JP2003316925A - Information reliability evaluating device and information ranking system - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a ranking information collecting system and an information reliability evaluating device for analyzing evaluation on the information about commodities on the basis of the vote information given from an evaluation group formed of mixture of general users and experts to provide the right ranking information. <P>SOLUTION: When evaluating reliability of information by performing a vote about the information to be evaluated by users such as articles and service as a commodity and a specified opinion from a user device 1 to an information reliability evaluating device 2, the reliability of the user himself/herself who voted is reflected on the information reliability. With this structure, the reliability of a user who performs dishonest act and a user who performs a vague vote is lowered to restrict the generation of dishonest act, and the secure information reliability can be obtained. When performing a popularity vote about articles and service as a commodity or a vote about a specified opinion, more accurate ranking can be performed on these commodities and the opinion on the basis of the information reliability. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2004,JPO

Description

Detailed Description of the Invention

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a system for evaluating the reliability of various kinds of information, and in particular, collects and processes voting data on the reputation and evaluation of consumers to classify products and services. The present invention relates to an information reliability evaluation device and an information rating system provided as rating information.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art In recent years, a service that provides consumers with sales ranking information and popularity ranking information (hereinafter referred to as rating information) based on product sales records and popularity polls and provides purchasing guidelines. (Hereafter referred to as rating service)
However, many have appeared.

[0003] In some rating services, users are given e-mail or WWW (World Wide Web) for product questionnaires and votes, and the results are totaled to calculate rating information. There is.

However, such a system has the following problems (1) to (3).

(1) There is a possibility that a product provider or a person concerned with the product may repeatedly vote and illegally raise the evaluation value, and as a result, accurate rating information cannot be obtained.

(2) For general users, since there is no reward for voting and there is no incentive (motivation) for voting, a lot of information is not collected easily, and as a result accurate rating information is obtained. Absent.

(3) There are various users, such as those who have abundant product knowledge and who can vote accurately, and those who have no product knowledge at all. All of these various people's votes are reflected in the rating in the same way, resulting in inaccurate rating information.

As a practical method for reducing these problems, for example, with respect to the above-mentioned problem (1), the number of votes for a product is limited to a predetermined number such as one person, and the same person There is a way to prevent people from repeatedly voting.

To solve the problem (2) above, a method of increasing the incentive of voting by distributing a reward or a prize to all the people who voted or those selected by lottery. There is.

To solve the above problem (3), there is a method in which the voting by the general public is excluded and the evaluation is limited to a specialized company such as credit rating.

[0011]

[Problems to be Solved by the Invention] However, even if it is limited to a predetermined number of votes for each person, the evaluation value of a certain product may still be due to the hiring of a part-time job by a particular company or the acquisition. There is a possibility that the rating information will be manipulated due to fraudulent acts such as manipulation of.

In addition, in order to increase incentives for voters, in the method of distributing gifts such as book coupons, the characteristics such as annual income and gender of the voter are biased depending on the distributed gifts.

In addition, when an expert with abundant product knowledge is requested to vote, there remains a problem that the prize cost and the reward cost become enormous. In addition, the method of entrusting ratings to experts is good in fields where there is a large market for rating information, such as the financial status of companies and credit rating, but products such as books, foods, and clothing that are evaluated. It is difficult to identify and select experts to rate in each field, where the number of products is huge and new products are emerging one after another. Even if an expert can make a selection, there is still a possibility of giving an unfair evaluation because it is acquired by a company that provides products.

In view of the above problems, the object of the present invention is to analyze the evaluation of information such as products from the voting information given by the evaluation group in which general users and experts are mixed and to obtain correct rating information. It is to provide a rating information collection system and an information reliability evaluation device to be provided.

That is, a more detailed object of the present invention is a system for analyzing and calculating an evaluation of a product from voting information provided by an evaluation group in which general users and experts are mixed. The mechanism to evaluate the users themselves and the mechanism to weight the evaluation of votes according to the evaluation value of the users themselves increase the incentive to vote by experts with rich product knowledge, and fraudulent evaluation is performed. It is to provide a rating information collection system and an information reliability evaluation device that reduce the possibility and provide more accurate rating information.

As an example of an evaluation apparatus for an object or service including a function of evaluating the evaluator itself as described above, for example, an evaluation apparatus and an evaluation method disclosed in JP 2001-338100 A are known. However, this device excludes poor-quality evaluations or evaluators by conducting questionnaires to the evaluators themselves and users and analyzing the results of the questionnaires.

