation request stored in the DB 9 by the processing of S11 to S11 is displayed in association with the record number (item number).

In the example shown in FIG. 10, the display column 30 shows a company name "company A", a request date "2000/6/1", a manufacturer name "α company", a type "3.5", and an I / F " IDE ”, model name“ ABC1234 ”, scheduled evaluation start date“ 2000/7
/ 1 ”and an evaluation completion record“ 2000/7/30 ”scheduled to be completed.

As described above, the evaluation request record 45 as an index of the evaluation request content can be posted on the evaluation status page P2 by the processing of steps S05 to S11. Thereafter, when another component user (company B or the like) accesses the home page, an evaluation status page P2 on which the evaluation request record 45 is posted is displayed on the display 16. The other component users can know the joint evaluation request from the company A by referring to the evaluation status page P2.

(Examination Result Answer) Next, an operation example of the examination result answer will be described. As an example, a case where an operator of another component user (for example, company B) accesses the homepage by operating the terminal device T after the evaluation request record 45 is posted on the evaluation status page P2 by company A is described.

In FIG. 4, the company B performs the above-described processes of steps S01 to S04, and displays the evaluation status page P2 on the display 16. Then, as shown in FIG. 10, an evaluation request record 45 posted by Company A is displayed on the evaluation status page P2.

The evaluation request record 45 is displayed in a state corresponding to the number indicating the record number (item number) assigned to the evaluation request record 45. The displayed record number (“1” in the example of FIG. 10) functions as a button 46 for browsing details of the evaluation request content.

Therefore, Company B presses the button 46 using the input device 20 to browse the details of the evaluation request (step S12). Then, the new evaluation request content page P5 is displayed on the display 1 as a link destination of the button 46.
6 is displayed.

FIG. 11 is a diagram showing a screen display example of the new evaluation request content page P5. New Evaluation Request Contents Page P
5 displays the display columns 47 and 48 and a button 49 for proceeding to the answer sheet.

In the display column 47, an evaluation request sheet page P
The specific information of the component to be evaluated, the scheduled start date of the evaluation, and the scheduled end date of the evaluation are displayed by using the third entry field 36 (FIG. 8).

The display field 48 shows an evaluation request sheet page P
Requester (Company A) filled out using field 38 (Figure 8) in 3
Are displayed, and the person in charge of the evaluation are displayed.

In the display field 48, the item numbers assigned to the respective evaluation items are displayed.
It functions as a button 50 for proceeding to the condition detail page P4 (FIG. 9) on which detailed conditions of the corresponding evaluation item are posted.
When the button 50 is pressed, the condition detail page P4 of the evaluation item corresponding to the pressed button 50 is displayed on the display 16.

Further, on the new evaluation request content page P5, a guidance message 51 stating "Please consider conducting joint evaluation of the above parts" is displayed, and the viewer is encouraged to consider joint evaluation. I have.

Company B, by browsing the new evaluation request content page P5 and the condition detail page P4, grasps the request content of the request source (Company A) and the evaluation content executed by the request source.
Consider whether to conduct joint evaluation. Then, button 49
Is pressed (step S14). Then, the evaluation answer sheet page P6 is displayed on the display 16 in place of the new evaluation request content page P5.

FIG. 12 is a diagram showing a screen display example of the evaluation answer sheet page P6. Evaluation answer sheet page P6
Has display fields 51 to 53, entry fields 54 and 55, and buttons 56 and 57.

The display fields 51 to 53 display the contents of the evaluation request from the request source entered in the entry fields 36 to 38 of the evaluation request sheet page P3. Entry field 54
Is a column for entering information about the respondent. In this example, the company name, affiliation, name, contact information (address, telephone number, etc.), e-mail address, scheduled evaluation start date, and scheduled evaluation completion date are entered. A column is provided.

The entry column 55 is a column for entering the evaluation content of the respondent, and has an input column for inputting a plurality of evaluation items. Each input field is displayed in a state where an item number is assigned. Each item number is set with a hyperlink for proceeding to the condition detail page P7 (see FIG. 15) for the corresponding evaluation item.
Functions as a button 58 for proceeding to the page P7.

The button 56 is a button that is pressed when joint evaluation is not performed on the evaluation request contents.
Reference numeral 7 denotes a button for transmitting the contents of the entry fields 54 and 55 to the Web server S when joint evaluation is performed on the contents of the evaluation request.

Company B creates a response to the evaluation request using the evaluation response sheet page P6 (step S1).
6). That is, the company B pushes the button 56 when the request is not adopted as a result of the examination by browsing the new evaluation request content page P5. As a result, the terminal device T transmits to the Web server S that the joint evaluation is not performed in response to the request (step S19).

On the other hand, when Company B evaluates at least one evaluation item in response to the request (receives a request for joint evaluation), Company B enters the company name and the like in each of the entry fields 54. And the evaluation items to be carried out in Company B are entered in the entry column 55 (Step S
17). At this time, the company B can refer to the display contents of the display columns 51 to 53 as support information for filling in necessary items in the entry columns 54 and 55.

Then, when the company B fills in the necessary fields in the entry columns 54 and 55, the evaluation answer sheet page P6 is in a state shown in FIG. 13, for example. In the example shown in FIG.
A response has been created to the effect that the company will carry out each of the evaluation-targeted components (HDDs), such as “moisture resistance test”, “high temperature running”, “temperature and humidity cycle running”, and “ON / OFF test” .

Next, the company B can call up the condition detail page P7 corresponding to the evaluation item on the display 16 by pressing the button 58 corresponding to the evaluation item name entered in the entry column 55. FIG. 14 is a diagram illustrating a screen display example of the condition detail page P7. Condition details page P
7 has the same configuration as the condition detail page P4 shown in FIG. 9, and has a display column 41, entry columns 42 and 43, and a return button 44.

Company B refers to the condition detail page P7, and enters each of the detailed condition input fields provided in the entry field 42 into
Enter the conditions to be set in the evaluation conducted by Company B
(Step S18). Thereafter, when the company B finishes inputting the detailed conditions, the company B presses the return button 44. Then, the evaluation answer sheet page P6 (FIG. 13) is displayed again on the display 16 in place of the condition detail page P7 (Step S).
17).

Thereafter, the company B presses a button 58 corresponding to another evaluation item entered in the entry column 55,
The other condition detail page P7 is called, and the detailed condition corresponding to the evaluation item is input.

The evaluation items carried out at the request destination are as follows:
It does not matter whether the evaluation item matches the evaluation item presented by the requestor. Further, detailed conditions set for common evaluation items may differ between component users.

In the case where the evaluation is performed under the same conditions for the common evaluation items among the component users, the number of components to be evaluated (the number of samples) is increased, so that a more appropriate evaluation result is obtained.
(Failure occurrence rate in the field). In addition, when evaluation is performed on a common evaluation item under different detailed conditions, a more appropriate evaluation result can be obtained by expanding the range of evaluation for the evaluation item. In addition, when evaluation is performed on different evaluation items among component users, more evaluation results can be obtained for the component by increasing the evaluation items of the component to be evaluated.

When the company B finishes inputting the detailed conditions for all the evaluation items entered in the entry column 55, the company B presses a response transmission button 57 (step S19). As a result, the contents (answer contents) entered in the evaluation answer sheet page P6 and each condition detail page P7 are transmitted from the terminal device T to the Web server S. The content of the transmitted response is stored in the DB 9 by the CPU 2 (FIG. 2) of the Web server S.

When the button 57 is pressed and the answer content is transmitted to the Web server S, the evaluation status page P2 is displayed again on the display 16 in place of the evaluation answer sheet page P6 (step S04).

At this time, the display column 3 of the evaluation status page P2
As shown in FIG. 15, an answer record 59 and a record number (item number) assigned to the answer record 59 are displayed in 1. The answer record 59 is a record relating to the answer content stored in the DB 9 by the processes of steps S12 to S19 described above. The record number functions as a button 60 for proceeding to the evaluation answer sheet page P6.

In the example shown in FIG. 15, the display column 31 shows a company name "company B", a response date "2000/6/1", a manufacturer name "α company", a type "3.5", and an I / F " IDE ”, model name“ ABC1234 ”, scheduled evaluation start date“ 2000/7
/ 1 "and an answer record 59 composed of an evaluation completion date" 2000/7/30 ".

As described above, the answer record 59 as an index of the answer content is posted on the evaluation status page P2 by the processes of steps S12 to S19. afterwards,
When the evaluation request source (Company A) accesses the homepage, the evaluation status page P2 on which the answer record 59 is posted
Is displayed on the display 16. By referring to the evaluation status page P2, Company A can know that it will participate in the joint evaluation as a response to the request from Company B.

Further, the company A presses the button 60,
The evaluation plan (evaluation items and their detailed conditions, number of samples, scheduled evaluation start date, scheduled evaluation completion date) implemented by Company B can be viewed.

(Evaluation Status Report) Next, an operation example of the evaluation status report will be described. As an example, a case will be described in which Company A posts the evaluation status of the evaluation items posted on the homepage on the homepage.

