US20110022433A1 - Methods and apparatus for assessing locate request tickets - Google Patents

Methods and apparatus for assessing locate request tickets Download PDF

Info

Publication number
US20110022433A1
US20110022433A1 US12/823,028 US82302810A US2011022433A1 US 20110022433 A1 US20110022433 A1 US 20110022433A1 US 82302810 A US82302810 A US 82302810A US 2011022433 A1 US2011022433 A1 US 2011022433A1
Authority
US
United States
Prior art keywords
ticket
locate
information
assessment
marking operation
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Abandoned
Application number
US12/823,028
Inventor
Steven Nielsen
Curtis Chambers
Jeffrey Farr
Greg Block
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
CertusView Techonologies LLC
Original Assignee
CertusView Techonologies LLC
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by CertusView Techonologies LLC filed Critical CertusView Techonologies LLC
Priority to US12/823,028 priority Critical patent/US20110022433A1/en
Priority to US12/840,481 priority patent/US20110040590A1/en
Priority to US12/840,461 priority patent/US20110040589A1/en
Priority to US12/840,476 priority patent/US20110046994A1/en
Priority to US12/840,467 priority patent/US20110046993A1/en
Publication of US20110022433A1 publication Critical patent/US20110022433A1/en
Assigned to CERTUSVIEW TECHNOLOGIES, LLC reassignment CERTUSVIEW TECHNOLOGIES, LLC ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: NIELSEN, STEVEN, CHAMBERS, CURTIS, BLOCK, GREG, FARR, JEFFREY
Priority to US14/259,843 priority patent/US9646275B2/en
Priority to US15/589,432 priority patent/US20170243144A1/en
Abandoned legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • GPHYSICS
    • G06COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06QINFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
    • G06Q10/063Operations research, analysis or management
    • G06Q10/0635Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
    • GPHYSICS
    • G06COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06QINFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
    • GPHYSICS
    • G06COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06QINFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
    • G06Q10/063Operations research, analysis or management
    • GPHYSICS
    • G06COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06QINFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
    • G06Q10/063Operations research, analysis or management
    • G06Q10/0631Resource planning, allocation, distributing or scheduling for enterprises or organisations
    • G06Q10/06311Scheduling, planning or task assignment for a person or group
    • G06Q10/063118Staff planning in a project environment
    • GPHYSICS
    • G06COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06QINFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
    • G06Q10/063Operations research, analysis or management
    • G06Q10/0633Workflow analysis

Definitions

  • Field service operations is an example of an area that is experiencing growth in information technology.
  • Field service operations may be any operation in which companies dispatch technicians and/or other staff to remote locations in order to perform certain activities, for example, installations, services and/or repairs.
  • Field service operations may exist in industries, such as, but not limited to, network installations, utility installations, security systems, construction, medical equipment, heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) and the like.
  • HVAC heating, ventilating and air conditioning
  • locate and marking operation An example of a field service operation in the construction industry is a so-called “locate and marking operation,” also commonly referred to more simply as a “locate operation” (or sometimes merely as “a locate”).
  • a locate technician visits a work site in which there is a plan to disturb the ground (e.g., excavate, dig one or more holes and/or trenches, bore, etc.) so as to determine a presence or an absence of one or more underground facilities (such as various types of utility cables and pipes) in a dig area to be excavated or disturbed at the work site.
  • an excavator who plans to disturb ground at a work site is required by law to notify any potentially affected underground facility owners prior to undertaking an excavation activity.
  • Advanced notice of excavation activities may be provided by an excavator (or another party) by contacting a “one-call center.”
  • One-call centers typically are operated by a consortium of underground facility owners for the purposes of receiving excavation notices and in turn notifying facility owners and/or their agents of a plan to excavate.
  • excavators typically provide to the one-call center various information relating to the planned activity, including a description of the dig area to be excavated or otherwise disturbed.
  • FIG. 1 illustrates an example in which a locate operation is initiated as a result of an excavator 110 providing an excavation notice to a one-call center 120 .
  • An excavation notice also is commonly referred to as a “locate request,” and may be provided by the excavator to the one-call center via an electronic mail message, information entry via a website maintained by the one-call center, or a telephone conversation between the excavator and a human operator at the one-call center.
  • the locate request may include an address or some other location-related information describing the geographic location of a work site at which the excavation is to be performed, as well as a description of the dig area (e.g., a text description), such as its location relative to certain landmarks and/or its approximate dimensions, within which there is a plan to disturb the ground.
  • a description of the dig area e.g., a text description
  • the one-call center identifies certain underground facilities that may be affected by the proposed excavation at the work site.
  • one-call centers generally have access to various existing maps of underground facilities in their jurisdiction, referred to as “facilities maps.”
  • Facilities maps typically are provided by underground facilities owners within the jurisdiction and show, for respective different utility types, where underground facilities purportedly may be found relative to some geographic reference frame or coordinate system (e.g., a grid, a street or property map, GPS latitude and longitude coordinates, etc.).
  • a one-call center identifies a significant buffer zone around an identified work site (i.e., based on the address or location information provided by an excavator in the locate request), so as to make an over-inclusive identification of underground utilities that are implicated by the proposed excavation (e.g., to err on the side of caution).
  • polygon This practice of creating a buffer zone around an identified work site with reference to one or more facilities maps commonly is referred to as generating a “polygon” or “polygon map.” Based on these generally over-inclusive polygons (and in some instances significantly over-inclusive polygons), the one-call center identifies all of the underground facilities that may fall within the polygon so as to notify the corresponding facility owners and/or their agents of the proposed excavation.
  • polygons or polygon maps utilized by one-call centers for this purpose typically embrace a geographic area that includes but goes well beyond the actual work site, and in many cases the geographic area enclosed by a given polygon is significantly larger than the actual dig area in which excavation or other similar activities are planned.
  • the one-call center Once facilities implicated by the locate request are identified by a one-call center (e.g., via the polygon process), the one-call center generates a “locate request ticket” (also known as a “locate ticket,” or simply a “ticket”).
  • the locate request ticket typically identifies the work site of the proposed excavation and a description of the dig area, typically lists on the ticket all of the underground facilities implicated by the proposed excavation (e.g., by providing a member code for the facility owner of an underground facility that falls within a given polygon), and may also include various other information relevant to the proposed excavation (e.g., the name of the excavation company, a name of a property owner or party contracting the excavation company to perform the excavation, etc.).
  • the one-call center sends the ticket to one or more underground facility owners 140 and/or one or more locate service providers 130 (who may be acting as contracted agents of the facility owners) so that they can conduct a locate and marking operation to verify a presence or absence of the underground facilities in the dig area.
  • a given underground facility owner 140 may operate its own fleet of locate technicians (e.g., locate technician 145 ), in which case the one-call center 120 may send the ticket to the underground facility owner 140 .
  • a given facility owner may contract with a locate service provider to receive locate request tickets and perform a locate and marking operation in response to received tickets on their behalf.
  • a locate service provider or a facility owner may dispatch a locate technician to the work site of planned excavation to determine a presence or absence of one or more underground facilities in the dig area to be excavated or otherwise disturbed.
  • a first step for the locate technician includes utilizing an underground facility “locate device,” which is an instrument for detecting facilities that are concealed in some manner, such as cables and pipes that are located underground, to verify the presence or absence of underground facilities indicated in the locate request ticket as potentially present in the dig area (e.g., via the facility owner member codes listed in the ticket).
  • An underground facility locate device is used to detect electromagnetic fields that are generated by a “test” signal provided along a length of a target facility to be identified.
  • Locate devices typically include both a signal transmitter to provide the test signal (e.g., which is applied by the locate technician to a tracer wire disposed along a length of a facility), and a signal receiver which is generally a hand-held apparatus carried by the locate technician as the technician walks around the dig area to search for underground facilities.
  • the signal receiver indicates a presence of a facility when it detects electromagnetic fields arising from the test signal.
  • the absence of a signal detected by the receiver of the locate device generally indicates the absence of the target facility.
  • the locate technician then generally marks the presence (and in some cases the absence) of a given underground facility in the dig area based on the various signals detected (or not detected) using the locate device.
  • the locate technician conventionally utilizes a “marking device” to dispense a marking material on, for example, the surface of the ground along a detected underground facility.
  • Marking material may be any material, substance, compound, and/or element, used or which may be used separately or in combination to mark, signify, and/or indicate. Examples of marking materials may include, but are not limited to, paint, chalk, dye, and/or iron.
  • Marking devices such as paint marking wands and/or paint marking wheels, provide a convenient method of dispensing marking materials onto surfaces, such as onto the surface of the ground.
  • arrows, flags, darts, or other types of physical marks may be used to mark the presence or absence of an underground facility in a dig area, in addition to or as an alternative to a material applied to the ground (such as paint, chalk, dye) along the path of a detected utility.
  • the marks resulting from any of a wide variety of materials and/or objects used to indicate a presence or absence of underground facilities generally are referred to as “locate marks.” Often, different color materials and/or physical objects may be used for locate marks, wherein different colors correspond to different utility types.
  • the technician also may provide one or more marks to indicate that no facility was found in the dig area (sometimes referred to as a “clear”).