On the other hand, the present invention analyzes the ability of the evaluator by analyzing only the questionnaire or votes for the evaluation target, and does not require the questionnaire for the evaluator itself or the user. It is also possible to prevent an attack that illegally changes the evaluation value by intentionally giving a different answer to the questionnaire.

[0018]

In order to achieve the above-mentioned object, the present invention is an information reliability evaluation apparatus for evaluating the reliability of information, in which voting data voted by a user with respect to evaluation of information to be voted. Voting data input means for inputting, voting data storage means for accumulating the voting data, user reliability evaluation means for evaluating the reliability of the user who voted to obtain the user reliability, Information reliability evaluation means for evaluating the reliability of the information to be voted to obtain information reliability based on the user reliability and the voting data, and information reliability output means for outputting the information reliability. We propose an information reliability evaluation device having and.

According to the information reliability evaluation device of the present invention, the voting data voted by the user is inputted by the voting data input means, and the inputted voting data is stored in the voting data storage means. Further, the user reliability evaluation means evaluates the reliability of the user who has voted, and obtains the user reliability for each user. Further, the information reliability evaluation means evaluates the reliability of the information to be voted based on the user reliability and the voting data, obtains the information reliability, and the information reliability is It is output by the information reliability output means.

As a result, in the case of voting for the information to be evaluated by the user, such as a product as an article, a product as a service, a specific opinion, etc.,
Information reliability reflects the reliability of the user who voted. Therefore, for example, by reducing the user reliability of the user who engages in fraudulent acts or the user who makes ambiguous votes, fraud can be suppressed and reliable information reliability can be obtained.

Therefore, according to the present invention, when a popularity vote of a product as an article or a product as a service or a vote for a specific opinion is performed, the information reliability makes it possible to more accurately identify the product or opinion. Can be rated.

Further, according to the present invention, the user reliability evaluation means includes means for calculating the user reliability as a rate of the voting data, and the information reliability evaluation means includes the user reliability. The information reliability evaluation device is configured to have a unit for changing the value of the voting data in response to the fluctuation, and calculating the information reliability by using the floating market voting data in which the value changes.

By calculating the user reliability as the voting data rate in this way, the value of the voting data can be changed according to the reliability of the user who cast the vote. For example, if the user credibility of the user who engages in fraudulent acts or the user who makes an ambiguous vote decreases, the value of the voting data voted by these users decreases, and it becomes difficult to reflect it in the information reliability.

Further, in the present invention, the user reliability evaluation means associates the information reliability in the past certain period with the voting data voted by the user for the information having the information reliability, A means for calculating the user reliability as the rate based on the information reliability and the voting data and changing the rate over time is provided. This makes it possible to update the information reliability, which is difficult to reflect the votes of the user who engages in the dishonesty and the user who makes an ambiguous vote, over time.

The present invention also provides an information reliability evaluation device, wherein the user reliability evaluation means comprises means for calculating the user reliability as the maximum number of votes that the user can vote within a predetermined period. Configured.

By calculating the user reliability as the voting limit in this way, the voting limit can be changed according to the reliability of the user who has voted. For example, if the user reliability of users who conduct fraudulent acts or users who make ambiguous votes decreases, the voting limit of these users, that is, the number of votes that can be cast decreases, and it is difficult to reflect this in the information reliability. .

Further, according to the present invention, the user reliability evaluation means associates information reliability in a certain period in the past with voting data voted by the user for information having the information reliability, A means for calculating the user reliability as the voting limit number based on the information reliability and the voting data and changing the voting limit number over time is provided. This makes it possible to update the information reliability, which is difficult to reflect the votes of the user who engages in the dishonesty and the user who makes an ambiguous vote, over time.

Further, the present invention constitutes an information reliability evaluation device provided with a user reliability output means for outputting the user reliability.

Further, the present invention constitutes an information reliability evaluation device in which the voting data input means comprises means for inputting the voting data from a user device connected to a communication network via the communication network. did.

Further, according to the present invention, the information reliability output means includes means for displaying the information reliability on the user device via the communication network.

Furthermore, the present invention is provided with a user reliability output means for displaying the user reliability on the user device via the communication network.

Further, the present invention comprises the above information reliability evaluation device, a plurality of user devices, and a communication device connecting the information reliability evaluation device and the plurality of user devices, The voting data input means of the information reliability evaluation device has means for inputting voting data transmitted from the user device via the communication device, and the user device has the information via the communication device. We propose an information rating system having means for transmitting voting data to a reliability evaluation device.