When reporting the evaluation status, Company A accesses the homepage in the same manner as described above, and displays the evaluation status page P2 on the display 16 (steps S01 to S04). Then, the evaluation status page P2 in the state shown in FIG.

Answer record 59 displayed in display field 31
The record number (item number) assigned to .function. Functions as a button 60 for proceeding to a page for reporting the evaluation status.

When reporting the evaluation status, the company A presses the button 60 assigned to the answer record 59 (step S20). Then, the evaluation status list page P8 is displayed.
It is displayed on the display 16 instead of the evaluation status page P2 (step S21).

FIG. 16 is a diagram showing a screen display example of the evaluation status list page P8. The evaluation status list page P8 has display fields 62 to 65. The display column 62 is used for specifying information (manufacturer name and model name) of a part to be subjected to joint evaluation
, An evaluation start date, and an evaluation completion date.

The display field 63 has a display area for displaying the number of components to be evaluated in the joint evaluation (total number of samples), the number of samples in which a fault has occurred (total number of faults), and the overall judgment. I have.

The display columns 64 and 65 are provided for each component user who has participated in the joint evaluation. In this example, display columns 64 and 65 corresponding to the companies A and B participating in the joint evaluation are provided.

The display column 64 displays each evaluation item performed by the company A, the person in charge of each evaluation item, and the evaluation result. On the other hand, the display column 65 displays each evaluation item performed by the company B, a person in charge of each evaluation item, and an evaluation result.

In each of the display columns 64 and 65, a button 66 corresponding to each evaluation item is provided.
By selecting and pressing 6, the evaluation item for which the evaluation status should be reported can be selected (step S22).

Here, the company A selects the button 66 corresponding to the evaluation item (for example, “moisture resistance test”) for which the evaluation status is to be reported among the plurality of buttons 66 provided in the display field 64.
push. When the button 66 is pressed, the pressed button 66
Is displayed on the display 16 in place of the evaluation status list page P8.

FIG. 17 is a diagram showing a screen display example of the evaluation result input page P9. The evaluation result input page P9 includes display columns 67 and 68, an entry column 69, and a result registration button 70.
And

The display column 67 displays the contents (see FIG. 8) entered by the company A in the entry column 36 of the evaluation request sheet page P3. The display column 68 displays the contents (see FIG. 9) entered by the company A in the entry column 42 of the condition detail page P4.

The entry column 69 is a column for entering the progress of the evaluation for the evaluation item for which the evaluation status is to be reported. Therefore, the entry field 69 has, for example, input fields for an evaluation start date, an evaluation status report date, an evaluation result, the number of failed samples (number of failed), the occurrence time, and a comment. .

The company A inputs the corresponding information into the respective input fields of the entry field 69 using the input device 20 (step S2).
3). As a result, the evaluation result input page P9 is, for example, in a state shown in FIG. Thereafter, when all the necessary items are entered in the entry field 69, the company A presses the result registration button 70 (step S24).

Then, the CPU 12 of the terminal device T (FIG. 3)
Temporarily store the items entered in the entry field 69 in the MM3. Further, an evaluation status list page P10 is displayed on the display 16 instead of the evaluation result input page P9 (step S21).

FIG. 19 is a diagram showing a screen display example of the evaluation status list page P10. Evaluation status list page P10
Has the same configuration as the evaluation status list page P8 shown in FIG. 16 except that it has a result transmission button 71.

The contents input using the evaluation result input page P9 are reflected on the evaluation list page P10. That is, the evaluation result (see FIG. 18) input to the entry field 69 of the evaluation result input page P9 is displayed in the display area 64A of the evaluation result of the corresponding evaluation item in the display field 64.

In this example, “Fail” is displayed in the evaluation result of page P9 as the evaluation result of the evaluation item “moisture resistance test” performed by Company A.
"Fail" is displayed in the display area 64A of the evaluation result of the "moisture resistance test" in the display column 64 of No. 10.

When there is another evaluation item for which the evaluation status is to be reported, the company A presses the button 66 corresponding to the relevant evaluation item, and performs the above-described steps S22 to S24. On the other hand, when the evaluation results are input for all the evaluation items for which the evaluation status is to be reported, the result transmission button 71 is pressed (step S25).

Then, the CPU 12 of the terminal device T sends the MM
Entry column 6 corresponding to each evaluation item temporarily stored in 3.
9 (referred to as “evaluation status”) in the Web server S
Send to The CPU 12 of the Web server S stores the received evaluation status in the DB 9.

At this time, based on the evaluation result included in each received evaluation situation and predetermined conditions stored in advance in the auxiliary storage device 4 or the DB 9, the CPU 2 controls the evaluation target component. Make a comprehensive judgment.

For example, when the CPU 2 receives the evaluation status for the evaluation item “moisture resistance test” from the terminal device T of Company A, the CPU 2 detects the evaluation result included in the evaluation status. Next, the CPU 2 determines whether the evaluation result meets a predetermined condition.

For example, the predetermined condition is set to “if at least one evaluation result is“ fail ”, the comprehensive judgment is“ fail ””. Under such conditions, the CPU 2 determines the overall determination as “fail” based on the evaluation result “fail” of the “moisture resistance test”.

When the CPU 2 determines that the overall judgment is “fail”, the CPU 2 displays the overall judgment “fail” in the display area 63A of the display column 63 of the evaluation status list page P10 provided to each terminal device T thereafter. "Pass" is displayed. Conversely, CP
When U2 determines that the comprehensive determination is “pass” based on at least one evaluation result and predetermined conditions, U2 displays the determination result “pass” in the display area 63A.

However, the above-described comprehensive judgment process by the CPU 2 is not performed when the comprehensive judgment cannot be made only by the evaluation status received by the Web server S. For example, the predetermined condition is “if the evaluation result of three or more evaluation items is“ fail ”, the comprehensive judgment is“ fail ””
On the other hand, when the evaluation status (evaluation result of the evaluation item) received by the Web server S is less than 3, the CPU 2 does not perform the comprehensive determination process.

The determination as to whether or not to make a comprehensive determination is made, for example, by
This is performed by the following method. That is, when the Web server S receives the evaluation status, the CPU 2 stores the already received evaluation result in the DB 9 for the component corresponding to the received evaluation status.
It is determined whether or not it is possible to make a comprehensive determination according to a predetermined condition by using the evaluation result read from and received in the received evaluation situation and the read evaluation result.

The above-described comprehensive judgment processing is executed by the CPU 2 when the Web server S receives the evaluation results of all the evaluation items from all the parts users who perform the joint evaluation of the parts to be evaluated. You may do it.

When the result transmission button 71 is pressed, the evaluation status page P2 is displayed again in place of the evaluation result list page P10 (step S04). At this time, in the display column 32 of the evaluation status page P2, as shown in FIG. 20, an evaluation status record 72 is displayed for each component user.

The evaluation status record 72 is posted when the evaluation status of at least one evaluation item is transmitted to the Web server S. In the example shown in FIG. 20, Company A and Company B indicate the evaluation status of at least one evaluation item as W.
The state after transmission to the eb server S is shown.

By referring to the evaluation status page P2 shown in FIG. 20, the companies A and B can grasp that the partner of the joint evaluation has reported the evaluation status of at least one evaluation item. it can.

Also, the overall judgment is that the CPU of the Web server S
In the case where the evaluation is made in step 2, the overall judgment made is displayed in a state where it is included as an element of the evaluation status record 72, so that the overall judgment can be known from the evaluation status record 72.

Further, the companies A and B can call the evaluation status list page P10 and the evaluation result input page P9 by pressing the button 74 corresponding to the evaluation status record 72. Thus, the evaluation status (evaluation progress status) reported by the partner of the joint evaluation can be grasped.

(Evaluation Result Browsing) Next, an operation example of evaluation result browsing will be described. The new evaluation request mentioned above,
After each of the processes in the evaluation status report, the company A and the company B have finished reporting the evaluation status for all the evaluation items to be evaluated, and then access the homepage and execute step S01.
When the processing of S04 is performed, the evaluation status page P2 shown in FIG. 21 is displayed.

As shown in FIG. 21, after the joint evaluation by Company A and Company B is completed, an evaluation result record 75 as an index of the evaluation result is displayed in the display column 33 of page P2.

The evaluation result record 75 includes, as its elements, a record number and the name of each component user who has performed the joint evaluation.
(Company name), maker name, type, I / F, model name, end date of joint evaluation, and evaluation result (pass / fail) of the component to be evaluated. In the example shown in FIG. 21, “fail” is shown as the evaluation result of the joint evaluation.

The record number in the evaluation result record 75 is the button 76 for proceeding to the evaluation result list page P11.
Function as The viewer of the homepage uses the input device 2
When the desired button 76 is pressed using 0 (step S26 in FIG. 4), the evaluation result list page P11 is displayed on the display 16 instead of the evaluation status page P2 (step S27).