  • locate and marking operation As mentioned above, the foregoing activity of identifying and marking a presence or absence of one or more underground facilities generally is referred to for completeness as a “locate and marking operation.” However, in light of common parlance adopted in the construction industry, and/or for the sake of brevity, one or both of the respective locate and marking functions may be referred to in some instances simply as a “locate operation” or a “locate” (i.e., without making any specific reference to the marking function). Accordingly, it should be appreciated that any reference in the relevant arts to the task of a locate technician simply as a “locate operation” or a “locate” does not necessarily exclude the marking portion of the overall process.
  • the locate service provider 130 may handle a high volume of locate requests on a daily basis.
  • the locate service provider 130 may have locate offices (or profit centers) in different geographical regions and each locate office may have a hundred or more locate technicians in the field each day. Depending on its size, each locate office may respond to hundreds or even thousands of locate requests on a given day.
  • the locate service provider 130 may use one or more ticket processing systems to process incoming locate request tickets from the one-call center 120 .
  • the ticket processing system may extract identifying information such as a ticket number from an incoming ticket and create a database entry for that ticket number.
  • the database entry may be used throughout the life cycle of the ticket to keep track of pertinent information, such as the status of the ticket (e.g., whether the ticket has been dispatched to a locate technician and, if so, which locate technician).
  • the ticket processing system may populate the database entry with additional information retrieved from the ticket. For example, if the ticket includes an address for a corresponding work site, the ticket processing system may store the address in an appropriate field in the database entry.
  • a resulting locate request ticket may identify the location and boundaries of a proposed work site/dig area in a number of different ways, using street addresses, map grids, and/or latitudinal and longitudinal (lat/long) coordinates.
  • conventional ticket processing systems used by locate service providers may have limited assessment capabilities. That is, conventional ticket processing systems may offer limited capabilities in deriving information that is not explicitly included in the incoming tickets. For example, little or no assessment is done to estimate various aspects (or attributes) of a requested locate operation, such as location, scope, time, complexity, risk, value, resource requirements and the like. The lack of information regarding these and other aspects of locate request tickets may lead to various inefficiencies, e.g., in the scheduling of the locate operations and/or the allocation of resources to the locate operations. There may also be an increased risk of damaging underground facilities. As a result, profitability of the locate service providers may be adversely affected.
  • the inventors have recognized a need for improved information management, dissemination, and utilization in the locate industry and other field service industries in which mobile technicians are dispatched in response to incoming service requests.
  • one embodiment of the present invention is directed to an apparatus for assessing one or more attributes of a locate operation requested in a locate request ticket.
  • the apparatus comprises at least one processor programmed to extract ticket information from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing the locate request ticket; apply one or more business rules to at least some of the ticket information to obtain a ticket assessment outcome for each of the one or more attributes; and dispatch at least one locate technician to perform the locate operation, based at least in part on the ticket assessment outcome for each of the one or more attributes.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing a complexity of one or more locate operations requested in a locate request ticket.
  • the apparatus comprises at least one processor programmed to extract one or more information elements from the locate request ticket, and associate one or more complexity types to the locate request ticket based at least in part on the one or more information elements.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing a level of risk associated with one or more locate operations requested in a locate request ticket.
  • the apparatus comprises at least one processor programmed to extract one or more information elements from the locate request ticket, and determine a risk value associated with the locate request ticket based at least in part on the one or more information elements.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing at least one attribute of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the apparatus comprising: at least one communication interface; at least one memory to store processor-executable instructions; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable instructions, the at least one processor: A) obtains ticket information from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing the locate request ticket; B) applies one or more business rules to at least some of the ticket information to generate at least one ticket assessment outcome for the at least one attribute; and C) controls the at least one communication interface to transmit, and/or controls the at least one memory to store, the at least one ticket assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/
  • Another embodiment is directed to a method, performed in a system comprising at least one processor, at least one memory, and at least one communication interface, for assessing at least one attribute of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) obtaining ticket information from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing, via the at least one processor, the locate request ticket; B) applying one or more business rules to at least some of the ticket information, via the at least one processor, to generate at least one ticket assessment outcome for the at least one attribute; and C) transmitting via the at least one communication interface, and/or storing in the at least one memory, the at least one ticket assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at
  • Another embodiment is directed to at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with at least one program including processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform a method for assessing at least one attribute of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) obtaining ticket information from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing the locate request ticket; B) applying one or more business rules to at least some of the ticket information to generate at least one ticket assessment outcome for the at least one attribute; and C) transmitting and/or storing the at least one ticket assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one ticket assessment outcome.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing complexity of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the apparatus comprising: at least one communication interface; at least one memory to store processor-executable instructions; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable instructions, the at least one processor: A) analyzes ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigns at least one complexity designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) controls the at least one communication interface to transmit, and/or controls the at least one memory to store, the at least one complexity designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in
  • Another embodiment is directed to a method, performed in a system comprising at least one processor, at least one memory, and at least one communication interface, for assessing complexity of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing, via the at least one processor, ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigning, via the at least one processor, at least one complexity designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) transmitting via the at least one communication interface, and/or storing in the at least one memory, the at least one complexity designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one complexity designation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with at least one program including processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform a method for assessing complexity of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigning at least one complexity designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) transmitting and/or storing the at least one complexity designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one complexity designation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing risk associated with a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the apparatus comprising: at least one communication interface; at least one memory to store processor-executable instructions; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable instructions, the at least one processor: A) analyzes ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigns at least one risk designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) controls the at least one communication interface to transmit, and/or controls the at least one memory to store, the at least one risk designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least
  • Another embodiment is directed to a method, performed in a system comprising at least one processor, at least one memory, and at least one communication interface, for assessing risk associated with a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigning at least one risk designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) transmitting and/or storing the at least one risk designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one risk designation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with at least one program including processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform a method for assessing risk associated with a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigning at least one risk designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) transmitting and/or storing the at least one risk designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one risk designation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the apparatus comprising: at least one communication interface; at least one memory to store processor-executable instructions; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable instructions, the at least one processor: A) in a first stage of assessment, produces a first assessment outcome at least in part by analyzing at least some ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) in a second stage of assessment, produces a second assessment outcome based at least in part on the first assessment outcome; and C) controls the at least one communication interface to transmit, and/or controls the at least one memory to store, at least one of the first assessment outcome and the second assessment outcome so as
  • Another embodiment is directed to a method, performed in a system comprising at least one processor, at least one communication interface, and at least one memory, for assessing a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) in a first stage of assessment performed by the at least one processor, producing a first assessment outcome at least in part by analyzing at least some ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) in a second stage of assessment performed by the at least one processor, producing a second assessment outcome based at least in part on the first assessment outcome; and C) transmitting via the at least one communication interface, and/or storing in the at least one memory, at least one of the first assessment outcome and the second assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/
  • Another embodiment is directed to at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with at least one program including processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform a method for assessing a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) in a first stage of assessment, producing a first assessment outcome at least in part by analyzing at least some ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; and B) in a second stage of assessment, producing a second assessment outcome based at least in part on the first assessment outcome.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for managing information assets used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets, each locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the apparatus comprising: at least one communication interface; at least one memory to store processor-executable instructions; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable instructions, the at least one processor: A) analyzes a record of a completed locate and/or marking operation; and B) updates, based at least in part on A), at least one information asset used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets.
  • the at least one information asset comprises at least one business rule to be applied to ticket information to obtain one or more ticket assessment outcomes.
  • Another embodiment is directed to a method, performed in a system comprising at least one processor and at least one memory, for managing information assets used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets, each locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing, via the at least one processor, a record, stored in the at least one memory, of a completed locate and/or marking operation; and B) updating, based at least in part on A), at least one information asset stored in the at least one memory and used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets.
  • the at least one information asset comprises at least one business rule to be applied to ticket information to obtain one or more ticket assessment outcomes.
  • Another embodiment is directed to at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with at least one program including processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform a method for managing information assets used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets, each locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing a record of a completed locate and/or marking operation; and B) updating, based at least in part on A), at least one information asset used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets.
  • the at least one information asset comprises at least one business rule to be applied to ticket information to obtain one or more ticket assessment outcomes.
  • the term “dig area” refers to a specified area of a work site within in which there is a plan to disturb the ground (e.g., excavate, dig holes and/or trenches, bore, etc.), and beyond which there is no plan to excavate in the immediate surroundings.
  • the metes and bounds of a dig area are intended to provide specificity as to where some disturbance to the ground is planned at a given work site. It should be appreciated that a given work site may include multiple dig areas.
  • the term “facility” refers to one or more lines, cables, fibers, conduits, transmitters, receivers, or other physical objects or structures capable of or used for carrying, transmitting, receiving, storing, and providing utilities, energy, data, substances, and/or services, and/or any combination thereof.
  • underground facility means any facility beneath the surface of the ground. Examples of facilities include, but are not limited to, oil, gas, water, sewer, power, telephone, data transmission, cable television (TV), and/or internet services.
  • locate device refers to any apparatus and/or device for detecting and/or inferring the presence or absence of any facility, including without limitation, any underground facility.