According to the information rating system of the present invention, the voting data is transferred from the user device operated by the user to the information reliability evaluation device via the communication device including a communication network such as the Internet or a telephone line. It is input and the voting target information is rated based on the information reliability.

[0034]

BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION An embodiment of the present invention will now be described in more detail with reference to the drawings.

FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing an information rating system according to the first embodiment of the present invention, FIG. 2 is a functional block configuration diagram showing a user device according to the first embodiment of the present invention, and FIG.
FIG. 3 is a functional block configuration diagram showing an information reliability evaluation device in the first embodiment of the present invention. In FIG. 1, 1 is a user device, 2 is an information reliability evaluation device, and 3 is a communication network.

As shown in FIG. 2, the user device 1 comprises a well-known computer device or a mobile phone, and has a communication means 101.
And information processing means 102, data input means 103, display means 10
Equipped with 4. The communication unit 101 communicates with the information reliability evaluation device 2 via the communication network 3 such as the Internet, a mobile phone network, or a local area network based on an instruction from the information processing unit 102.

The information processing means communicates with the information reliability evaluation apparatus 2 via the communication means 101 based on the data input from the data input means 103, and makes a user registration request to the information reliability evaluation apparatus 2. And the voting data are transmitted, and the information received from the information reliability evaluation device 2 is displayed on the display means 104.

The information reliability evaluation device 2 comprises a well-known computer device in which a predetermined program is installed in advance, and as shown in FIG. 3, a communication means 201, a user registration means 202, a vote data input means 203, Voting data storage means 204, user reliability evaluation means 205, information reliability evaluation means
207, user reliability output means 209, information reliability output means 21
It has 0 and.

Further, the user reliability evaluation means 205 and the information reliability evaluation means 207 respectively have a user reliability management table 206 and an information reliability management table 208, respectively. Temporarily record the current evaluation value.

The communication means 201 communicates with the user device 1 via the communication network 3 such as the Internet, a telephone line, a mobile phone network, or a local area network, and the registration transmitted from the user device 1 is performed. Upon receiving the request, the data is transferred to the user registration means 202, and the voting data transmitted from the user device 1 is transferred to the voting data input means 203.

The user registration means 202 receives the registration request transmitted from the user device 1, and receives the user reliability management means 20.
By notifying 5, the user who has made the registration request is recorded in the user reliability management table 206. The user who votes is given a unique user ID in advance by performing user registration.

The voting data input means 203 is the user device 1
The voting data transmitted from is received and stored in the voting data storage means 204. In addition, the voting data input means 203,
Information to be voted is displayed on the user device 1 by a WWW (World Wide Web) form or electronic mail, and a screen for prompting the vote is displayed to collect voting data.

In this embodiment, voting data input means 203
The voting data received by the device is obtained by voting for a specific attribute of a product or service, for example, a specific attribute such as ease of use, price, design or speed. For example, when the above-mentioned attributes are not required, such as a popularity vote of a CD, a video, a book, or a vote for a specific opinion, it is regarded as one attribute of support. In this embodiment, these attributes are given from the outside. However, depending on the system, specific attributes discussed in electronic bulletin boards, etc., such as “commodity A is fragile” and “hospital B is good at orthopedic surgery” without specifying these attributes, It can also be implemented in a form that allows free voting. In the present embodiment, information to be voted for, such as attributes and specific opinions of such products viewed from a certain aspect, is hereinafter referred to as an "article." It is clear that there are various forms of articles as described above.

Further, in the present embodiment, “commodity” refers to all goods and services subject to commercial transactions, and includes not only automobiles, books, food, medicines, clothing, etc., but also restaurants and beauty salons. It also includes services such as rooms, schools, transportation and medical care. It also includes digital contents such as digitized music, images, and movies.

It should be noted that the vote data inputting means 203 may be used by a third party to illegally vote by the password set at the time of user registration, the terminal authentication function of the mobile phone, or the user authentication function such as an electronic signature. May be prevented.