FIG. 22 is a diagram showing a screen display example of the evaluation result list page P11. Evaluation result list page P11
Indicates each of the display columns 62, 63, 64, and 65, and the total determination result 7
7 and a return button 66A are displayed. Each display column 62-6
5 is the same as each of the display columns 62 to 65 of the evaluation status list page P10 shown in FIG.
In each of the display areas 64A and 65A showing the evaluation result of the above, the evaluation result of the corresponding evaluation item is displayed. Also,
The comprehensive determination result is displayed in a comprehensive determination display area 63A of the display column 63. Further, as the overall judgment result 77,
The result of the joint evaluation is displayed.

By browsing the evaluation result list page P11, the viewer can grasp the evaluation result (pass / fail) for each evaluation item and the comprehensive judgment result. Further, when the viewer wants to browse the details of each evaluation item, he / she presses the button 66 corresponding to the evaluation item desired to be browsed among the buttons 66 provided according to each evaluation item (step S28). .

Then, the result detail page P12 (FIG. 23)
Is displayed on the display 16 instead of the evaluation result list page P11. On the other hand, when the return button 66A is pressed, the page returns to the evaluation status page P2.

In FIG. 23, the result detail page P12
Has display fields 67, 68, 78 and a return button 79. The display fields 67 and 68 display the same display content as the display fields 67 and 68 (see FIG. 18) of the evaluation result input page P9. The display column 78 displays the same content as the content entered in the entry column 69 of the evaluation result input page P11.

By browsing the result detail page P12, the viewer can grasp the evaluation target, the evaluation condition, and the evaluation result related to the evaluation item selected by the viewer (step S29). Thereafter, when the viewer presses the return button 79, the evaluation result list page P11 is changed to the result detail page P1.
2 is displayed again on the display 16 in place of 2.

The viewer presses another button 66 to
The result detail page P12 corresponding to another evaluation item can be browsed. Thereafter, when the viewer finishes browsing the evaluation result of the joint evaluation, the viewer returns to the evaluation status page P2 illustrated in FIG. 21 by, for example, pressing a return button provided on the Web browser.

In the operation example described above, the case where Company A has selected the HDD as the component to be evaluated has been described. However, pages P2 to P12 are prepared for each type of component displayed on the type selection page P1. Then, each company can perform the same processing as that described above for parts other than the HDD.

Each of the pages P1 to P12 described above is similarly provided to each component user who can access the homepage. Therefore, in the above example, A
Parts users other than Company B and Company B (for example, Company C and Company D)
As in the case of the companies A and B, the evaluation status and the evaluation result of the above-mentioned joint evaluation can be referred to.

According to the joint evaluation system described above,
When performing an evaluation on an evaluation target, each component user performs the processing of steps S05 to S11 in FIG. 4 to obtain an evaluation request (new evaluation request) as an evaluation plan (at least one Evaluation items, their detailed conditions (number of samples, etc.), scheduled start date of evaluation, scheduled completion date of evaluation, etc.) can be posted on the website.

Other component users can access the homepage and browse the posted new evaluation request to determine whether to participate in the joint evaluation (steps S12 to S16).

Thereafter, when participating in the joint evaluation, the other component users post the evaluation plan to be implemented by the user on the homepage as the contents of the answer (steps S17 to S1).
9). Accordingly, the requesting component user can grasp the evaluation plan for the evaluation target to be performed by another component user as a response to the request.

Thereafter, each component user who performs the joint evaluation can post the progress of the evaluation of each evaluation item on the homepage as the evaluation status (steps S20 to S25). Thus, each component user can browse the evaluation status regarding the evaluation performed by another component user.

When the evaluation of all the evaluation items in the joint evaluation is completed, each part user who has performed the joint evaluation accesses the homepage and obtains the evaluation result of each evaluation item in the joint evaluation and the comprehensive evaluation result. The judgment result and the result can be browsed.

As described above, each component user participating in the joint evaluation shares the evaluation result obtained by the joint evaluation via the homepage. As a result, each component user can use the evaluation result obtained in the joint evaluation for calculating the failure occurrence rate in the field of the component.

According to the joint evaluation system, each part user participating in the joint evaluation exchanges and shares information on the joint evaluation such as the evaluation target, the evaluation item, the evaluation quantity, the evaluation result, etc. via the homepage. Can be. For this reason, since each component user can share the evaluation man-hour and the evaluation cost, it is possible to evaluate a component with higher assurance accuracy than when each component user evaluates a component by itself.

Further, by jointly conducting the evaluation and sharing the evaluation result, it is possible to request the parts provider to improve the parts while keeping a joint pace. Can be.

In the above-described embodiment, the contents of the evaluation request, the contents of the answer, the evaluation status, and the evaluation result are posted on the homepage, and each component user can obtain the above information by referring to the homepage. Instead, the above-described evaluation request contents, response contents, evaluation status, and evaluation results may be transmitted by e-mail.

[Second Embodiment] The second embodiment has the following configuration added to the joint evaluation system of the first embodiment. That is, the above-described Web server S receives at least one evaluation item of the component to be evaluated and its detailed condition by receiving the content of the evaluation request or the content of the response from each component user participating in the joint evaluation. I do.

The received evaluation items and detailed conditions are C
It is stored in DB9 by PU2. At this time, CP
If there is an evaluation item that is performed under a condition common to the component users, U2 obtains the total number of components (the number of samples) to be evaluated for the evaluation item and stores it in the DB 9.

After that, the CPU 2 waits for the evaluation status to be transmitted from the terminal device T operated by each component user participating in the joint evaluation. Then, the CPU 2
When the eb server S receives the evaluation status transmitted from the terminal device T of a certain part user, the evaluation status is stored in the DB
9 and the following processing is performed.

That is, the CPU 2 detects the evaluation result (pass / fail) included in the evaluation status. At this time, if the evaluation status of another evaluation item has already been stored in DB9,
The evaluation result included in the evaluation status already stored in the DB 9 is read.

Subsequently, the CPU 2 determines whether or not the detected evaluation result and the evaluation result read from the DB 9 satisfy a predetermined condition for making an overall rejection determination. The predetermined condition is stored in the auxiliary storage device 4 or the DB 9 in advance, and is read out by the CPU 2 in the determination.

In the above determination, if the predetermined condition is satisfied, the CPU 2 makes a comprehensive determination of rejection of the part to be evaluated and creates an e-mail to that effect.

Subsequently, the CPU 2 obtains the e-mail address of each component user to whom the e-mail is to be transmitted. The e-mail address is entered using an evaluation request sheet (FIG. 8) or an evaluation response sheet (FIG. 13), received by the Web server S as evaluation request contents or response contents, and stored in the DB 9. Therefore, the CPU 2 obtains the electronic mail by reading it from the DB 9. Then, the CPU 2 transmits the created e-mail to each component user participating in the joint evaluation.

As described above, the CPU 2 of the Web server S
In the joint evaluation, regarding the evaluation status for a specific evaluation item transmitted from each component user, if it is possible to make a comprehensive judgment of rejection based on the evaluation status received so far and predetermined conditions Creates an e-mail notifying the overall judgment of rejection and notifies each part user who participated in the joint evaluation.

Thus, each part user who participated in the joint evaluation receives the above-mentioned e-mail, and does not need to browse the homepage, as a result of the joint evaluation.
It is possible to know that a rejection comprehensive judgment has been made for the part to be evaluated.

By adding the above-described configuration, for example, when joint evaluation is performed by three component users, the Web server S monitors the evaluation result (evaluation result) by each component user, and When the results of user evaluations reach a level that can be judged to be unacceptable,
It is possible to realize a function of automatically notifying each component user of a reject result.

The conditions for making a comprehensive judgment of rejection are as follows:
When a plurality of component users perform evaluation on a plurality of samples for a certain evaluation item under the same detailed conditions,
The condition may be such that when the total number of samples determined to be “defective” by each component user exceeds a predetermined threshold value, a comprehensive determination of rejection is made. It should be noted that the predetermined condition may be a condition for making an overall judgment of success.

As shown in FIG. 24, when a company A and a company B evaluate a certain part on a predetermined number of samples under the same evaluation items and conditions, the data of the joint evaluation is obtained. (Evaluation plan) is registered in the DB 9 of the Web server S (step S101). After that, the Web server S
Company A and Company B report "good" or "bad" for each sample. The CPU 2 detects the determination result of “defective” for the sample (abnormality detection function: step S
102).

Subsequently, the CPU 2 determines whether or not the evaluation that has received the result of the determination of “defective” is an evaluation item that is repeatedly performed by the companies A and B (step S103). At this time, if the evaluation is an evaluation item that is repeatedly performed, the total number of samples (the number of tests) to be performed for the evaluation item by Company A and Company B is determined. Then, the sum (the number of defects) of the number of samples determined to be "defective" is obtained (step S104).

Thereafter, the CPU 2 determines whether or not the total number of failures with respect to the number of tests is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold, thereby determining whether the overall determination is NG (fail) or OK (pass) (step S105). If it is determined to be (fail), the company A and the company B are notified of NG (fail) (step S10).
6).