  • marking device refers to any apparatus, mechanism, or other device that employs a marking dispenser for causing a marking material and/or marking object to be dispensed, or any apparatus, mechanism, or other device for electronically indicating (e.g., logging in memory) a location, such as a location of an underground facility.
  • marking dispenser refers to any apparatus, mechanism, or other device for dispensing and/or otherwise using, separately or in combination, a marking material and/or a marking object.
  • An example of a marking dispenser may include, but is not limited to, a pressurized can of marking paint.
  • marking material means any material, substance, compound, and/or element, used or which may be used separately or in combination to mark, signify, and/or indicate.
  • marking materials may include, but are not limited to, paint, chalk, dye, and/or iron.
  • marking object means any object and/or objects used or which may be used separately or in combination to mark, signify, and/or indicate.
  • marking objects may include, but are not limited to, a flag, a dart, and arrow, and/or an RFID marking ball. It is contemplated that marking material may include marking objects. It is further contemplated that the terms “marking materials” or “marking objects” may be used interchangeably in accordance with the present disclosure.
  • locate mark means any mark, sign, and/or object employed to indicate the presence or absence of any underground facility. Examples of locate marks may include, but are not limited to, marks made with marking materials, marking objects, global positioning or other information, and/or any other means. Locate marks may be represented in any form including, without limitation, physical, visible, electronic, and/or any combination thereof.
  • locate and marking operation are used interchangeably and refer to any activity to detect, infer, and/or mark the presence or absence of an underground facility.
  • marking operation is used to more specifically refer to that portion of a locate operation in which a marking material and/or one or more marking objects is/are employed to mark a presence or an absence of one or more underground facilities.
  • locate technician refers to an individual performing a locate operation. A locate operation often is specified in connection with a dig area, at least a portion of which may be excavated or otherwise disturbed during excavation activities.
  • locate request and “excavation notice” are used interchangeably to refer to any communication to request a locate and marking operation.
  • locate request ticket (or simply “ticket”) refers to any communication or instruction to perform a locate operation.
  • a ticket might specify, for example, the address or description of a dig area to be marked, the day and/or time that the dig area is to be marked, and/or whether the user is to mark the excavation area for certain gas, water, sewer, power, telephone, cable television, and/or some other underground facility.
  • historical ticket refers to past tickets that have been completed.
  • FIG. 1 shows an example in which a locate operation is initiated as a result of an excavator serving an excavation notice to a one-call center.
  • FIG. 2 shows an example of a ticket management system, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure, comprising a number of software components for performing various functions, such as parsing incoming locate request tickets, assessing parsed tickets according to appropriate business rules, and scheduling and dispatching locate technicians to perform locate operations.
  • FIG. 2A shows an illustrative implementation of a ticket assessment engine comprising a network of ticket assessment modules arranged in multiple stages.
  • FIG. 3 shows an example of a locate request ticket that may be received by a ticket management system, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 4 shows an example of a virtual white lines (VWL) image associated with a ticket received by a ticket management system, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • VWL virtual white lines
  • FIG. 5 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket parsing application to convert an incoming locate request ticket into a parsed ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 6 shows an example in which a ticket assessment engine accesses one or more stored images that have been processed by a geographic information system, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 7 shows an example of a facilities map with an overlaid VWL image, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 8 shows an illustrative set of lookup tables that may be used by a ticket assessment engine, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 9 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to selecting the best available location information and refine the location information when necessary, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 10 illustrates an exemplary method for refining location information, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 11 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to assess the scope of a locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 12 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to assess the complexity of a locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 13 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to estimate the duration of a locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 14 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to compute a risk measurement associated with a locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 15 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to compute an estimated value for a locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 16A shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to identify one or more required and/or recommended pieces of equipment for performing a requested locate operation, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 16B shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to identify one or more requirements and/or recommendations for selecting a suitable technician to perform a requested locate operation, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 17 shows an illustrative example of a multi-stage ticket assessment engine having a network of assessment modules.
  • FIG. 18 shows an example of a work order that may be created from an incoming locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 19 shows an illustrative computer that may be used for improving information management, dissemination, and utilization in the locate industry and other field service industries, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • Various embodiments described herein relate to systems, methods and apparatus for improved information management, dissemination and utilization in field service operations in which mobile technicians are dispatched in response to service requests.
  • some exemplary embodiments relate to systems, methods and apparatus for automatically and intelligently assessing locate request tickets to provide information that can be used to improve activity scheduling, resource allocation, quality control, and/or regulatory compliance. While the particular example of locate request tickets is provided herein primarily for purposes of illustration, it should be appreciated that the inventive concepts described herein may be more generally applicable to other types of field service operations.
  • a ticket management system that associates a level of confidence with at least some input data to indicate how reliable the data is. For example, a level of confidence may be assigned to a data unit as it enters the ticket manage system, so that the propagation of unreliable information may be limited.
  • confidence levels may be used to resolve conflicts, so that information from a more trust-worthy source may be chosen over information from a less trust-worthy source. Additionally, multiple related pieces of information may be compared, and a confidence level may be increased when the related pieces of information are consistent with each other.
  • a ticket management system includes a ticket assessment engine for analyzing incoming locate request tickets.
  • the ticket assessment engine may be programmed to derive useful information that is not directly available from the tickets themselves.
  • a number of different types of assessments may be performed, including, but not limited to, those listed below.
  • the different types of assessments may be performed in one or more stages, where an assessment outcome from one stage may influence an assessment outcome at a subsequent stage.
  • a ticket assessment engine may be used to improve various aspects of the business operations of a locate service provider, such activity scheduling, resource allocation, quality control, and/or regulatory compliance.
  • the ticket assessment engine may be programmed to provide an estimated measurement, ranking, score, classification and/or some other suitable value for each of the assessment targets listed above, or any other desirable assessment targets. These outcomes may then be input into one or more other components of the ticket management system, for example, an activity scheduling application, a ticket review application for quality control and training, and/or a customer billing application.
  • the ticket assessment engine may access various information sources in order to produce the desired assessment outcomes. For example, the ticket assessment engine may make use of facility plats available from the facility owners to determine whether certain geographical areas should be classified as high risk or high complexity areas. As another example, the ticket assessment engine may access a database containing past damage reports to determine whether a given excavator has a history of frequent and/or costly damages. As yet another example, the ticket assessment engine may access a database containing information regarding previously completed tickets to search for notes and/or remarks regarding a given geographical location.
  • ticket assessment may be carried out by an entity other than a locate service provider, such as a facilities owner, an excavator, a one-call center, a community (e.g., city, town, village, and/or other form of municipality) and/or an insurance company.
  • entities may perform ticket assessment based on their own interests and concerns. For instance, in assessing potential damages in an event of an accident, a facilities owner may take into account loss of customer satisfaction due to service interruption, which may in turn lead to economic losses for the facilities owner (e.g., customer canceling service contract).
  • a facilities owner may assess the complexity of a requested locate and/or marking operation and determine whether it may be desirable to dispatch its own personnel to monitor the operation.
  • the facilities owner may even decide to dispatch its own personnel to perform the requested operation, instead of a locate technician dispatched by a locate service provider.
  • a facilities owner or regulatory body may use ticket assessment to identify high risk locate and/or marking operations that may require auditing prior to excavation, to ensure that the locate service provider's technicians have adequately performed the operations.
  • each of the software components described herein may be implemented in any suitable way, for example, as processor-executable instructions stored in at least one physical storage device (e.g., a non-volatile memory device and/or a volatile memory device) of a general purpose computer or some other suitable hardware system.
  • the general purpose computer or hardware system may comprise at least one hardware processor for executing the instructions stored in the physical storage device, and may further comprise at least one input/output (I/O) interface for receiving inputs from input sources or devices and for sending outputs to output recipients or devices.
  • I/O input/output
  • the hardware processor on which a software component executes may be in a mobile or portable device, such as a mobile telephone, personal digital assistant, a marking device (e.g., for spray painting lines or other marks on the ground), or any other type of mobile or portable device.
  • a mobile or portable device such as a mobile telephone, personal digital assistant, a marking device (e.g., for spray painting lines or other marks on the ground), or any other type of mobile or portable device.
  • FIG. 2 shows an example of a ticket management system 200 comprising a number of software components for performing various functions, such as parsing incoming locate request tickets, assessing parsed tickets according to appropriate business rules, and scheduling and dispatching locate technicians to perform locate operations.
  • the ticket management system 210 may be a management software application run by a locate service provider, such as the locate service provider 130 shown in FIG. 1 , although this is not required.
  • the ticket management system 200 receives locate request tickets 205 from one or more suitable sources, such as the one-call center 120 shown in FIG. 1 .
  • Each ticket typically includes one or more text strings describing various parameters of the requested locate operation, such as time, location and types of facilities. In some instances, one or more images depicting the work site and/or dig area may also be attached to the ticket.
  • ticket information refers generally to any information included in or derived from locate request tickets (e.g., as issued by a one-call center).
  • a ticket parser 210 may be provided, which may be programmed to recognize an origin of a ticket 205 and perform the parsing accordingly to output a parsed ticket 215 .
  • the parsed ticket 215 may be created according to a standardized ticket format, which may be any suitable set of rules or conventions for representing and organizing data, designed to facilitate efficient handling of data by various software components.
