This post was published on 18th September, 2013.<\/p>\n
In a recent case decided by the IPAB at a circuit sitting bench in Delhi on 5th<\/sup> July 2013, the Appellant (Electronic Navigation Research Institute, Tokyo) claimed that it had invented \u201cA Chaos Theoretical Exponent Value Calculation system\u201d and applied for patent under 3624\/DELNP\/2005. The Deputy Controller held that the functions of the this system was based on mathematical method for solving mathematical equations, and declined to accept the technical effect theory followed under European Patent law, as he was of the opinion that the Indian patent law does not allow patents for mathematical methods which have a technical effect, and therefore the invention was rejected as not patentable under S.3 (k) of the Patents Act 1970.<\/p>\n Brief Description of the Invention: <\/span> <\/b> The brain is actively functioning, the speech voice includes many crosstalk noises, namely many disturbances of signals derived from other part, and the relationship between the SiCECA neighborhood distance and the chaos theoretical exponent value calculated is on the curve of Fig.7, indicating \u201cthe relationship between the chaos theoretical exponent value and the SiCECA neighbourhood distance parameter p is 10% is given by the vertical line giving CEM10. Since the dynamics that generated actual speech voice does not have deal noise characteristics as shown in Fig. 7, the SiCECA neighbourhood distance parameter for obtaining a stable processing result must be set in correspondence with the degree of clarity of signals to be processed, and it is better to set to 20% for the purpose of analyzing voices in an ordinary office environment.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cFor an ordinary speech voice, since the duration of one single phoneme is from tens milliseconds to one hundred and tens milliseconds, one macroscopic chaos theoretical exponent value is one value calculated from hundreds to thousands microscopic chaos theoretical exponent values calculated during that time, or a plurality of values in the order of several values depending on the processing parameter settings for the calculation of a macroscopic chaos theoretical exponent value.<\/p>\n 1.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 A system for analyzing speech voice signal comprising: 2.The system for analysing a speech voice signal as claimed in claim 1, comprising:\u00a0 A means for receiving, as parameters, an embedding dimension D, an embedding delay time td, an expansion delay time te, a size of neighbourhood points set N, and the shortest period Tm and the longest period TM of said\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 speech voice signal; \u201cWhen the patentee explains that there is an inventive step which is a technical advance compared to the existing knowledge (state-of the-art) or that it has economic significance that would not give him the right to a patent as such. \u2018\u2019The inventive step\u2019 must be a feature which is not an excluded subject itself. Otherwise, the patentee by citing economic significance or technical advance in relation to any of the excluded subjects can insist upon grant of patent thereto.\u00a0\u00a0 Therefore, this technical advance comparison, should be done with the subject matter of invention and it should be found it is not related to any of the excluded subjects <\/i><\/b>…..\u00a0\u00a0 In Symbian vs. Comptroller of Patents (supra), the application in question was \u201cMapping dynamic link libraries in a computing device\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0 It was a method of accessing data in a dynamic link library in a computing device. The Act in question was the UK Act, 1977 and in S. 1(2) the Act excludes \u201ca scheme, rule or method\u2026 for doing business, or a program for a computer.\u201d In Symbian the Court asked the question. Whether the claimed technical contribution can be said to be the excluded subject matter itself or whether the claim is actually technical.\u00a0\u00a0 That is why the UK and European Acts uses the phrase \u201cas such\u201d to limit the area of non-patentability. Perhaps Symbian acknowledges the lack of clarity in the words \u201cas such\u201d, and also that \u201cThe danger is all the greater because the concept of a \u201ctechnical\u201d contribution is imprecise\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0 Symbian approved of Merril Lynch\u2019s application which held that if there is \u201csome technical advance on the prior art in the form of a new result (eg. A substantial increase in processing speed as in Vicom)\u201d it might be possible to obtain a patent. Symbian also recognised the difficulty in being too precise about deciding the feature. \u201cEach case must be determined by reference to its particular facts and features\u201d In Symbian, the Court dismissed the Controller General\u2019s appeal against the order setting aside his refusal to grant patent on the ground of non-patentability.<\/p>\n The Controller here was of the opinion that the invention which is the technical advance was itself nothing more than \u201ca mathematical method for solving mathematical claims which are further based on various algorithms.\u201d So the identifiable contribution was itself the excluded subject matter according to the impugned order. So the Controller held that the Indian Patent law does not allow patent for a mathematical method just because it provides a technical advance.\u00a0 His reasoning that merely because a mathematical method is a technical advance it cannot cross the 3(k) bar is right.