The processing of FIG. 24 will be described in detail. For example, three parts users are 200 parts each (total 600 parts).
When the evaluation is being performed and it is determined that the test is rejected when two or more defective samples are generated, the CPU 2 constantly monitors the result of the determination of “defective” and determines the result of the determination of “defective” issued from each component user. When the total reaches 2 or more, each component user is notified of rejection.

[Third Embodiment] In the joint evaluation system of the first embodiment, each component user publishes the contents of an evaluation request on a homepage, thereby encouraging other component users to participate in the joint evaluation. Instead, the third embodiment has the following configuration.

That is, as shown in FIG.
(In FIG. 23, DB19 of terminal device T operated by company A and company B) is stored in an evaluation plan database (evaluation plan D).
Used as B).

Each part user can obtain information on the evaluation plan.
(Part type, model, evaluation item, evaluation condition, evaluation start date, evaluation completion date, etc.) is input to the terminal device T using the input device 20 (step S201), and an instruction for data registration is input ( In step S202, the CPU 2 stores the information on the input evaluation plan in the DB 19 (evaluation plan DB) (step S203).

At this time, the information on the evaluation plan is stored in the DB
19 is stored in a predetermined area (open area to be jointly evaluated) (step S204). This joint evaluation target area is set to be accessible from the Web server S.

On the other hand, the Web server S monitors the joint evaluation target area of each terminal device T. The monitoring function can be realized by the CPU 2 executing a predetermined program for realizing the monitoring function.

That is, the CPU 2 accesses each joint evaluation target open area through the Internet N at a predetermined cycle (or real time) (step S205), and stores the information on the evaluation plan stored in the joint evaluation target open area on the Web. Download to DB9 of server S (steps S206, S207).

Subsequently, the CPU 2 creates an evaluation plan corresponding to the new evaluation request using the information on the evaluation plan downloaded to the DB 9 (step S208), and notifies the created evaluation plan to each component user (step S208). S20
9).

That is, the CPU 2 uses the information on the evaluation plan downloaded from each terminal device T to display the evaluation request record 45 (FIG. 10) and the button 4 on the evaluation status page P2.
6 and a new evaluation request content page P5 (FIG. 11), an evaluation answer sheet page P6 (FIG. 12), and a condition detail page P7 provided when the button 46 is pressed.
Data for creating each screen data of FIG. 13 is created and stored in the auxiliary storage device 4 or DB9.

After that, each component user can access each page P2, P5 to P7 on the display 16 by operating the terminal device T to access the home page, and determine whether to participate in the joint evaluation. Can be considered. According to the third embodiment, each component user publishes the contents of the evaluation request on the homepage (step S
05 to S11) need not be performed.

Note that, instead of the above configuration, step S20
In steps 8 and S209, the CPU 2 may create an e-mail including the evaluation plan and send it to another component user. Also in this configuration, each component user publishes the content of the evaluation request on the homepage (step S05).
~ S11) need not be performed. On the other hand, each part user
By receiving the electronic mail, it is possible to receive an evaluation request from another component user without browsing the homepage.

[Fourth Embodiment] In the fourth embodiment, a progress management function for joint evaluation is added to the first embodiment. FIG. 26 is a flowchart showing the fourth embodiment.

In the same manner as in the first embodiment, the Web server S sends the evaluation request contents (entry contents (FIG. 8) to the evaluation request sheet) to the Web server S from the terminal device T of each part user who participated in the joint evaluation. The details of the condition or the contents of the answer (contents of the evaluation answer sheet (FIG. 13) and details of the condition) are received. The received evaluation request content and response content are stored in the CPU 2
Is stored in the DB 9.

On the other hand, the terminal device T of each component user is
DB1 as an evaluation plan database as in the embodiment
Hold 9 When each component user evaluates the evaluation target related to the joint evaluation with respect to the evaluation item to be performed, the evaluation status (the progress status to be entered on the evaluation result input page P9 (the entry status in the entry column 69) Contents: see FIG. 18) is stored in the DB 19.

The CPU 2 of the Web server S monitors the storage status of the evaluation status in each DB 19 at a predetermined cycle (for example, every day) by executing a program for realizing the progress management function. That is, the Web server S accesses the DB 19 of the terminal device T of each component user who has participated in the joint evaluation, and downloads the evaluation state to the Web server S when a new evaluation state is stored in the DB 19. Are stored in the DB 9 (steps S301 and S30).
2).

Next, the CPU 2 executes the accessing DB
The evaluation completion date for each evaluation item performed by the component user corresponding to 19 is checked by referring to the evaluation request contents and the answer contents held in the DB 19.
(Step S303).

At this time, if the scheduled completion date of the evaluation of each evaluation item performed by the component user has not passed, or the scheduled completion date of the evaluation of a certain evaluation item has passed, When the evaluation status has already been downloaded to the DB 9 (step S3
03; OK), the CPU 2 ends the processing.

On the other hand, when there is an evaluation item whose evaluation completion date has passed but the evaluation status has not yet been downloaded (step S303; NG), the CPU 2
An e-mail requesting that the evaluation status of the evaluation item be stored in the DB 19 is created and transmitted to the component user (step S304).

According to the fourth embodiment, an electronic mail urging the user to perform the evaluation is notified to the component user, so that the user can be urged to perform the evaluation. Note that the reminder may be posted on a homepage instead of the reminder e-mail.

Further, in the fourth embodiment, when the scheduled completion date of the evaluation has passed, an e-mail for urging the user to perform the evaluation is transmitted. Instead of this, for example, when the remaining time until the scheduled completion date of the evaluation is less than a predetermined time, an e-mail for a reminder may be transmitted.

[Fifth Embodiment] In the fifth embodiment, a function of modifying the joint evaluation plan is added to the configuration of the fourth embodiment. FIG. 27 is a flowchart illustrating the fifth embodiment. In the fifth embodiment, the CPU 2 of the Web server S receives the evaluation request content or the answer content from each component user who participated in the joint evaluation, and thereby the content of the evaluation (evaluation item,
The detailed conditions are stored in the DB 9.

At this time, the CPU 2 calculates a burden rate for the joint evaluation of each part user based on the number of evaluation items performed by each part user, the number of samples to be evaluated, and the like, and ranks the ranks according to the burden rates. (Rank high: Large burden ← → Rank low: Small burden) is set for each component user. The set rank is stored in DB9.

Thereafter, the same processing as in steps S301 to S303 described in the fourth embodiment (steps S401 to S401)
By executing S404), it is determined whether each component user has completed the evaluation for each evaluation item within the scheduled evaluation completion date. If there is an evaluation item that has not been completed within the evaluation completion date, the CPU
2 reads the rank of each component user stored in the DB 9 by the above-described processing, and refers to the component user to confirm the sharing (burden rate) of the joint evaluation for each component user.
(Step S405).

Next, the CPU 2 creates an evaluation plan correction plan (for example, an evaluation request with an evaluation completion deadline for a delayed evaluation item) (step S406), and sends an e-mail to the parts user with the lowest rank. (Step S407).

The component user who has received the e-mail confirms the evaluation plan amendment included in the e-mail, and examines whether to accept (accept) the evaluation plan amendment (step S407). The response of the examination result is transmitted to the Web server S (step S408).

When the Web server S receives the above answer,
The CPU 2 determines whether the answer is rejection or acceptance of the evaluation plan amendment (step S409). At this time, if the evaluation plan amendment is approved, the CPU 2 accesses the DB 9 (step S410) and modifies the evaluation plan for the corresponding part user (step S411). As a result, the contents of the home page are changed.

For example, when the performance of a certain evaluation item is transferred from one component user to another component user, the evaluation item transferred from the evaluation item performed by the component user is deleted, and the other evaluation item is deleted. The migrated evaluation item is added to the evaluation items performed by the component user.

In contrast, in step S409,
If the evaluation plan amendment is rejected, the CPU 2 advances the processing to step S405, and
The next lowest rank component user is notified by e-mail.

As described above, when the evaluation delay by any component user occurs, the CPU of the Web server S
2 prepares an evaluation plan amendment, and notifies an e-mail requesting approval of the evaluation plan amendment in order from a part user having a lower evaluation burden rate. If the revised evaluation plan is approved, a joint evaluation will be conducted in the future according to the revised evaluation plan.

Therefore, according to the fifth embodiment, the evaluation plan can be changed and the burden ratio can be changed without bothering each part user who participated in the joint evaluation. Also in the fifth embodiment, when the remaining time until the scheduled completion date of a certain evaluation is shorter than a predetermined time, the CPU
2 may create an evaluation plan correction plan.

Further, in the fifth embodiment, the evaluation plan correction plan is configured to be transmitted using electronic mail. Alternatively, the evaluation plan correction plan and its response may be posted on a homepage to be transmitted to the destination.

[Sixth Embodiment] In the sixth embodiment, an improvement request notification function for a component provider (component supplier) is added to the first embodiment. FIG.
Is a flowchart illustrating a sixth embodiment.