  • the standardized format may be an Extensible Markup Language (XML) format. Further details regarding ticket parsing are described below in connection with FIG. 5 .
  • ticket information which may include one or more of the original ticket 205 , the parsed ticket 215 , and any images of the work site and/or dig area that may have been attached to or otherwise included with the ticket 205 , is stored in a ticket database 220 .
  • the ticket database 220 may be any substantially persistent storage of data, for example, a relational database that is created and maintained using a suitable database software.
  • the relational database may store relationships between excavation companies, one-call centers, facility owners, locate service providers, facilities maps, locate request tickets, and the like.
  • Any stored ticket information may be retrieved from the ticket database 220 in a suitable manner and supplied to a ticket assessment engine 230 for processing and analysis.
  • the ticket assessment engine 230 may identify one or more prerequisite activities that must be completed before the requested locate operation can be undertaken. For example, the ticket assessment engine 230 may determine, based on the received ticket information, that a safety personnel must be dispatched to ensure that a manhole is clear of any hazardous gases before a locate technician may enter the manhole to perform a requested locate operation, or that a vacuum truck is to be dispatched to dig one or more potholes before a locate technician can begin a requested locate operation.
  • Such prerequisite tasks may be performed by different work crews (e.g., with different equipment and/or skill sets) and may be scheduled separately from the requested locate operation.
  • the ticket 205 (and hence ticket information derived therefrom) may be related to a so-called “project ticket,” which is a request for a locate operation that may encompass an appreciably large linear distance or geographic area, and hence may require a significant number of hours to complete (e.g., the work site may be several miles along a highway, or may include an entire housing development complex).
  • the ticket assessment engine 230 may break up such a project in a suitable manner into multiple work orders (e.g., work orders 235 A-C) and assess the ticket information accordingly (e.g., producing separate assessment outcomes for each individual work order). When appropriate, subsequent processing such as scheduling and dispatch may also be performed on a per work order basis.
  • the ticket assessment engine 230 applies an appropriate set of business rules 240 to evaluate ticket information.
  • business rules for assessing each of the following aspects: location, scope, complexity, time, risk, value, and/or resource. Exemplary business rules for some of these aspects are described in greater detail below in connection with FIGS. 9-16 and Tables 1-26.
  • a business rule engine (not shown) may be used to allow business users to dynamically modify existing business rules and/or define new rules.
  • ticket assessment implemented by the ticket assessment engine 230 may proceed in one or more stages, where an assessment outcome from one stage may be an input to a subsequent stage of assessment.
  • the ticket assessment engine 230 may comprise one or more modules arranged in multiple stages, where each module may assess a different aspect of the requested locate operation.
  • the ticket assessment engine 230 may comprise multiple modules for assessing, respectively, location, scope, complexity, time, risk, value, and/or resource.
  • Each module may implement a corresponding set of business rules, such as the business rules shown in Tables 1-26, and different modules may implement the corresponding set of business rules at different assessment stages within the engine 230 . Examples of a ticket assessment engine 230 based on multiple assessment modules are described in greater detail below in connection with FIGS. 2A and 19 .
  • the ticket assessment engine 230 may rely on auxiliary input information such as facilities maps, past damage reports, excavator history, traffic, weather, and the like. These pieces of information may be accessed as needed from an auxiliary information storage 250 , which may include one or more databases and/or lookup tables. Examples of various types of auxiliary input information used by the ticket assessment engine 230 are described in greater detail below in connection with FIGS. 6-8 .
  • the ticket assessment engine 230 provides as an exemplary output one or more work orders 235 A-C and populates the work order(s) with corresponding “assessment outcomes.”
  • An assessment outcome may be a numeric value (which may have any of a variety of possible units of measure, or no particular unit of measure, and may or may not be based on some range or scale), one or more symbols or alpha-character indicators (e.g., Y/N for “yes/no,” T/F for “true/false,” H/M/L for “high,” “medium,” “low,” etc.), and/or one or more words/phrases.
  • the ticket assessment engine 230 may output one or more assessment outcomes per ticket analyzed, such that a set of assessment outcomes are provided per ticket.
  • exemplary categories of assessment outcomes include, but are not limited to, scope, complexity, duration, risk, value, and resources.
  • the populated work orders may then be forwarded to any number of components in the ticket management system 200 .
  • the populated work orders may be forwarded to a scheduling and dispatch application 260 , which may allocate an appropriate technician to each work order based on at least some of the assessment outcomes, such as estimated duration, estimated value and/or resource requirements.
  • the populated work orders may be stored in a database that can be accessed by one or more components in the ticket management system 200 .
  • the ticket assessment engine 230 may be implemented in any suitable manner, as the present disclosure is not limited in this respect.
  • the ticket assessment engine 230 may be implemented using Windows Workflow Foundation (WF), which is a Microsoft® technology for defining, executing, and managing workflows.
  • WF Windows Workflow Foundation
  • a workflow definition may be loaded for assessment from a .xml file, using rules loaded from a .rules file.
  • WF thread When a new ticket is ready for assessment, a new instance of the workflow may be instantiated in a new WF thread.
  • the assessment runtime may update the system database with the calculated output and mark the ticket as ready for scheduling.
  • the ticket assessment outcomes may be used by the scheduling and dispatch application 260 in any suitable manner, as the present disclosure is not limited in this respect.
  • a value assessment outcome may be used as a weighting factor. For example, a ticket that is assessed as having high value may be weighted to encourage the scheduling and dispatch application 260 to dispatch the ticket ahead of other tickets that are assessed as having lower values.
  • a risk assessment outcome may be used in a similar fashion, to encourage the dispatch of higher risk tickets ahead of lower risk tickets. This may provide for more opportunities for review and quality assessment for the higher risk tickets.
  • a resource assessment outcome may be used by the scheduling and dispatch application 260 as a constraining factor in assigning technicians and/or equipment to tickets.
  • a ticket may be assessed as requiring a gas-certified, skill level 4 (GAS/4) locate technician. This may be used as a hard constraint, so that only locate technicians with GAS/4 or higher certification may be assigned to the ticket.
  • the skill attribute may be used as a soft constraint, so that the ticket may be assigned to a lesser qualified locate technician only if a locate technician with GAS/4 or higher certification is not available.
  • appropriate business rules may be implemented by the scheduling and dispatch application 260 to determine whether any potential negative effects (such as increased risk, increased duration, and/or decreased profitability) are outweighed by the potential benefits of completing the requested locate operation earlier.
  • the scheduling and dispatch application 260 may determine, based on one or more ticket assessment outcomes, that it is unnecessary to dispatch any technician to perform a requested locate and/or marking operation.
  • a scope assessment outcome may indicate a number and/or a type of facilities to be located as represented in the locate request ticket.
  • the scope assessment outcome may indicate zero facilities of an underground type.
  • a risk assessment outcome may indicate a low risk associated with the requested locate and/or marking operation (e.g., because all relevant facilities maps suggest that the closest underground facilities are at least some threshold distance away from a specified dig area).
  • the locate request ticket may be flagged for an “office clear” (i.e., clearing the ticket without dispatching any locate technician to the work site), which may yield a higher profit margin for the locate service provider than a ticket for which a technician is dispatched.
  • the office clear may be performed automatically by analyzing the dig area (e.g., its shape, size, and/or location) against one or more relevant facilities maps.
  • the office clear may be performed manually or semi-automatically, where a human operator screens the ticket to confirm that no underground facilities are likely present in the dig area.
  • the scheduling and dispatch application 260 may forward the work order to a quality control application 270 , along with any activity logs and/or technician reports.
  • the quality control application 270 may determine whether the work order has been adequately responded to, for example, by checking the activity logs to determine whether every facility type listed on the work order is accounted for.
  • the quality control application 270 may also be programmed to present a user interface through which human supervisors may review the completed work order and determine whether the technician is in need of additional training in any particular area. Examples of manual, semi-automated and automated quality assessment techniques that may be suitable for implementing the quality control application 270 of the ticket management system 200 may be found in one or more of the following references, each of which is incorporated herein by reference:
  • one or more assessment outcomes may be used to filter the completed work orders to identify those work orders that may require specific quality assessment involving human review.
  • a risk assessment outcome may be used to filter out low- or medium-risk work orders, so that only high-risk work orders are submitted for human review.
  • a suitable threshold may be selected to identify high-risk work orders.
  • a combination of assessment outcomes may be used for filtering.
  • one or more filtering rules may be applied to any suitable combination of assessment outcomes (e.g., location, scope, complexity, time, risk, value and/or resource) to identify candidate work orders for human review.
  • a filtering rule may take into account any suitable combination of the following information: one or more types of facilities to be located, client identity (e.g., identity of a facilities owner), type of excavation to be carried out subsequent to the locate operation, excavator identity, damage history for a geographical area encompassing the work site, and damage history associated with the client and/or excavator.
  • client identity e.g., identity of a facilities owner
  • type of excavation to be carried out subsequent to the locate operation e.g., excavator identity
  • damage history for a geographical area encompassing the work site
  • damage history associated with the client and/or excavator damage history associated with the client and/or excavator.
