Appeal No. 2003-0277
Application No. 09/097,979
comparison step to determine the relevancy of the documents to the
query (Abstract). The examiner acknowledges (paper number 7, page
3) that the language-independent conceptual representations are not
logical forms. According to the examiner (paper number 7, page 3),
“Penteroudakis applies logical forms as an efficient way to
represent semantic analysis [see fig. 23; col. 2, lines 10-64].”
Based upon this teaching in Penteroudakis, the examiner concludes
that “[i]t would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
Data Processing art at the time of the invention to apply the
logical forms of Penteroudakis to the semantic and conceptual
analysis of Liddy because they would provide an efficient way to
organize the bridge between texts in different languages with
similar semantics.”
Appellants argue (brief, page 7) that the system in
Penteroudakis generates logical forms, but “it has nothing to do
with determining the similarity of input texts, by comparing
logical forms generated for each of the input texts.” Appellants
explain (brief, pages 7 and 8) that the language-independent
generalized representations produced by Liddy are “utterly
different then [sic, than] a process which uses logical forms,” and
that the applied references neither teach nor would have suggested
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007