As described in the first embodiment, the Web
The server S receives the evaluation status transmitted from each component user participating in the joint evaluation. The received evaluation status is C
The data is stored in the DB 9 by the PU 2 (step S50).
2).

Next, the CPU 2 monitors the failure status of the component to be evaluated (step S503). For example, CPU2
Determines whether the evaluation result included in the evaluation status stored in the DB 9 in step S502 is “fail”.

If the evaluation result is “fail”, C
The PU 2 creates an e-mail including the evaluation item for which the evaluation result is given, the detailed condition thereof, and a request for improvement of the part to be evaluated, and transmits the e-mail to the part provider of the part (step S504). The email address of the parts provider is
Before the processing shown in FIG. 27, the data is stored in the auxiliary storage device 4 or the DB 9.

Upon receiving the e-mail requesting improvement, the component provider performs a process (for example, a design change) necessary for improvement on the component. As described above, according to the fifth embodiment, the improvement request can be notified from the component user to the component provider according to the evaluation result.

The above-mentioned e-mail requesting improvement is
When the CPU 2 makes an overall judgment “fail” for the joint evaluation, it may be transmitted for at least one evaluation item that caused the failure.

Further, the setting is made so that the parts provider can access the homepage by operating any of the terminal devices T, so that the improvement request is posted on the homepage and the improvement request is transmitted to the parts provider via the homepage. May be.

[Seventh Embodiment] In the seventh embodiment, a function of posting a part improvement schedule by a parts provider (for example, α company) is added to the sixth embodiment. FIG. 29 is a flowchart illustrating the seventh embodiment.

As shown in FIG. 29, the same processing as in steps S502 to S504 described in the sixth embodiment is performed.
(Steps S601 to S603), when the improvement request is transmitted to the component provider, the component provider investigates and analyzes the cause of the evaluation result of the component being "failed" (step S604). Next, the component provider drafts an improvement plan for the component and verifies the countermeasure effect (step S605).

Thereafter, when the report items to the component user (for example, improvement plan, countermeasure status, provision schedule of the improved components) are collected, the component provider transmits the report items to the administrator of the homepage (step). S606).

[0206] The manager of the homepage inputs the report items to the Web server S using the input device 10. The input report items are registered in the DB 9 by the CPU 2.
(Step S607).

Then, in response to the request for the evaluation status page P2 from the terminal device T, the CPU 2 creates screen data of the evaluation status page P2 including the report items registered in the DB 9, and provides the screen data to the terminal device.

Thus, the display 16 of the terminal device T displays the evaluation status page P2 including the report item from the component provider. FIG. 30 is a diagram illustrating a screen display example of the evaluation status page P2 including the report items.

As shown in FIG. 30, the evaluation status page P2
In the display field 34, a report 80 is displayed as a report item from the component provider (α company). The report 80 is, for example, an improvement schedule of a component to be evaluated.

In the example shown in FIG. 30, as each report 80, “Improvement schedule of ABC1234 manufactured by α company: Survey analysis 7/30 Measures 8/10, Sample provision 8/3
0 "and" ABC ABC1234 improvement schedule:
Head specific parameter changed product will be provided on September 10 ".

According to the seventh embodiment, each component user who has participated in the joint evaluation can receive an improvement schedule for the component to be evaluated from the component provider via the evaluation status page P2.

[0212] In the seventh embodiment, the parts provider transmits the report matter to the homepage manager, and the manager posts the report matter on the homepage. Instead of this configuration, the following configuration can be adopted.

For example, when the parts provider summarizes the report items, a web page (not shown) for operating the terminal device T to access the homepage and input the report items is provided.
Is called on the display 16. Next, the parts provider
Fill out the report items on the called web page,
Send to server S. The CPU 2 of the Web server S registers the received report items in the DB 9 and uses them for creating screen data of the evaluation status page P2 thereafter.

[Eighth Embodiment] The eighth embodiment is obtained by adding the following configuration to the configuration of the third embodiment. FIG.
FIG. 1 is a flowchart for explaining the eighth embodiment.
In the eighth embodiment, similarly to the third embodiment, an evaluation plan is created (step S208 in FIG. 25) and posted on a homepage (step S701; step S2 in FIG. 25).
09).

Each part user (Company A and Company B in the example of FIG. 31) operates the terminal device T to access the home page, and calls each of the pages P5 to P6, thereby making an evaluation plan.
Confirm (New Evaluation Request) and accept the evaluation plan,
Consider whether to change the evaluation plan (Step S
702).

When each part user approves the evaluation plan, it performs the processing of steps S16 to S19 described above.
(FIG. 4). On the other hand, when requesting a change of the evaluation plan, each component user displays a response Web page (not shown) for inputting a response to the evaluation plan on the display 16.
To call. The answer Web pages are P5 to P
7 and may be a separate page, for example, page P6
May be configured by providing an entry column for the answer.

Each part user enters the contents of a request for changing the evaluation plan (for example, evaluation item, detailed conditions, evaluation start date, evaluation end date) in a response entry column (not shown) provided on the response Web page. Enter the answer including the request for changing the scheduled date). Then, by pressing a transmission button (not shown) provided on the answer Web page, the contents of the change request are transmitted to the Web server S.

The CPU 2 of the Web server S registers the contents of the received change request in the DB 9. After that, the CPU 2
Post the change request contents registered in DB9 on the homepage. For example, the CPU 2 posts the content of the change request in the display column 34 of the evaluation status page P2.

By viewing the evaluation status page P2, the component user corresponding to the requester of the evaluation plan can know that another component user has requested a change in the evaluation performed by himself. The part user examines whether or not the posted change request can be accepted (step S702).

[0220] Thereafter, the component user calls the display 16 for a response Web page corresponding to the change request. The answer Web page can be called up, for example, by clicking the change request content displayed in the display field 34.

Then, the part user answers the change request to the Web page for answering whether or not to approve the change request, and if not, further changes to the change request. Fill in as Web
Send to server S.

[0222] The CPU 2 of the Web server S
When the response to the change request transmitted from is received, it is determined whether or not the response acknowledges the content of the change request (step S703). At this time, if the answer includes the approval of the content of the change request, the contents of the corresponding pages P5 to P7 are updated according to the approved content of the change request.
(Step S704).

On the other hand, when the answer includes a message that the change request is not accepted, the CPU 2 transmits the further change request included in the answer to the homepage (for example,
The information is displayed in the display field 34) of the evaluation status page P2. Thereafter, steps S702 and S70 are performed until the Web server S receives an acknowledgment for the further change request content.
3 is repeated.

According to the eighth embodiment, each component user can request a change request via the homepage for the presented evaluation plan. Then, when the change request is mutually agreed between the component users performing the joint evaluation,
The above evaluation plan will be changed according to the approved changes.

[Ninth Embodiment] In the ninth embodiment, a function for estimating the cause of an evaluation result of "failed" and posting the estimated cause on a homepage are provided on the Web server in the first embodiment. This is a function and a function. FIG.
FIG. 2 is a flowchart for explaining the ninth embodiment.

In the DB 9 or the auxiliary storage device 4 of the Web server S, examples of evaluation of parts performed in the past,
A failure history database holding information such as causes for the evaluation result (cause estimation information) is created in advance.

[0229] The CPU 2 of the Web server S
If the evaluation result included in the evaluation status (progress status) received from is "fail" (step S801), the failure history database on the auxiliary storage device 4 or DB 9 is referred to The cause is estimated (step S802).

When the cause is estimated, the CPU 2 displays the estimated cause on a predetermined Web page in the homepage.
It is posted on the page (step S803). Thereafter, the component supplier can access the homepage and browse the estimated cause posted on the homepage. The inferred cause is used as material for improvement of parts by the parts supplier.

[Tenth Embodiment] In the tenth embodiment, a function of ordering a part (sample) to be evaluated for joint evaluation from a part supplier is added to the third or seventh embodiment. . FIG. 33 is a flowchart illustrating the tenth embodiment.

In FIG. 33, the Web server S manages an evaluation plan for joint evaluation (step S901), and when joint evaluation is to be performed for a certain part, the scheduled start date of the evaluation is stored in DB9. It is determined whether the read-out period until the read-out scheduled evaluation start date is less than a predetermined threshold value (step S902).

At this time, if the period up to the evaluation start date is equal to or longer than the predetermined threshold, the process is terminated. If the period up to the evaluation start date is less than the predetermined threshold, C is set.
The PU 2 performs an ordering process for a part as a sample (step S903).

That is, the CPU 2 determines, for example, the number of samples used for joint evaluation, the delivery destination of at least one sample to which the sample is to be delivered, the contact information of each delivery destination,
Ordering information including the expected delivery date to each delivery destination is created based on the information on the joint evaluation (eg, evaluation request content, response content) stored in the DB 9 and posted on the homepage.

For example, the order information is posted on a web page that is easily noticeable by the component provider, such as a product selection page P1 and an evaluation information page P2 of the homepage. Thereby, the component provider delivers the specified number of samples to at least one component user who participated in the joint evaluation.

According to the tenth embodiment, it is possible to save the component user himself / herself from ordering the sample to the component provider.