As a concrete operation of the user when voting through the vote data input means 203, a vote for a certain article is instructed by a metaphor of investment using pseudo money like purchase of stock. To do. As another example, as shown in FIG. 4, the amount of votes cast once is set to a fixed number (for example, one vote), and the article display field 41 is displayed on the screen 4 for prompting votes.
It is also possible to provide radio buttons 42 and 43 corresponding to the above and to instruct voting by mouse clicking on the radio buttons 42 and 43. Also, at this time, a comment for the article may be allowed to be entered in the comment input field 44. Further, as another example, as a response item of the questionnaire, for example, several stages such as “strongly support”, “support”, “somehow support”, and “not support” are provided, respectively. Against 5
You may assign the number of votes like 3 votes, 1 vote, and 0 votes.

The voting data storage means 204 stores the voting data received from the voting data input means 203, for example, in the data structure shown in FIG. That is, voting data storage means 205
Stores the article ID, the voter ID, the voting time, the voting order, and the number of votes in association with each other.

The article ID (a (i)) is an identifier uniquely given to the article. Voter ID (u
(i)) is the user ID of the voter. The voting time is the date and time of voting. The vote order (t) is a vote order indicating the number of times the vote for the same article is made. The number of votes (v (i, j)) indicates how many votes the user has voted for the article by the vote.

In this embodiment, each user can vote for an article as many times as desired and can vote as many times as desired. However, as will be described later, it is possible to set an upper limit on the total amount that a user can vote, depending on the reliability of the user.

The user reliability evaluation means 205 uses the user reliability management table 206 having the data structure shown in FIG. 6 to determine the reliability (S), rate (U), and voting limit (M) of each user. , And the cumulative number of votes (T). In the user reliability management table 206, the reliability S (i) of the user and the rate U (i), the voting limit number M (i), and the cumulative voting are associated with the user ID (u (i)). The number T (i) is stored.

The reliability (S) is expressed by the product of the rate (U) and the voting limit (M) (S (i) = U (i) × M (i)),
When a user first registers as a user, a certain amount of reliability is given as an initial value. For example, S = 1000, U
= 10, M = 100, etc. are given. These values are changed by performing the calculation described later. However, in the present embodiment, for simplicity, the reliability (S), the rate (U), and the voting limit number (M) are not recalculated each time each vote is made, and the reliability (S), the rate (U), and the voting limit number (M) are not recalculated. A time frame for the period is provided, recalculation is performed at the timing when the time frame ends, and these values are updated.

The voting limit number (M) is an upper limit value that the user can vote within a fixed period, and is a fixed value in this embodiment. This fixed period may be set to the same period as the above time frame, or may be set to a different period different from the time frame.

The cumulative number of votes (T) is the sum of all votes cast by the user, including past time frames.

The information reliability evaluation means 207 uses the information reliability management table 208 having the data structure shown in FIG.
The registration time of each article or the time of the first vote, the reliability (A), and the cumulative number of votes (T) are managed. In the information reliability management table 208, the registration time of each article or the time at which the article is first voted in association with the article ID (a (j)), the article reliability (A (j)), and the cumulative number of votes ( T (j)) is stored.

The information reliability evaluation means 207 updates the reliability (A (j)) of the voted article at the timing when the user inputs voting data. Specifically, u (i) is the user who votes, {u (1) ... u (m)} is the set of all users, and the article is a
(j), where the set of all articles is {a (1) ... a (n)}, the reliability A (j) of the article a (j) is calculated by the following equation (1).

A (j) '= v (i, j) × U (i) + A (j) (1) However, A (j)': reliability of the article a (j) in the new time frame (evaluation Value) A (j): reliability (evaluation value) of article a (j) in the previous time frame v (i, j): number of votes U (i) of user u (i) for article a (j): It is the evaluation value (rate) per vote of the user u (i).

It should be noted that U (i) is assumed to be calculated in advance by the above-mentioned user reliability evaluation procedure, which is shown in FIG.
It is acquired from the user reliability management table shown in.

However, if the above is kept as it is, the value of the reliability A (j) monotonously increases with the passage of time. For this reason, if this value is used for rating services of goods and services, the older the better. To avoid this, when certain conditions are met (for example, 75 days have passed),
The value of the information, that is, the reliability A (j) of the article a (j) may be fixed once and the vote from the user may not be accepted.

On the other hand, the user reliability evaluation means 205 sets a time frame at regular intervals as already described, and performs the following calculation for each time frame to update the evaluation value of the user. The basic idea is to use the rate of users who voted in a highly correlated manner with the evaluation value A (j) (j = 1 ... n) of the article at that time that fluctuated by the information reliability evaluation means. Perform the raising process. In this embodiment, the calculation shown in the following equation (2) is performed.