  • Other types of information may also be taken into account, as the inventive concepts described herein relating to filtering are not limited to any specific examples
  • the scheduling and dispatch application 260 may also forward the completed work order to a billing application 280 , which may apply various billing rules to calculate a fee to be billed to each customer.
  • the billing application may use the activity logs to determine the amount of time the technician spent on each facility type and compute a fee accordingly to be billed to that facility owner.
  • the ticket assessment system 200 may further include a feedback mechanism, such as a backend assessment module 290 .
  • the backend assessment module 290 may monitor completed work orders received from the scheduling and dispatch application 260 and send appropriate updates to various other components of the ticket management system 200 .
  • the backend assessment module 290 may maintain statistical information regarding the completed work orders and provide the statistical information to a business rule engine (not shown), which may update the business rules 240 accordingly.
  • the backend assessment module 290 may provide updates to some of the historical information stored in the auxiliary information storage 250 .
  • a work order may be closed by a technician for reasons other than having completed the requested location operation. For example, the technician may be unable to gain access to a work site, or may discover significant discrepancy between the dig area description and the actual dig area. The technician may then close the current work order and request that a new work order be generated. Upon detecting such a situation, the backend assessment module 290 may generate an appropriate new work order, e.g., with more accurate work site and/or dig area information, and submit it to the scheduling and dispatch application 260 for re-dispatch.
  • an appropriate new work order e.g., with more accurate work site and/or dig area information
  • the backend assessment module 290 may be adapted to receive information from the quality control application 280 . For example, upon reviewing a completed work order via the quality control application 280 , a human supervisor may discover a significant problem and may determine that a re-mark or re-stake operation is necessary. This information may be provided to the backend assessment module 290 , which may generate a new work order accordingly and perform appropriate updates to the information stored in the auxiliary information storage 250 .
  • FIG. 2A an illustrative implementation of a ticket assessment engine (e.g., the ticket assessment engine 230 of FIG. 2 ) is shown, comprising a network of ticket assessment modules arranged in multiple assessment stages.
  • a ticket assessment engine comprising a network of ticket assessment modules arranged in multiple assessment stages.
  • Each stage may include one or more assessment modules (e.g., labeled in FIG. 2A as “Assessment 1 -A,” “Assessment 1 -B,” “Assessment N-A,” etc.), wherein each module comprises a corresponding set of business rules (e.g., business rules 240 in FIG. 2 ) that are used to assess various elements of ticket information.
  • business rules 240 in FIG. 2 business rules
  • each module may receive as input one or more of the following: ticket information 225 , auxiliary information 255 , (e.g., facilities maps, stored images, historical records, environmental data and/or lookup tables), and/or one or more assessment outcomes from one or more previous stages of assessment.
  • ticket information 225 e.g., ticket information 225
  • auxiliary information 255 e.g., facilities maps, stored images, historical records, environmental data and/or lookup tables
  • assessment outcomes from one or more previous stages of assessment.
  • a first stage assessment may include two modules, Assessment 1 -A and Assessment 1 -B, each receiving ticket information and auxiliary information as input.
  • Assessment 1 -A may produce Outcome 231 , which may be fed into a Stage 2 Assessment module, Assessment 2 -A.
  • Assessment 1 -B may produce Outcome 232 , which may also be fed into Assessment 2 -A.
  • Outcome 232 may be used at an even later stage of assessment, e.g., at Assessment N-A.
  • Outcome 232 may be output by the ticket assessment engine as a “final” assessment outcome.
  • Outcome 231 produced by Assessment 1 -A may be an “intermediate” assessment outcome, in that it is used only internally, by other assessment modules, and is not output by the ticket assessment engine.
  • Assessment 2 -A may access other information, such as the ticket information 225 input to the ticket assessment engine and/or auxiliary information 255 accessible to the ticket assessment engine.
  • the output of Assessment 2 -A namely, Outcome 233
  • Assessment N-A may produce Outcome 234 based on inputs from different stages of assessment, e.g., Outcome 232 and Outcome 233 .
  • assessment modules are shown in FIG. 2A , it should be appreciated that those arrangements are merely illustrative. Other suitable arrangements may also be used, as the present disclosure is not limited in this respect. Also, any suitable types of assessment may be implemented by the assessment modules, including, but not limited to, scope, location, complexity, risk, value, time and/or resource. A more specific illustrate example of a multi-stage ticket assessment engine is discussed in greater detail below, in connection with FIG. 17 .
  • FIG. 3 shows an example of a locate request ticket 300 that may be received by the ticket management system 200 , for example, via email from the one-call center 120 shown in FIG. 1 .
  • the ticket 300 may contain various pieces of information stored in a number of fields, including:
  • a one-call center may draw a polygon on a map corresponding to the work site. This polygon may be overlaid onto one or more facilities maps to determine which types of facilities are implicated. For example, a facility type (or owner) may be indicated on the locate request ticket in the member code section 314 if and only if at least one utility line of that type (or owner) touches or intersects with the polygon.
  • the one-call center may provide the coordinates for the vertices of the polygon in the locate request ticket, along with other information describing the location and boundaries of the work site and/or dig area.
  • the ticket may include locate instructions provided by an excavator who initiated the ticket, which may be in the form of free text.
  • the ticket may include information indicating whether the planned excavation activities include any boring (e.g., on a street, driveway and/or sidewalk) and/or blasting.
  • the ticket may indicate whether a permit has been obtained for a related construction project (e.g., installing a swimming pool or building a foundation for a structure).
  • one or more images or graphical representations of the work site and/or dig area may be attached to the ticket 300 .
  • a so-called virtual white lines (VWL) image may be attached, which may contain a digital image of the work site including the dig area (or some other suitable digital data representing the geographic location of the dig area) along with electronic annotations delimiting the dig area.
  • VWL virtual white lines
  • FIG. 4 An example of a VWL image 400 is shown in FIG. 4 .
  • the dig area is indicated on an aerial image by a set of dashed lines 410 forming a rectangle.
  • the lines 410 are more generally referred to as “dig area indicators,” which may be any electronically generated markings indicating a point, line, path and/or area of the planned excavation.
  • the VWL image 400 may be created by the excavator using a suitable VWL application (not shown), such as those described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/050,555 and U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/151,769 and No. 61/151,815, all of which are incorporated by reference herein in their entireties.
  • the excavator may use the VWL application to obtain an aerial image of a geographical location encompassing the planned dig area and use a drawing tool of the VWL application to add the dig area indicators 410 to the aerial image.
  • locate request tickets originating from different one-call centers may store information in different formats (e.g., different one-call centers may use different commercial software to generate locate request tickets). Therefore, a ticket parsing application, such as the ticket parser 210 shown in FIG. 2 , may be used to convert incoming tickets to a standardized format recognized by various components within a ticket management system.
  • FIG. 5 shows an illustrative process 500 that may be performed by a ticket parsing application to convert an incoming locate request ticket into a parsed ticket.
  • the ticket parsing application may identify a source or origin of an incoming ticket (e.g., a particular one-call center that generated the incoming ticket). This may be accomplished in a number of different ways. For example, the ticket parsing application may simply search the ticket to determine whether the originating one-call center is identified in the ticket itself. Alternatively, if the ticket is received via email, the ticket parsing application may identify the originating one-call center by examining the sender's email address. As yet another example, the ticket parsing application may search the ticket for some indication of a geographic area to which the work site belongs (e.g., a city or town name) and identify a one-call center serving that geographic area.
  • a geographic area to which the work site belongs e.g., a city or town name
  • the ticket parsing application may retrieve or otherwise identify a set of parsing rules corresponding to the one-call center identified at act 502 .
  • the parsing rules may allow the ticket parsing application to detect the locations of various information elements within the incoming ticket.
  • the information elements may be stored in respective fields in the incoming ticket.
  • some of the fields may have variable lengths, and one or more designated markers may be used to demarcate the end of a field (or the beginning of the next field).
  • the ticket parsing application may locate and process the various fields in a sequential fashion.
  • the ticket parsing application may identify an information element (e.g., a text block) that has not be processed and proceed to extract information from the identified information element. For example, for a text block corresponding to an address field, the ticket parsing application may simply copy the entire string from the text block. Some minor transformations may be performed at act 510 , such as truncating a street name that exceed a predetermined maximum length. More significant transformations may also be performed. For example, the ticket parsing application may be programmed to recognize alphanumeric codes and/or abbreviations specific to each one-call center and map those codes and/or abbreviations to some suitable standard representations.
  • an information element e.g., a text block
  • the ticket parsing application may simply copy the entire string from the text block.
  • Some minor transformations may be performed at act 510 , such as truncating a street name that exceed a predetermined maximum length. More significant transformations may also be performed.
  • the ticket parsing application may be programmed
  • the ticket parsing application may populate appropriate fields in the parsed ticket with the information obtained at acts 506 and 508 . Then, at act 514 , the ticket parsing application may determine whether there is at least one unprocessed information element in the incoming ticket. If the determination is positive, the ticket parsing application may return to act 506 to identify a next unprocessed information element. Otherwise, the ticket parsing application may end the process 500 , and the parsed ticket may be forwarded to a ticket assessment engine for further processing and analysis.
  • process 500 for parsing an incoming ticket is merely illustrative. Depending on the one-call centers' actual practices, other processes and methods may also be suitable for converting an incoming locate request ticket to a standardized format.