[Eleventh Embodiment] In the eleventh embodiment, a function of posting a due date schedule and a function of changing a plan for joint evaluation based on the due date schedule are added to the tenth embodiment. FIG. 34 is a flowchart illustrating the eleventh embodiment.

As shown in FIG. 34, the ordering process (step S903) shown in FIG. 33 is executed, and the ordering information for the parts provider is posted on the homepage. The order confirmation is performed based on the order information, and the delivery date of the sample is transmitted to the Web server S.

When the Web server S receives the delivery date of the sample, the CPU 2 reads the scheduled evaluation start date in the evaluation plan using the sample from the DB 9 and determines whether the sample delivery date is earlier than the evaluation start date. A determination is made (step S905).

At this time, if the delivery date is before the scheduled evaluation start date, the CPU 2 posts the delivery date on the homepage as in the tenth embodiment (step S906).
On the other hand, when the delivery date is later than the scheduled evaluation start date, the CPU 2 posts the delivery date and the request for changing the evaluation start date on the homepage (step S907).

When the parts user to whom the sample is to be delivered knows the request for changing the evaluation start date by browsing the homepage by operating the terminal device T, is it possible to change the evaluation start date according to the delivery date? Consider whether or not (step S
908).

[0240] Then, the part user gives a response to the change request (whether the change is possible, if the change is possible, the scheduled evaluation start date after the change, and if necessary, the desired delivery date),
Fill in the form provided on the homepage and send it to the Web server S. When the Web server S receives the above-mentioned answer, the CPU 2 checks whether or not the change included in the answer is possible, and determines whether or not the scheduled evaluation start date can be changed (step S909).

At this time, if the scheduled evaluation start date can be changed, CPU 2 rewrites the scheduled evaluation start date in the corresponding evaluation plan on the homepage to a new evaluation start date (step S910). Further, the CPU 2 notifies the component provider by posting the new scheduled evaluation start date and the desired delivery date on the homepage.

On the other hand, if the answer to the change request indicates that the evaluation start date cannot be changed, the CPU 2
Notifies the homepage administrator (administrator of the joint evaluation system) of the fact and the request for the adjustment of the delivery date (step S911). The administrator who has received the notification contacts the component provider and adjusts the delivery date.

According to the eleventh embodiment, the Web server S
CPU 2 determines whether the delivery date presented by the parts provider meets the evaluation plan, and if not,
By posting a request to change the evaluation plan on the homepage,
Notify the component user. The component user sends the answer to the web server S via the homepage. As a result, the component user can save the trouble of performing the process of reflecting the plan change due to the delivery date of the sample on the homepage.

According to the eleventh embodiment, the parts provider notifies the delivery schedule to the Web system, and the Web system corrects the joint evaluation plan and the delivery schedule as needed based on the notified delivery schedule. .

[Twelfth Embodiment] In the twelfth embodiment, the evaluation result of the joint evaluation of the parts posted on the above-mentioned homepage is given to the parts user who cannot perform the evaluation because of the evaluation equipment and the cost required for the evaluation. Is set to be viewable for a fee, and a function is added to the first embodiment for distributing the profit obtained by the view to each component user who has performed the joint evaluation provided for the view.

FIG. 35 is a diagram showing a system configuration according to the twelfth embodiment. The system according to the twelfth embodiment includes:
It differs from the system of the first embodiment in the following points.
(1) The Web server S has a charging processing unit 91 that is realized by the CPU 2 executing a program. The Web server S functions as the creating unit, the determining unit, the providing unit, the calculating unit, and the requesting unit of the present invention by executing the program of the CPU 2. The charging processing unit 91 corresponds to a determining unit, a calculating unit, and a requesting unit. (2) A computer 92 of a settlement institution is connected to the Internet N. The computer 92 includes a settlement account of the administrator and each member of the homepage (members: in the example shown in FIG. 34, company A, company B,
(Company C, Company D) and manages withdrawal processing and payment processing from each settlement account.

<Outline> An outline of the settlement / charging process on the joint evaluation alliance homepage will be described. (1) The administrator of the homepage determines a settlement institution such as a bank, and opens a settlement account for the administrator and each member in advance. This procedure may be performed by a document between the administrator, the settlement period, and each member without using the Internet N. (2) Billing process performed by the joint evaluation system (a) Operating expenses of the joint evaluation alliance operating organization Each member pays a membership fee to the administrator on a regular basis. The administrator applies the paid membership fee to various costs required for operating the joint evaluation system (for example, management and operation costs of a homepage, maintenance and inspection costs of the Web server S), and operates the joint evaluation system. To charge the membership fee, the settlement institution withdraws the membership fee from the settlement account of each member established in the settlement institution for a predetermined period (monthly / semi-annual / year), and deposits each withdrawn withdrawal into the settlement account of the administrator. By doing so. The withdrawal processing and the deposit processing may be performed by processing by the computer 92. (b) Billing process when a member who has not participated in the joint evaluation browses the evaluation result of the joint evaluation. , Administrators
A fee is collected for the browsing, and the collected fee is distributed to each member who has performed the joint evaluation. Hereinafter, charging / settlement processing in this case will be described in detail.

FIG. 36 is a diagram showing a charge and a charge for browsing the evaluation result.
It is a flowchart which shows a settlement process. In FIG. 36, a component user who wishes to view the evaluation result (not participating in the joint evaluation: for example, company D) operates the terminal device T and accesses a homepage through the Internet (steps S1001 to S1003).

Then, on the display 16 of the terminal device T, a type selection page P1 (FIG. 5) is displayed. Company D
From the main menu on page P1, select the type for which you want to view the evaluation results (step S1004, S
1005).

Then, as in the first embodiment, after user authentication is performed, a Web page P1 showing a list of evaluation models is displayed.
The screen data of No. 3 is transmitted from the Web server S to the terminal device T, and the Web page P13 is displayed on the display 16 (Step S1006).

FIG. 37 shows a screen display example of the Web page P13. The Web page P13 has an evaluation model list 93 of the selected product type and buttons 94 to 96. FIG. 36 shows an evaluation model list 93 when the selected product type is the HDD. The evaluation model list 93 displays, in a table format, one or more evaluation records each having a manufacturer name, a type, an I / F, a model name, an evaluation start date, a scheduled completion date, and a total number of evaluation samples as elements.

Company D selects the model (model name) desired to be browsed from the evaluation model list 93, inputs the selected model (model name) into the entry field 94, and then presses the next button 95 (step S1007). Then, the model selection result is transmitted from the terminal device T to the Web server S.

When the Web server S receives the selection result,
The accounting unit 91 of the Web server S executes a member check process, and determines whether or not the browse applicant is a member who has not participated in the joint evaluation corresponding to the evaluation result of the browse desire (step S1008). That is, the billing processor 91 specifies an evaluation record including the selected model (model name) from the evaluation model list 93.

Next, the charging processing section 91 reads from the DB 9 the user names of the members corresponding to the specified evaluation records, ie, the user names of the plurality of component users (evaluation sharing members) who have performed the joint evaluation corresponding to the evaluation records. Next, the charging unit 91
Compares the read user name with the user name of the browsing applicant (company D) acquired at the time of the user authentication described above, and determines whether there is a match.

At this time, if there is a matching user name, the charging processing section 91 determines that the browsing applicant is one of the evaluation sharing members, creates screen data of the evaluation status page P2, The message is transmitted to the corresponding terminal device T (step S1009). Subsequent processing is the same as in the first embodiment.

On the other hand, if there is no matching user name, it is determined that the browsing applicant (company D) is not an evaluation sharing member, and the screen data of the pay notification screen P14 is created and transmitted to the corresponding terminal device T. I do. The terminal device T displays the pay notification screen P14 on the display 16 based on the received screen data (step S1010).

FIG. 38 is a diagram showing a screen display example of the pay notification screen P14. The pay notification screen P14 presents a fee for referring (viewing) the evaluation result. Company D presses the next button 96 after confirming the presented fee.

Then, a Web page including a list of evaluation results
Screen data (not shown) is transmitted from the Web server S to the terminal device T of the company D, and a list of evaluation results is displayed on the display 1.
6 is displayed (step S1011).

The evaluation result list has, for example, the same screen configuration as the evaluation result display column 33 shown in FIG. 21 and has an evaluation result record for the model (model name) selected by the viewer (company D). 75 is displayed.

Evaluation result record 7 desired by Company D for viewing
5 (step S1012), the evaluation result list page P11 (FIG. 22) and the result detail page P12 (FIG. 23) corresponding to the clicked evaluation result record 75.
Is displayed on the display 16. This gives D
The company can browse the desired evaluation result (S10
13).

When the browsing is completed, the charging processing section 91 of the Web server S calculates a fee for the browsing (step S1014), and issues a settlement request for transferring the calculated fee from the account of the company D to the administrator's account. The information is transmitted to the computer 92 of the settlement institution (step S1015). The settlement request may be transmitted to the settlement institution by e-mail.