U (i) '= (1-ε + k × Σ _{<j = 1} ... _n> ((v (i, j) / M (i)) × (A (j) / A _Total ))) × U (i) (2) where U (i) ': Evaluation value (rate) of user u (i) in the new time frame U (i): Evaluation of user u (i) in the previous time frame Value (rate) v (i, j): Number of votes of user u (i) for article a (j) M (i): Maximum number of votes for user u (i) A (j): Article a (j) ) Reliability (evaluation value) A _Total : Sum of reliability of all articles k: Impact rate ε of voting of the time frame ε: Attenuation rate of the time frame.

In the above equation 2, v (i, j) / M (i) represents the weight of the vote of the person. A (j) / A _Total is article a
It represents the weight in the overall evaluation of (j). Thus, the higher the product of the two, the more votes were cast for the higher rated articles. However, this may be good when the voting results of other people are hidden in this time frame, that is, when the voting results have not been published, but as in the present embodiment, the articles a (j) are successively output each time they are voted. If the evaluation (reliability A (j)) is published, it is more advantageous to vote after seeing other people's voting trends. With this, there is a problem that the evaluation ability of the user cannot be accurately determined.

Therefore, in order to increase the weight of the person who voted first, the equation (2) is multiplied by the evaluation function F (t) at the voting time t. Although t may be a real time, in this embodiment, t
It may be a relative time for a certain article, as in the voting order shown in. An example of this evaluation function F (t) is 1 /
A function whose value becomes smaller as the order increases like t is used.

U (i) '= (1-ε + k × Σ _{<j = 1} ... _n> ((v (i, j) × F (t) / M (i))) × (A (j) / A _Total ))) × U (i) (3) In addition, in the above formula (3), the rate U (i) will be attenuated by the effect of the attenuation rate ε if no voting is performed, and the final It will be 0. Therefore, it may be applied only when a certain vote is made in the time frame. Further, the attenuation rate ε can be changed according to the total amount voted within the time frame.

If there are many false votes, the initial value given at the time of user registration (U (i) = 10 in the above example).
It may be less than 0). In such cases,
A lower limit may be set so as not to fall below the initial value because fraud such as re-registering with a different name is performed or the incentive for voting decreases.

By the above steps, U (i) (i = 1 ... m)
5 is updated, based on this new evaluation value, all articles a (j) (j = 1 ... The voting data shown in is acquired, and the reliability A (j) (j = 1 ... N) of the article is recalculated by the following expression (4).

A (j) = Σ _{<i = 1} ... _m> (v (i, j) × U (i)) (4) Above, the user reliability evaluation means 205 and the information reliability evaluation means 2
To summarize the processing flow of 07, these are performed at two occasions, one when the user votes and the other when the time frame ends.

The processing flow at the time of voting by the user is shown in FIG.
The steps are as follows.

1. User u by voting data input means
The vote v (i, j) is accepted from (i) (SA1).

2. A record of the user is acquired from the user reliability management table (SA2).

3. The total number of votes in the past fixed period is counted, and it is checked whether the value exceeds the maximum number of votes M (i) (SA3).

4. The article reliability A (j) is calculated from the equation (1) (SA4).

5. The value of A (j) in the information credibility management table is updated (SA5).

6. The user is notified that the vote was successful (SA6).

The processing flow at the end of the time frame is performed by the following steps as shown in FIG.

1. The time frame end event is accepted (SB1).

2. Current total of A (j) (j = 1 ... n) A _Total
Is calculated (SB2).

3. Using current A (j) (j = 1 ... m), for all users u (i) (i = 1 ... m)
The process of (c) is performed (SB3).

(A) Voting data concerning the user is acquired from the voting data storage means.

(A) The user reliability U (i) is calculated by the equation (3).

(C) The result is updated in U (i) of the user reliability management table.

4. U (i) (i = 1 ...
m) is used to perform the following processes (a) to (c) for all articles a (j) (j = 1 ... n) (SB4).

(A) Voting data for the article is acquired from the voting data storage means.

(A) A (j) is calculated and updated by the equation (4).

(C) The article record in the information reliability management table is updated.