  • the ticket assessment engine 230 may access various types of auxiliary information from the auxiliary information storage 250 in order to produce the desired assessment outcomes. For example, as shown in FIG. 6 , the assessment engine 230 may retrieve one or more stored images 605 from the auxiliary information storage 250 , along with any associated metadata (e.g., geospatial metadata). As discussed in greater detail below, the stored images 605 may be created or modified by a geographic information system (GIS) 610 based on one or more input images 615 .
  • GIS geographic information system
  • an input image 615 may be represented by any source data that, when processed electronically by a suitable computer system, enables the computer system to display an image on a display device.
  • This source data may be in any of a variety of suitable computer-readable formats, including PDF, JPG, BMP, GIF, PNG and the like.
  • the source data for an image may be generated by scanning a tangible two-dimensional image source, such as paper or cloth.
  • the source data may be generated by an image acquisition device as the result of acquiring a “real-world” scene.
  • Examples of an image acquisition device include a digital camera (either still-frame or video), which may generate pixel information as part of the source data for an image.
  • An image acquisition device may also be a laser scanning device that scans three-dimensional objects to produce coordinate information in a three-dimensional space.
  • the following is a non-exhaustive list of exemplary input images (or source data) using which the GIS 610 may create or modify the stored images 605 .
  • input images or source data such as those listed above may be analyzed and/or manipulated by the GIS 610 shown in FIG. 6 .
  • the GIS 610 may be programmed to “geotag” an input image by associating geospatial metadata with features in the input image.
  • the geospatial metadata may include any suitable combination of lat/long coordinates, altitude, bearing, place names, etc.
  • the GIS 610 may be programmed to create a computer-aided design (CAD) drawing showing aboveground and/or underground facilities installed in a geographic area, and to associate geospatial metadata with at least some of the facilities shown on the drawing.
  • CAD computer-aided design
  • the GIS 610 may be programmed to align two geotagged images, for example, by scaling one or both of the images and aligning one or more reference points. This process is sometimes referred to as “georeferencing,” and may be useful in combining one or more facilities maps showing different types of facilities installed in the same geographic area.
  • the GIS 610 may provide a framework for manipulating and displaying images in ways that may facilitate a variety of location-related analyses.
  • the ticket assessment engine may be adapted to invoke one or more services provided by the GIS 610 .
  • the assessment engine may submit a geotagged VWL image (e.g., the VWL image 400 shown in FIG. 4 ) to the GIS 610 and request that the dig area indicators (e.g., the dig area indicators 410 ) be shown on a facilities map.
  • the GIS 610 may obtain a relevant facilities map, for example, by retrieving one or more existing maps from the auxiliary information storage 250 and combing them if necessary, or by creating a CAD drawing showing all facilities known to be present in the geographic area shown on the VWL image 400 .
  • the GIS 610 may then render the dig area indicators 410 as an overlay on the facilities map based on the geospatial metadata associated with the VWL image and the facilities map.
  • An example of the resulting facilities map 700 with the dig area indicators 410 is shown in FIG. 7 .
  • Images are merely one example of a variety of different types of information that may be used by a ticket assessment engine.
  • Another example is a set of lookup tables, such as the lookup tables 800 shown in FIG. 8 .
  • the ticket assessment engine may load one or more of these lookup tables and use them to map locate operation attributes to intermediate or final assessment outcomes.
  • the locate operation attributes may be raw attributes directly obtained from locate request tickets, or derived attributes assigned by the ticket assessment engine based on some raw attributes.
  • the lookup tables 800 include a complexity lookup table 810 , a time lookup table 820 , a risk lookup table 830 , a value lookup table 840 and a resource lookup table 850 .
  • the complexity lookup table 810 may be used to assign a suitable measure of complexity to a requested locate operation, and may be indexed with a variety of different locate operation attributes. For example, the complexity look up table 810 may map the number of facilities to be located and/or each individual facility type (e.g., gas, cable, electric, water, etc.) to a suitable complexity level (e.g., high, medium or low). As another example, the complexity lookup table 810 may map work site details such as high traffic or restricted access to corresponding complexity reason codes that are recognized by various components within a ticket management system (e.g., the ticket management system 200 shown in FIG. 2 ).
  • a ticket management system e.g., the ticket management system 200 shown in FIG. 2 .
  • the time lookup table 820 and the risk lookup table 830 may be used, respectively, to assign an estimated duration and a suitable measure of risk to a requested locate operation.
  • the time look up table 820 may map each individual facility type (e.g., gas, cable, electric, water, etc.) to a duration estimate per unit length or unit area
  • the risk lookup table 830 may map each individual facility type to a suitable risk score.
  • the time lookup table 820 and the risk lookup table 830 may, respectively, map work site details such as high traffic or restricted access to corresponding scaling factors for increasing or decreasing a duration estimate and a risk score.
  • the value lookup table 840 may be used to associate a value to a requested locate operation.
  • the value may be simply the expected revenue to be collected for the work performed, or some other suitable measure of value such as net profit (e.g., revenue less cost) or value at risk.
  • the value lookup table 840 may correlate complexity with value (e.g., mapping high complexity to high value, medium complexity to medium value, and low complexity to low value), where the complexity level is determined at least in part using the complexity lookup table 810 .
  • the value look up table 840 may map each individual facility type (e.g., gas, cable, electric, water, etc.) to a value estimate, which may be a flat rate or a rate per unit length.
  • the value lookup table 840 may map ticket types (e.g., emergency, short notice, re-mark, etc.) to corresponding adjustment values for increasing or decreasing a value. For example, extra fees may be collected for an emergency locate operation, while a re-mark operation may not be billed to a customer if the locate service provider is at fault (e.g., the locate service provider did not adequately respond to the locate request ticket during a first visit, which was already billed to the customer).
  • ticket types e.g., emergency, short notice, re-mark, etc.
  • extra fees may be collected for an emergency locate operation, while a re-mark operation may not be billed to a customer if the locate service provider is at fault (e.g., the locate service provider did not adequately respond to the locate request ticket during a first visit, which was already billed to the customer).
  • the resource lookup table 850 may be used to determine any equipment requirements and/or technician certification and/or minimum skill level requirements for a requested locate operation. For example, locate technician skill levels may be ranked from 1-10, with 10 being the most skilled.
  • the resource lookup table 850 may map high complexity to skill levels 8-10, medium complexity to skill levels 4-7, low complexity to skill levels 1-3, where the complexity level is determined at least in part using the complexity lookup table 810 .
  • the resource look up table 850 may map each individual facility type (e.g., gas, cable, electric, water, etc.) to one or more technician certifications (e.g., gas-certified, cable-certified, electric-certified, water-certified, etc.).
  • the resource lookup table 850 may map each individual facilities type (e.g., gas) to one or more required or recommended tools or pieces of equipment (e.g., a gas detection tool).
  • lookup tables 800 may provide quick access to data, other types of data structures may also be used to store the information contents described above.
  • a ticket assessment engine may access other types of information contents in addition to, or instead of, those described above. For example, in determining a risk level associated with a requested locate operation, a ticket assessment engine may access historical records of previously completed locate request tickets to determine whether there is a high concentration of past damage reports within the proximity of the currently requested locate operation.
  • a historical record of a previously completed locate request ticket may also store information collected during the corresponding locate and/or marking operation. For example, the record may store an actual duration of the operation and/or actual durations of various tasks that are part of the operation. The record may further indicate whether an accident occurred during subsequent excavation (e.g., whether one or more underground facilities were damaged during excavation).
  • a ticket assessment engine may access records pertaining to excavation companies and/or individual excavators. Such records may contain information such as excavation company name and address, individual excavator name and address, excavator type (e.g., pool installer, landscaper, construction company, facility installer, etc), and/or damage history.
  • a ticket assessment engine may use the excavator type information and the damage history information to assess the level of risk associated with a currently requested location operation. For example, the ticket assessment engine may return a high risk classification for a requested locate operation when a corresponding excavation company and/or individual excavator has a significant history of damaging facilities. The ticket assessment engine may further increase a technician skill level requirement for the requested locate operation, as a way to ensure accurate marking and reduce risk.
  • location information provided in a locate request ticket may in some instances be incomplete and/or inaccurate.
  • the address for the work site may be vague or ambiguous (e.g., a street name without any house numbers), or multiple conflicting pieces of location information may be given (e.g., a street address and a pair of lat/long coordinates that do not match).
  • additional analysis may be needed to increase the level of confidence that a locate technician is being dispatched to the correct location.
  • additional location information may be extracted from a textual description of the work site that is included in the ticket, and/or from one or more virtual white lines (VWL) images associated with the ticket.
  • VWL virtual white lines
  • FIG. 9 shows an illustrative process 900 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to selecting the best available location information and refine the location information when necessary.
  • the ticket assessment engine may collect one or more pieces of location information from a locate request ticket (e.g., the parsed ticket 215 as shown in FIG. 2 ). For example, the ticket assessment engine may extract from the ticket a work site address, coordinates for vertices of a polygon generated by the originating one-call center, and/or any VLW images attached to the ticket. In some instances, the ticket may additionally contain portions of free text (e.g., in a “Remarks” field recording an excavator's description of the dig area and/or the reason for excavation).