After that, the accounting processing section 91 notifies the company D of information on the fee (billing information) (step S1016). The notification is performed by e-mail, for example.

Thereafter, the charging processing section 91 calculates the amount (hereinafter referred to as “distribution amount”) allocated to each evaluation sharing member when the fee is allocated to each evaluation sharing member. And
The accounting processing unit 91 transmits to the computer 92 a settlement request for transferring the corresponding distribution amount from the administrator's account to each evaluation sharing member's account.

In the above processing, the fee may be set to a fixed amount for each browse of one part model, and the charge of the evaluation sharing member who shares the evaluation of the model for each part model may be set. The unit price per viewing may be calculated based on the number of evaluation steps.

It is preferable that the process of distributing the browsing fee of the evaluation result to the evaluation sharing member is performed at regular intervals (for example, every month) together with the settlement process of the membership fee. That is, the amount obtained by subtracting the total value of the monthly sales amount from the membership fee for January,
The account of each evaluation sharing member may be debited to the administrator's account. The distribution of the fee may be an amount according to the number of evaluation steps for each evaluation sharing company.

According to the twelfth embodiment, the evaluation sharing member
(The member who has performed the joint evaluation) can reduce the evaluation cost of the parts by receiving the distribution of the inspection fee of the evaluation result. Also, a member who views the evaluation result can reduce the cost of evaluating the parts by not performing the evaluation. For this reason, the viewing fee is set lower than the evaluation cost.

Also, a component user who cannot perform the evaluation at all due to various circumstances becomes a member of the homepage and can obtain the evaluation result. When the component user who performs only such browsing becomes a member, the number of members who can collect a browsing fee can be increased. Therefore, the amount of money distributed to the evaluation sharing member can be increased, and the evaluation cost of the parts of the evaluation sharing member can be reduced.

Note that the following configuration can be adopted instead of the configuration of the twelfth embodiment. (A) Regarding the evaluation result browsing, all members are charged regardless of whether they participated in the joint evaluation or not, and the obtained browsing fee is paid to each evaluation sharing member corresponding to the viewed evaluation result. On the other hand, it is allocated as evaluation work cost according to the evaluation man-hours of each evaluation member. (B) The membership fee for members who do not participate in joint evaluation at all (non-participating members) is set higher than the membership fee for members who can participate in joint evaluation (participating members), and the membership fee from non-participating members is shared by members. Distribute to

In the embodiments described above, the components of the electronic device are exemplified as the evaluation targets. However, in the present invention, the evaluation target is replaced with the components of the electronic device, and the electronic device, the units of the electronic device, the software, and the program are used. , Institutions, people,
Any one of services and the like may be used. As an example,
The present invention can be applied to a case of jointly evaluating whether application software to be evaluated can operate on a plurality of basic software. [Others] The present invention can be specified as follows. (Supplementary Note 1) A step in which a first terminal device used by a first evaluator that evaluates an evaluation target transmits a joint evaluation request including an evaluation plan of the evaluation target to a network; A second terminal device receiving the joint evaluation request from the network,
A step in which the second terminal device transmits an answer to the network for the joint evaluation request including the evaluation plan to be evaluated to the network; a step in which the first terminal device receives the answer from the network; A step of transmitting an evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request by the first evaluator to the network; and a step of the second terminal device displaying the evaluation result of the evaluation target by the first evaluator. Receiving from the network; transmitting the evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request by the second evaluator to the network; and receiving the first terminal device from the network. Receiving the evaluation result of the evaluation target from the network by the second evaluator from the network. (Supplementary Note 2) The network includes a server that provides a homepage in response to a request from the first terminal device and the second terminal device, and the server includes the joint evaluation request, the answer, and the first evaluation. The joint evaluation method according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation result of the evaluation target by the evaluator and the evaluation result of the evaluation target by the second evaluator are received and posted on the homepage. (Supplementary Note 3) The server, based on predetermined conditions, receives the evaluation result of the evaluation target by the first evaluator and / or the evaluation result of the evaluation target by the second evaluator. 3. The joint evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein the comprehensive evaluation of the joint evaluation is performed, and a result of the comprehensive evaluation is notified to the first evaluator and / or the second evaluator. (Supplementary note 4) The joint evaluation method according to supplementary note 3, wherein the server posts the result of the comprehensive judgment on the homepage. (Supplementary Note 5) The information processing apparatus further includes a first database that stores an evaluation plan to be evaluated by the first evaluator, and the server accesses the first database to acquire the evaluation plan of the first evaluator. 3. The joint evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein in this case, at least the joint evaluation request including the acquired evaluation plan of the first evaluator is notified to the second evaluator. (Supplementary note 6) The joint evaluation method according to supplementary note 5, wherein the server posts the joint evaluation request on the homepage. (Supplementary Note 7) The server stores the evaluation completion schedule in the evaluation plan of the first or second evaluator, and, when determining that the evaluation is not completed by the stored evaluation completion schedule, the first or second evaluation unit Notifying the evaluator of No. 2 of the reminder of the evaluation,
The joint evaluation method described in Supplementary Note 2. (Supplementary note 8) The joint evaluation method according to supplementary note 7, wherein the server posts the reminder on the homepage. (Supplementary Note 9) The server stores the evaluation completion schedule in the evaluation plan of the first evaluator, and when the server determines that the evaluation is not completed before the stored evaluation completion schedule, the first evaluator performs the evaluation. 3. The joint evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein the second evaluator is notified of a request to perform an evaluation to be performed. (Supplementary note 10) The joint evaluation method according to supplementary note 9, wherein the server posts the execution request on the homepage. (Supplementary Note 11) In a case where the evaluation result of the evaluation target performed by the first evaluator or the second evaluator is rejected, the server requests the provider of the evaluation target to improve the evaluation result. The joint evaluation method described in Supplementary Note 2. (Supplementary Note 12) The server posts the improvement request on the homepage, and a third terminal device used by the provider to be evaluated receives the homepage from the server and displays the improvement request. The joint evaluation method described in Supplementary Note 11. (Supplementary note 13) The joint evaluation method according to supplementary note 12, wherein the server, when receiving the improvement measure presented by the evaluation target provider, posts the improvement measure on the homepage. (Supplementary Note 14) In a case where the server receives a schedule until the provider of the evaluation object puts the improved evaluation object into the first evaluator and the second evaluator, the server sends the schedule to the homepage. Appendix 1
2. The joint evaluation method described in 2. (Supplementary Note 15) When the server receives a request to change the evaluation plan of the first evaluator from the second evaluator, the server notifies the first evaluator of the change request, and When receiving a change in the evaluation plan of the first evaluator determined between the first evaluator and the second evaluator, the first evaluator reflects the change in the evaluation plan. The joint evaluation method according to Appendix 6, wherein the evaluation plan is posted on the website. (Supplementary Note 16) If the evaluation result of the first evaluator or the second evaluator is rejected, the server publishes the estimated cause of the rejection on the homepage, and 3. The joint evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein a third terminal device used by the target provider receives the homepage from the server and displays the estimated cause. (Supplementary Note 17) Based on the evaluation plan posted on the homepage, the server issues a purchase order to be evaluated in the evaluation plan to a provider to be evaluated.
The joint evaluation method described in Supplementary Note 2. (Supplementary Note 18) When the server receives the delivery date of the evaluation target presented from the provider in response to the order form, the server determines whether the delivery date matches the evaluation plan, and determines whether the delivery date matches the evaluation plan. 18. The joint evaluation method according to claim 17, wherein, if not performed, the first evaluator and / or the second evaluator performing the evaluation based on the evaluation plan are notified of a request for changing the evaluation plan. (Supplementary Note 19) When the server receives a change in the evaluation plan from the first and / or second evaluator that has received the change request, the server posts the change on the homepage based on the change. 18. The joint evaluation method according to claim 18, wherein the evaluation plan is updated. (Supplementary Note 20) A method in which a server provides a homepage according to a request, wherein a step of creating a homepage on which a result of a joint evaluation on an evaluation target by a plurality of evaluators is posted, and a view of the result of the joint evaluation When receiving a request from a viewer of the homepage, determining whether the viewer corresponds to any of the plurality of evaluators who performed the joint evaluation; and If the user does not fall under any of the above categories, the step of providing the homepage to the viewer for a fee, and the rate obtained by providing the homepage is calculated according to the share of the co-evaluation of each evaluator. Calculating an amount allocated to the evaluator; and requesting the settlement institution to pay each of the calculated amounts to the plurality of evaluators. Home provides a method of. (Supplementary Note 21) A creation unit that creates a home page on which the results of the joint evaluation on the evaluation targets by a plurality of evaluators are posted, and when a request for viewing the results of the joint evaluation is received from a viewer of the home page, A determination unit that determines whether or not the viewer falls under any of the plurality of evaluators who have performed the joint evaluation; and, if the viewer does not fall under any of the plurality of evaluators, the browsing is performed. A providing unit that provides the homepage to the evaluator for a fee, and a calculating unit that calculates the amount of the fee obtained by providing the homepage allocated to each evaluator in accordance with the share of the co-evaluation of the evaluator. A requesting unit for requesting a clearing house to pay each of the calculated amounts to the plurality of evaluators. (Supplementary Note 22) A receiving unit, a transmitting unit, and a storing unit, wherein the receiving unit is an evaluation plan of the evaluation target transmitted from a first terminal device used by a first evaluator who evaluates the evaluation target. Receiving the joint evaluation request, the storage means stores a homepage on which the joint evaluation request is posted, and the transmitting means stores the homepage on which the joint evaluation request is posted by a second evaluator. 2 terminal device, the receiving means receives the response of the joint evaluation request including the evaluation plan of the evaluation object transmitted from the second terminal device, and the storage means displays a home page on which the response is posted. The transmitting unit transmits a home page on which the answer is posted to the first terminal device, and the receiving unit transmits the home page on which the first message is transmitted from the first terminal device.
Receiving the evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request by the evaluator, and storing the homepage on which the evaluation result of the evaluation object based on the joint evaluation request by the first evaluator is posted. The transmitting unit transmits to the second terminal device a home page on which the evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request by the first evaluator is posted, and the receiving unit transmits the homepage from the second terminal device. The storage unit receives the evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request by the second evaluator and the storage unit stores the evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request by the second evaluator. The transmitted homepage is stored, and the transmitting unit stores a homepage on which the evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request by the second evaluator is posted. Transmitting to the serial first terminal device, a server.