The information reliability output means 210 is used by the user device 1.
When the information for designating the article a (j) is given from, the reliability information of the designated article is displayed on the user device 1 via the communication means 201 as shown in FIG. 10, for example. At this time, the information reliability output means 210 determines the reliability A of the specified article a (j) from the information reliability management table 208 shown in FIG.
The value of (j) is acquired and the information is displayed on the user device 1. The rank and average value in the entire article may be displayed. Further, in the display example of FIG. 10, “RuMo” is an index indicating the reliability, and for example, a value obtained by multiplying the reliability A (j) by a certain constant is used.

When the user reliability output means 209 is provided with information designating the user ID (u (i)) from the user device 1, the reliability of the designated user is shown in FIG. 11, for example. The degree information is displayed on the user device 1 via the communication means 201. At this time, the user reliability output means 209 acquires the value of the reliability S (i) of the user from the user reliability management table 206 shown in FIG. 6, and based on this, the number of votes, the voting value, Each value of the credit evaluation value and the credit rank is calculated and the information is displayed on the user device 1. Note that the rank or average value among all users may be displayed as the credit rating. Further, in the display example of FIG. 11, “RuMo” is an index indicating the reliability, and for example, the reliability S of the user is
A value obtained by multiplying (i) by a certain constant is used.

(Second Embodiment) The present invention is not limited to the first embodiment described above, and the second embodiment described below is also possible. In the first embodiment described above, by changing the rate U (i) of the user, the reliability S (i) of the user corresponding to the user ID (u (i)) is changed. In the second embodiment, the rate U (i) is fixed and the voting limit number M (i) is changed. In this case, the following equation (5) may be used instead of the above equation (2).

M (i) '= (U (i)' / U (i)) × M (i) = (1-ε) × M (i) + k × Σ _{<j = 1} ... _n> (( v (i, j) x F (t)) x (A (j) / A _Total )) (5) where U (i) ': evaluation value (rate of user u (i) in the new time frame ) U (i): Evaluation value (rate) of user u (i) in the previous time frame v (i, j): Number of votes M (i) 'of user u (i) for article a (j): User u (i) voting time limit in new time frame M (i): User u (i) voting time limit in previous time frame F (t): Evaluation function A (j): Article a (j) Reliability (evaluation value) A _Total : Sum of reliability of all articles k: Impact rate of voting of the time frame ε: Attenuation rate of the time frame.

In the second embodiment, the user reliability output means 209 changes the voting limit number M (i), so that the reliability of the user is not expressed as a rate but, for example, "current ownership". Display as "dot".

The above first and second embodiments are specific examples of the present invention, and the present invention is not limited to the above embodiments. For example, as another embodiment, the user can freely specify the voting limit number M (i), and the rate U (i) can be calculated and set accordingly.

In the above embodiment, the above (2),
As shown in equations (3) and (5), the number of votes v (i, j) (j = 1 ... n) for the article a (j) and the reliability A (j) (j = 1
... n) is reflected in the reliability S (i) (= U (i) × M (i)) of the user by calculating a simple product. There are many other embodiments, such as performing a correlation analysis of these two vectors, and the index obtained by these methods may be fed back to the reliability S (i) of the user.

In the above embodiment, each user has one index of reliability S (i), but as another embodiment,
It is also possible that a specific user has a plurality of indices of reliability S (i). For example, an index of reliability S (i) with respect to a person's personality as an automobile expert and an index of reliability S (i) such as an index of reliability S (i) with respect to the personality of a person who enjoys fishing are used. It is also possible to have a user and freely vote for the user for each index of reliability S (i). At this time, the reliability S (i) may be displayed as local currency (currency having a different value per unit for each index) that is different for each index, to make it easier to understand the usage properly.

Also, a fixed rate U (i) is given to each community such as automobiles and fishing, and the voting limit M (i) is differentiated according to the reliability S (i) to evaluate the user. When doing so, depending on the degree of association between communities, the reliability S
(i) may be exchangeable. For example, if one person has a personality in the field of automobiles and a personality in the field of fishing, and each has two voting limits of M (car) and M (fishing), set the exchange rate according to the degree of relevance of the community. , This exchange rate may allow the voting limit to move.

Further, it goes without saying that a system in which one or more user apparatuses 1 and the information reliability evaluation apparatus 2 are connected to each other may be configured without a communication network.

[0095]

As described above, according to the information reliability evaluation device and the information rating system of the present invention, the product provider or its related persons repeatedly vote for the specific product information to be evaluated. However, even if you try to raise the evaluation value of those products illegally, if you do not get the approval from other users, the reliability of the voter itself will decline, so it is possible to suppress such fraud. It is possible to correctly evaluate the reliability of information. Furthermore, as a result of this,
More accurate product rating information can be obtained.