  • the ticket assessment engine may be programmed to intelligently extract location information from these portions of free text, for example, by searching for relevant phrases such as “next to,” “across from,” “near,” etc. Alternatively, the ticket assessment engine may prompt a human user to read the portions of free text and manually enter any relevant location information.
  • the ticket assessment engine may select a piece of location information from the multiple pieces of location information collected at act 902 . This selection may be based on levels of confidence, that is, the ticket assessment engine may select the piece of location information that is deemed the most trustworthy or reliable.
  • a geotagged VWL image may be considered the most reliable among all types of location information. As such, it may be selected whenever available. If a geotagged VWL image is not available, then a complete address (e.g., with city, street name and house number) may be selected over other pieces of location information, such as a one-call center polygon. If neither a geotagged VWL image nor a complete address is available, then coordinates for the centroid of a one-call center polygon may be computed and reverse-geocoded to obtain an address.
  • the ticket assessment engine may also perform one or more consistency checks on the collected location information. For example, the ticket assessment engine may reverse-geocode at least some of the available coordinates to determine if the coordinates correspond to a point that falls within the city, county, and/or state indicated on the ticket.
  • the ticket assessment engine may determine whether the location information selected at act 904 has a sufficiently high confidence level. If the determination is positive, then the process 900 ends and the selected location information may be recorded and used throughout the rest of the assessment process carried out by the ticket assessment engine. If the determination is negative, the ticket assessment engine may make a best-effort attempt at refining the location information at act 908 .
  • FIG. 10 illustrates an exemplary method for refining location information.
  • a street name e.g., “Main Street”
  • a one-call center polygon 1000 is also available.
  • the ticket assessment engine may programmed to determine the coordinates for the points 1005 A and 1005 B, at which Main Street intersects the one-call center polygon 1000 . These coordinates may then be reverse-geocoded to obtain an address range on Main Street that falls within the one-call center polygon 1000 . If the address range is sufficiently small, the ticket assessment engine may simply select the address range as the prevailing location information. If, however, the address range is too large, the ticket assessment engine may narrow it down by computing the centroid of the one-call center polygon 1000 and selecting one or more addresses 1005 C that are closest to the computed centroid.
  • the ticket assessment engine may invoke the services of a geographic information system (e.g., the GIS 610 shown in FIG. 6 ) to perform any of the computational tasks described above.
  • a geographic information system e.g., the GIS 610 shown in FIG. 6
  • a ticket assessment engine may determine the nature and amount of work to be done in response to the ticket.
  • the result of scope assessment may be used in a number of subsequent assessment processes, such complexity, time, risk, value and/or resource requirements.
  • the number and types of facilities to be located may be determined or verified, which may in turn be used to determine complexity (e.g., whether a high profile facility type is involved), time (e.g., an estimated duration for each facility type), risk (e.g., whether a high risk facility, such as gas, is involved), value (e.g., an estimated revenue to be collected for each facility type) and/or resource requirements (e.g., certification requirements for each facility type).
  • complexity e.g., whether a high profile facility type is involved
  • time e.g., an estimated duration for each facility type
  • risk e.g., whether a high risk facility, such as gas, is involved
  • value e.g., an estimated revenue to be collected for each facility type
  • resource requirements e.g.,
  • a one-call center may compile some form of ticket scope information and include the information in a locate request ticket. For example, a one-call center may generate a polygon and determine, based on the polygon, which facility types are to be listed on the ticket. However, such information from one-call centers may not always be accurate, and therefore it may be desirable to independently generate and verify ticket scope information.
  • FIG. 11 shows an illustrative process 1100 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to assess the scope of a locate request ticket.
  • the ticket assessment engine may extract various pieces of information from the ticket to determine at least one characteristic of the planned dig area (e.g., size, shape and/or boundaries). For example, if a geotagged VWL image is available, the ticket assessment engine may determine the dig area boundaries based on the dig area indicators and the geospatial metadata associated with the VWL image. As discussed above, the ticket assessment engine may associate a higher level of confidence to the VWL image, compared to a polygon generated by the one-call center. Therefore, in some embodiments, the VWL image may be used in lieu of the one-call center polygon in determining ticket scope.
  • the VWL image may be used in lieu of the one-call center polygon in determining ticket scope.
  • the ticket assessment may also use other types of information during act 1102 .
  • the ticket assessment engine may search for scope information in one or more free text portions of the ticket.
  • the ticket assessment engine may be programmed to search for keywords related to landmarks (e.g., sidewalk, playground, etc.) and/or directions (e.g., north, east, south, west, etc.). If one or more keywords are found, the ticket assessment engine may prompt a human user to read the free text and enter any additional scope information.
  • the ticket assessment engine may determine the reason for and/or method of excavation, which may be used to determine other scope-related parameters such as excavation depth and/or dig area size.
  • the reason for excavation may sometimes be given explicitly in the ticket.
  • the ticket 300 may indicate under the excavation information 306 and the excavator information 310 that a conduit is being installed for a telephone company.
  • the reason for excavation may be found in a free text description given by the excavator, and the ticket assessment engine may search for informative keywords or key phrases in the free text description. For example, words such as “pool” and “mailbox” may be commonly used when describing the reason for excavation, and the ticket parsing application may be programmed to recognize these words and extract relevant portions of the free text.
  • the reason for excavation may be inferred based on excavator information.
  • the reason for excavation is likely to be installing water and/or sewer lines.
  • the excavator is a pool contractor, the reason for excavation is likely to be installing a swimming pool.
  • the excavation information may indicate a method of excavation, which may be helpful in estimating the extent of the excavation activities.
  • Certain methods of excavation such as blasting and/or boring, may be more likely to cause accidents compared to other methods.
  • blasting is planned
  • boring it may be desirable to include in the dig area all areas within a certain distance from the planned locations of boring.
  • the particular radius and/or distance may be selected based on a number of different factors, e.g., government regulations, contractual obligations, insurance requirements, industry best practices, and/or the locate service provider's risk tolerance levels.
  • the ticket assessment engine may determine or verify the number and types of facilities to be located. Alternatively, the ticket assessment engine may verify the list of one-call center members (or facilities owners) who are notified of the ticket. As discussed above, it may be desirable to independently verify this type of information, even though it may be already provided by the one-call center.
  • the ticket assessment may use a variety of auxiliary information (e.g., as stored in the auxiliary information storage 250 shown in FIG. 2 ) in determining or verifying the number and types of facilities to be located.
  • the ticket assessment engine may access one or more facilities maps illustrating installed underground facilities and street-level landmarks.
  • the facilities maps may be geotagged, which may enable overlaying a polygon or dig area indicators onto the facilities maps (e.g., as shown in FIG. 7 ) to determine whether one or more items on the facilities maps fall within the dig area or are sufficiently close to the dig area.
  • the ticket assessment engine may determine scope information for each individual facility type determined at act 1106 .
  • the ticket assessment engine may compare the dig area boundaries (e.g., as indicated by dig area indicators or a polygon) against a respective facilities map. This may facilitate subsequent time estimation (e.g., different facility types may have different duration estimates per unit length or unit area). It may also facilitate billing after the ticket has been completed (e.g., some facility owners may be billed on a per ticket basis, while other facility owners may be billed per unit of work performed).
  • inventive concepts disclosed herein are not limited to any specific implementations.
  • analyses may be performed in any suitable order (e.g., not necessarily in the order presented in FIG. 11 ).
  • the determination of excavation reason and/or method at act 1104 may be carried out prior to, or concurrently with, the determination of dig area characteristics at act 1102 .
  • Other variations may also be possible.
  • a ticket may be considered more or less complex for a number of different reasons, such as the number and types of facilities to be located, work site characteristics and/or some other suitable combination of factors. Therefore, complexity assessment may very broadly encompass any types of analysis to categorizes and/or annotate a ticket in such a way that facilitates subsequent handling of the ticket. For example, the outcomes of complexity assessment may be presented in any suitable manner (e.g., using numerical scores and/or user-defined categories), and may inform any other assessment process, such as time, risk, value or resource requirements. Furthermore, complexity assessment may take into account any suitable input information, such as information directly available from a ticket, or information derived based on the ticket and/or other auxiliary information.
  • FIG. 12 shows an illustrative process 1200 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to assess the complexity of a locate request ticket, in accordance with some embodiments.
  • the ticket assessment engine may perform a keyword search on the ticket to look for any keywords that may trigger a complexity designation.
  • service contracts with some facility owners may include special requirements for the handling of certain types of “high profile” facilities (e.g., gas pipes and/or fiber optic cables), and a locate service provider may receive higher compensation for complying with these special requirements.
  • a locate service provider may also have internal regulations designating certain facilities as being “high profile.” This may be done, for example, for risk management purposes.
  • the ticket assessment engine when the ticket assessment engine detects the presence of one or more high profile facility types (e.g., gas or fiber optic), the ticket may be put into a complexity category of “high profile.” Additionally, one or more reason codes and/or descriptions may be given to indicate why the ticket has been categorized under “high profile.”