[0270]

According to the present invention, it is possible for a plurality of evaluators to jointly evaluate an evaluation target and to share the results obtained by the joint evaluation. Therefore, each evaluator shares evaluation man-hours and evaluation costs, and can evaluate an evaluation target with higher assurance accuracy.

[Brief description of the drawings]

FIG. 1 is a configuration diagram of a joint evaluation system for parts of an electronic device.

FIG. 2 is a configuration diagram of a Web server shown in FIG. 1;

FIG. 3 is a configuration diagram of the terminal device shown in FIG. 1;

[Figure 4] Flow chart of the Joint Evaluation Alliance homepage

FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a screen display example of a product selection page.

FIG. 6 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation status page.

FIG. 7 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation request sheet page.

FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation request sheet page.

FIG. 9 is a diagram showing a screen display example of a condition detail page.

FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation status page.

FIG. 11 is a diagram showing a screen display example of a new evaluation request content page.

FIG. 12 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation answer sheet page.

FIG. 13 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation answer sheet page.

FIG. 14 is a diagram showing a screen display example of a condition detail page.

FIG. 15 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation status page.

FIG. 16 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation status list page.

FIG. 17 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation result input page.

FIG. 18 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation result input page.

FIG. 19 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation status list page.

FIG. 20 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation status page.

FIG. 21 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation status page.

FIG. 22 is a diagram showing a screen display example of an evaluation result list page.

FIG. 23 is a diagram showing a screen display example of a result detail page.

FIG. 24 is a flowchart illustrating a second embodiment.

FIG. 25 is a flowchart illustrating a third embodiment.

FIG. 26 is a flowchart illustrating a fourth embodiment.

FIG. 27 is a flowchart illustrating a fifth embodiment.

FIG. 28 is a flowchart illustrating a sixth embodiment.

FIG. 29 is a flowchart illustrating a seventh embodiment.

FIG. 30 is an explanatory view of a seventh embodiment.

FIG. 31 is a flowchart illustrating an eighth embodiment.

FIG. 32 is a flowchart illustrating a ninth embodiment;

FIG. 33 is a flowchart illustrating a tenth embodiment;

FIG. 34 is a flowchart illustrating an eleventh embodiment.

FIG. 35 is a system configuration diagram of a twelfth embodiment.

FIG. 36 is a flowchart illustrating a twelfth embodiment;

FIG. 37 is a diagram showing a screen display example of a Web page of an evaluation model list.

FIG. 38 is a diagram showing a screen display example of a pay notification screen.

[Explanation of symbols]

 N Internet P1 Product selection page P2 Evaluation status page P3 Evaluation request sheet page P4, P7 Condition detail page P5 New evaluation request content page P6 Evaluation response sheet page P8 Evaluation status list page P9 Evaluation result input page P10 Evaluation status list page P11 Evaluation result List page P12 Result details page S Web server T Terminal device

 ────────────────────────────────────────────────── ─── Continuing from the front page (72) Inventor Takeyuki Yabuta 4-1-1, Kamiodanaka, Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki-shi, Kanagawa Prefecture Inside Fujitsu Limited (72) Inventor Masaru Kiyoita 4, Kamiodanaka, Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki-shi, Kanagawa Prefecture 1-1 1-1 Fujitsu Co., Ltd. (72) Inventor Yuujiro Yoshida 4-1-1 Kagamidanaka, Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki-shi, Kanagawa Prefecture Fujitsu Co., Ltd. (72) Inventor Kazumasa Moriya Ueodanaka, Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki-shi, Kanagawa 4-1-1, Fujitsu Limited

Claims (10)

[Claims] 1. A first terminal device used by a first evaluator that evaluates an evaluation target transmits a joint evaluation request including an evaluation plan of the evaluation target to a network; A second terminal device used receiving the joint evaluation request from the network; and a second terminal device transmitting a response to the joint evaluation request including the evaluation plan of the evaluation target to the network. Wherein the first terminal device receives the answer from the network; and wherein the first terminal device sends the evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request by the first evaluator to the network. Transmitting; and receiving the evaluation result of the evaluation target by the first evaluator from the network. And a step in which the second terminal device transmits an evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request from the second evaluator to the network; and wherein the first terminal device performs the second evaluation. Receiving from the network an evaluation result of the evaluation target by a person. 2. The network includes a server that provides a homepage in response to a request from the first terminal device and the second terminal device, wherein the server includes the joint evaluation request, the answer, and the first
The evaluation result of the evaluation object by the evaluator of
The joint evaluation method according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation result of the evaluation target by the evaluator is received and posted on the homepage. 3. The server, based on a predetermined condition, receives the evaluation result of the evaluation target by the first evaluator and / or the evaluation result of the evaluation target by the second evaluator. To perform the comprehensive evaluation of the joint evaluation, and report the result of the overall evaluation to the first evaluator and / or the second evaluator.
3. The joint evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein the evaluator is notified. 4. A first database for storing an evaluation plan to be evaluated by the first evaluator, wherein the server accesses the first database to obtain an evaluation plan of the first evaluator. 3. The joint evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein, in the case of performing, a joint evaluation request including the acquired evaluation plan of the first evaluator is notified to at least the second evaluator. 5. The server stores an evaluation completion schedule in the evaluation plan of the first or second evaluator, and, when it is determined that the evaluation is not completed by the stored evaluation completion schedule, the first or the second evaluator. 3. The joint evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein the second evaluator is notified of a prompt for the evaluation. 6. The server stores an evaluation completion schedule in the evaluation plan of the first evaluator, and when the server judges that the evaluation is not completed by the stored evaluation completion schedule, the first evaluator is 3. The joint evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein the second evaluator is notified of a request to perform an evaluation to be performed. 7. The server, if the evaluation result of the evaluation target performed by the first evaluator or the second evaluator is unsuccessful, a request for improvement to the provider of the evaluation target. 3. The joint evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein 8. The evaluation object according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation target is at least one of an electronic device component, an electronic device, an electronic device unit, software, a program, an institution, a person, and a service. Joint evaluation method. 9. A first terminal device, comprising: a network, a first terminal device used by a first evaluator evaluating an evaluation target, and a second terminal device used by a second evaluator. Transmits a joint evaluation request including the evaluation plan to be evaluated to a network, the second terminal device receives the joint evaluation request from the network, and the second terminal device evaluates the evaluation plan of the evaluation object. The first terminal device receives the response from the network, the first terminal device receives the response from the network, and the first terminal device responds to the joint evaluation request by the first evaluator. Transmitting the evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the evaluation result to the network, the second terminal device receiving the evaluation result of the evaluation target by the first evaluator from the network, The second terminal device transmits an evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the joint evaluation request by the second evaluator to the network, and the first terminal device transmits the evaluation target by the second evaluator. Receiving a result of the evaluation from the network. 10. A transmitting means connected to a network together with another terminal device used by a first evaluator for evaluating an evaluation target and used by a second evaluator;
Receiving means, wherein the transmitting means transmits a joint evaluation request including the evaluation plan to be evaluated to the network for the other terminal device to receive, and the receiving means receives the joint evaluation request Receiving, via the network, a response to the joint evaluation request including the evaluation plan of the evaluation object transmitted from the other terminal device; and the transmitting unit transmits the joint evaluation request by the first evaluator. Transmitting the evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the above to the network so that the other terminal device receives the evaluation result, wherein the receiving unit transmits the joint evaluation request by the second evaluator transmitted from the other terminal device A terminal device that receives, via the network, an evaluation result of the evaluation target based on the network.