Further, if a correct vote is made so that another user agrees with the other user before the other user, the evaluation value of the reliability of the user itself is increased, and more evaluation power can be obtained. Therefore, the incentive (motivation) for voting is increased, and it becomes easier to collect more information. As a result, more accurate product rating information can be obtained.

Further, there are various users among those who have abundant product knowledge and can make accurate votes to those who have no product knowledge at all, and the weight of each vote of these various people is Since it is reflected in the rating of the product, it is possible to obtain more accurate rating information of the product, which is a very excellent effect.

[Brief description of drawings]

FIG. 1 is a configuration diagram showing an information rating system according to a first embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a functional block configuration diagram showing a user device according to the first embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 3 is a functional block configuration diagram showing an information reliability evaluation device in the first embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of a voting screen according to the present invention.

FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a voting data storage structure according to the first embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 6 is a diagram showing a user reliability management table according to the first embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 7 is a diagram showing an information reliability management table according to the first embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 8 is a flowchart showing a procedure at the time of voting in the first embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 9 is a flowchart showing a procedure at the end of the time frame in the first embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of an information reliability display screen according to the first embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of a user reliability display screen according to the first embodiment of the present invention.

[Explanation of symbols]

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 ... User device, 2 ... Information reliability evaluation device, 3 ... Communication network, 101 ... Communication means, 102 ... Information processing means, 103 ... Data input means, 104 ... Display means, 201 ... Communication means, 202 ... User Registration means, 203 ... Voting data input means, 204 ... Voting data storage means, 205 ... User reliability evaluation means, 206 ... User reliability management table, 207 ... Information reliability evaluation means, 208 ...
Information reliability management table, 209 ... User reliability output means, information reliability output means 210.

   ─────────────────────────────────────────────────── ─── Continued front page    (72) Inventor Masayuki Terada             2-3-1, Otemachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo             Inside Telegraph and Telephone Corporation

Claims (10)

[Claims] 1. An information reliability evaluation device for evaluating the reliability of information, comprising: voting data input means for inputting voting data voted by a user for evaluation of information to be voted; and storing the voting data. Voting data storage means, user reliability evaluation means for evaluating the reliability of the user who has voted to obtain the user reliability, and the voting based on the user reliability and the voting data. An information reliability evaluation device, comprising: an information reliability evaluation unit that evaluates the reliability of target information to obtain an information reliability; and an information reliability output unit that outputs the information reliability. 2. The user reliability evaluation means includes means for calculating the user reliability as a rate of the voting data, and the information reliability evaluation means uses the user reliability as a rate. 2. The information reliability evaluation device according to claim 1, further comprising means for changing the value of the voting data, and calculating the information reliability by using the floating market voting data in which the value changes. 3. The user reliability evaluation means associates the information reliability in a certain past period with the voting data voted by the user for information having the information reliability, and the information reliability is evaluated. 3. The information reliability evaluation device according to claim 2, further comprising means for calculating the user reliability as the rate on the basis of the voting data and changing the rate over time. . 4. The user reliability evaluation means comprises means for calculating the user reliability as a voting limit number that a user can vote within a predetermined period.
The information reliability evaluation device described in. 5. The user reliability evaluation means associates the information reliability in a certain past period with the voting data voted by the user for information having the information reliability, and the information reliability is correlated. 5. The information according to claim 4, further comprising means for calculating the user reliability as the voting limit number based on the voting data and changing the voting limit number over time. Reliability evaluation device. 6. The information reliability evaluation device according to claim 1, further comprising a user reliability output means for outputting the user reliability. 7. The voting data input means comprises means for inputting the voting data from a user device connected to a communication network via the communication network. Information reliability evaluation device. 8. The information reliability evaluation apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the information reliability output means includes means for displaying the information reliability on the user device via the communication network. . 9. The information reliability evaluation device according to claim 7, further comprising user reliability output means for displaying the user reliability on the user device via the communication network. 10. The information reliability evaluation device according to claim 1, a plurality of user devices, and the information reliability evaluation device and the plurality of user devices are connected. A communication device, the voting data input means of the information reliability evaluation device has a means for inputting voting data transmitted from the user device via the communication device, the user device, An information rating system comprising means for transmitting voting data to the information reliability evaluation device via the communication device.