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n The IPAB saw no reason to interfere with the impugned order.\u00a0 The appeal is dismissed.<\/p>\n Contributed by: Karthik Raju<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The post analyses an IPAB decision on the patentability of a chaos theoretical exponent value calculation system under Section 3(k) of the Indian Patents Act. It discusses the distinction between technical advance and excluded subject matter in the context of inventive step.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"iawp_total_views":28,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,14],"tags":[163,83,199,10349,9258,112,423,10348],"class_list":["post-3659","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-intellectual-property","category-patents","tag-indian-patent-law","tag-inventive-step","tag-ipab","tag-mathematical-methods","tag-patent-case-analysis","tag-patentability","tag-section-3k","tag-technical-advance"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3659","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3659"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3659\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":139645,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3659\/revisions\/139645"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3659"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3659"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3659"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nThe Invention relates to a system for analysing a time series signal by a method based on Chaos Theory and calculating a chaos theoretical exponent value (CTEV) thereof.\u00a0\u00a0 The Background states that correlative dimension, KS entropy and Lyapunov exponent are among the known chaos theoretical exponent values.\u00a0\u00a0 The systems used to calculate the exponents include systems in accordance with various procedures which are different algorithms ( Wolf\u2019s, Kantz\u2019 Sano\/Sawada and so on) Examples of prior arts have been mentioned. In particular, the Complete specifications states \u201cin any of the systems, the Lyapunov exponents constitute the neighbourhood points set generated from the neighbourhood condition to be set as the ratio with respect to its size on the strange attractor constructed in the embedding space, and are calculated as the mean value when points constituting the neighbourhood points set separate from each other.\u00a0 The conventional chaos theoretical exponent value calculation system uses one of such systems as mentioned above, and those systems have a presumption that it analyses a system of stable dynamic (the dynamics is the behaviour limited by its physical form and the like or the property that provides the behaviour) ( a system of stable dynamics means a system with physically invariable disposition or length, and the shape of strange attractor generated from the time series signal provided by the system becomes a similar for if such a system behaves chaotically).\u00a0\u00a0 Thus the temporarily changing dynamics, or the Lyapunov spectrum in Sano\/Sawada\u2019s algorithm, cannot be calculated as a significant value ( a system with its temporarily changing dynamics refers to a system such as the human vocal organs, for example in which the physical disposition or length changes.\u00a0 For instance, when phonemes\/a\/and \/or\/ are pronounced, the shapes of throat and oral cavity are different, and the strange attractor of the phoneme \/a\/ is enlarged or noises are added thereto).<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n
\nThe Summary of the Invention shows that what the inventors have invented is a system which makes it possible to calculate a CTEV that could not have been so far processed in a dynamics-changing system and to perform the process thereof at a high speed and on a real time basis, and to calculate a CTEV even from a time series signal which includes noises.<\/p>\n
\nIt can be seen from Fig. 7 of the specification that the sensitivity increases when the SICECA neighbourhood distance parameter is set to 10%, while the cerebral evaluation sensitive decreases when 30%. At 100% the sensitivity for detecting any street and the like affecting the speech contents cannot be obtained.<\/p>\n
\na reading means (xi) for reading a speech voice signal to be subjected to a\u00a0 chaotic analysis;
\na cutting means (xi) for cutting out said read speech voice signal for each processing unit for calculating a chaos theoretical exponent value of said read\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 speech voice signal,\u00a0 wherein said calculating means x(i) for calculating a chaos theoretical exponent value comprises:
\na first calculation means for calculating a chaos theoretical exponent value with respect to said sampling time as a microscopic chaos theoretical exponent value, in said cut-out speech voice signal at a processing unit; and a second calculation means for calculating the chaos theoretical exponent value of said speech voice signal with respect to a predetermined\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 time as a macroscopic chaos theoretical exponent value, based on said microscopic chaos theoretical exponent value.<\/p>\n
\nWherein said means for cutting out said speech voice signal for each processing unit cuts out a speech voice signal for each processing unit x=x(i)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 from said speech voice signal based on Equation 2 as herein described, where, when said read speech voice signal is s=s(t), to and t1 in Equation 2 are given as t0 and t1 satisfying a periodicity condition predetermined by Equation 3 as herein described.<\/p>\n