  • high profile facility types e.g., gas or fiber optic
  • the designation of “high profile” may also take into account a location of the work site. For example, although telephone and/or electric facilitates may not ordinarily be considered “high profile,” one or more sections of these facilities may be designated as such because they serve a special area, such as a hospital or military base. (This may be the case even if the work site itself is outside the special area.) Accordingly, the ticket assessment engine may use the work site location in conjunction with one or more facilities maps to determine whether any facilities to be located serve one or more special areas. If so, the ticket may be put into the “high profile” category along with an appropriate reason code and/or description.
  • the ticket assessment engine records, at act 1204 , the complexity category assigned to the locate request ticket during act 1202 , along with any reason codes and/or descriptions. This recording may be done in any suitable manner that allows the assigned complexity category to be later accessed using some information associated with the ticket.
  • the ticket assessment engine may store the assigned category in a database entry that can be indexed using a ticket serial number.
  • the ticket assessment engine may insert the assigned complexity category into a work order created for the ticket (e.g., work orders 235 A-C shown in FIG. 2 ).
  • the ticket assessment may determine whether the work site falls within some complexity region.
  • the ticket assessment engine may access a data storage (e.g., the auxiliary information storage 250 ) to obtain a set of polygons representing, respectively, a set of predetermined complexity regions.
  • Each of the polygons may be specified by the set of coordinates for its vertices, and may be associated with a complexity category indicating why the region has been designated as a complexity region. A more detailed description of the complexity category may also be provided.
  • the ticket assessment engine may then geocode an address of the work site and determine whether the resulting coordinates fall within any of the complexity regions represented by the polygons. If the coordinates do fall within at least one complexity region, the ticket assessment engine may proceed to act 1208 to store the corresponding complexity category and/or complexity category description.
  • the polygons representing complexity regions may be generated in a number of different ways, as the present disclosure is not limited in this respect.
  • a geographical information system e.g., the GIS 610 shown in FIG. 6
  • some commercially available digital map data may contain information delimiting various geographical regions of interest, such as highways, railroad tracks, parks, hospitals, military bases, schools, gated communities, zoning parcels, etc.
  • a geographical information system may be used to automatically assign complexity categories to some of these regions. The corresponding delimitation information may then be extracted from the digital map data and used to compute polygons.
  • a geographical information system may be adapted to allow a human user to manually define a complexity region.
  • a supervisory personnel may, based on local knowledge, designate a certain geographic area as a complexity region and provide an appropriate description (e.g., the area may be known to have defective tracer wires along a certain type of facility, which may increase the difficulty in locating that type of facility).
  • the geographic information system may present a graphic user interface to allow the supervisory personnel to electronically mark the boundaries of the complexity region.
  • the ticket assessment engine may determine at act 1210 whether the work site is in the proximity of a past ticket categorized as “high profile.” For example, the ticket assessment engine may search a database of past tickets to determine whether the work site is within a given radius (e.g. 100 yards) of a past ticket with a “high profile” designation. If so, the ticket assessment engine may assign the complexity category “high profile potential” to the current ticket and record a reason code “historical high profile” at act 1212 .
  • the ticket assessment engine may determine whether the locate request ticket is subject to special billing rules. For example, the ticket assessment engine may determine whether the ticket has a linear scope of 0.5 miles or greater (e.g., as determined during the scope assessment process 1100 ), or whether the work site is at a remote location that requires extended travel. Additionally, the ticket assessment engine may search one or more text fields (e.g., locate instructions, remarks and/or excavation type description) for keywords that might be relevant for billing. Then the ticket assessment engine may consult one or more billing tables to determine whether any special billing rules apply to the current ticket. For example, at act 1216 , the ticket assessment engine may set a hourly status indicator to “true,” indicating that the ticket should be billed per unit of work performed, rather than at a flat rate.
  • the ticket assessment engine may set a hourly status indicator to “true,” indicating that the ticket should be billed per unit of work performed, rather than at a flat rate.
  • the billing tables used by the ticket assessment engine may contain information that is specific to a particular geographic area. For example, different facility owners serving different geographical areas may be billed at different rates using different methods. Therefore, multiple billing tables may be prepared and selected for use based on the geographic areas in which the locate service provider is operating.
  • the ticket assessment engine may determine a service type (e.g., “emergency,” “short notice,” “re-mark,” “re-stake,” or “re-note”) by performing a keyword search.
  • the search may taken into account common abbreviations such as “shrt” for “short.”
  • the ticket assessment engine may record the corresponding service type at act 1220 . This information may be used, for example, during the scheduling and dispatch process to determine a due date or deadline for the ticket. It may also be used in determining an appropriate fee to be billed to a customer.
  • a set of business rules e.g., one or more of business rules 240 shown in FIG. 2 .
  • An exemplary set of complexity assessment business rules is summarized in Table 2 below (BR-001 through BR-005) and described in greater detail in Tables 3-7.
  • a locate request ticket may be assessed, such as a due date of the ticket, an estimated duration of the requested locate operation and/or an expiration date of locate marks.
  • the time at which a locate request ticket is generated may be used to estimate one or more deadlines.
  • a locate service provider may have more or less time to respond to the ticket.
  • the locate service provider may be required (e.g., by government regulations and/or locate contract provisions) to respond to an emergency ticket within a short window of time (e.g., two to four hours after the ticket is generated), whereas normal tickets may be completed within a longer window of time (e.g., 48 or 72 hours after the ticket is generated).
  • the time of ticket generation may also be used to determine when the locate marks placed by a technician at the work site will expire. For instance, in some jurisdictions, an excavator may be required by law or regulation to request a “re-mark” operation if the planned excavation activities are not completed within a certain period of time (e.g., on the order of days, such as seven or 14 days) after the original ticket is generated. In response to such a request, a new (but related) work order may be created to dispatch a locate technician to the work site to repeat the locate operation and/or refresh the locate marks previously placed (e.g., by spraying more paint on the ground at previously marked locations).
  • a new (but related) work order may be created to dispatch a locate technician to the work site to repeat the locate operation and/or refresh the locate marks previously placed (e.g., by spraying more paint on the ground at previously marked locations).
  • the ticket itself may be said to have expired, and the excavator may be required by law or regulation to initiate a new locate request ticket.
  • the duration of a locate request ticket may be estimated using statistical information collected from previously complete locate request tickets. For example, a ticket assessment engine may access a historical average and/or standard deviation for tickets of a certain type (e.g., tickets having a certain combination of features). This information may then be used to establish an adjustment and/or scaling factor to be applied to future tickets of the same type (e.g., having the same combination of features).
  • a ticket assessment engine may access a historical average and/or standard deviation for tickets of a certain type (e.g., tickets having a certain combination of features). This information may then be used to establish an adjustment and/or scaling factor to be applied to future tickets of the same type (e.g., having the same combination of features).
  • FIG. 13 shows an illustrative process 1300 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to estimate the duration of a locate request ticket, in accordance with some embodiments.
  • the ticket assessment engine may establish an initial duration estimate, for example, based on the total number of facilities to be located (e.g., as determined or verified during the scope assessment process 1100 ). More specifically, if the ticket is an N-locate ticket (i.e., there are N different types of facilities to be located), the ticket assessment engine may obtain the historical average duration for all previously complete N-locate tickets. Alternatively, the ticket assessment engine may obtain the standard deviation in addition to the average, and determine a duration estimate such that, with high probability, at least a desired percentage (e.g., 95 percents) of all N-locate tickets will have a duration not exceeding the duration estimate. Such an estimate may be computed using any known techniques, such as Chebychev's inequality.
  • a historical average duration may be computed for all previously completed tickets located within a certain geographical area (e.g., as specified by a geofence).
  • a historical average duration may be computed for all previously completed tickets having one or more common types of facilities (e.g., gas, cable, water, electric, etc.).
  • a historical average duration may be computed for all previously completed tickets having a suitable combination of ticket characteristics, such as all tickets completed within the past three months in a specified city or neighborhood.
  • the ticket assessment engine may, based on a number of different factors, determine on or more adjustments to be applied to the initial duration estimate established at act 1302 . For example, an adjustment may be assigned to each facility type based on observed averages. More specifically, if an N-locate ticket having a first facility type (e.g., gas) is on average 4 minutes longer than an N-locate ticket not having the first facility type, then an adjustment of 4 minutes may be assigned to the facility type “Gas.” On the other hand, if an N-locate ticket having a second facility type (e.g., sewer) is on average 3 minutes shorter than an N-locate ticket not having the second facility type, then an adjustment of ⁇ 3 minutes may be assigned to the facility type “Sewer.”
  • a first facility type e.g., gas
  • an adjustment of 4 minutes may be assigned to the facility type “Gas.”
  • an N-locate ticket having a second facility type e.g., sewer
  • an adjustment of ⁇ 3 minutes may be assigned to the facility
  • an adjustment may be determined based on complexity region type (e.g., as determined at during act 1206 shown in FIG. 12 ). More specifically, it may have been observed that an average ticket having a complexity region type “Gated” (e.g., the work site is within a gated community requiring some form of access approval, such as an access code) is 15 minutes longer than an overall average. Then an adjustment of 15 minutes may be assigned to all tickets having a complexity region type “Gated.” Alternatively, an appropriate adjustment may be chosen to guarantee that, with high probability, all tickets with complexity region type “Gated” will have a duration not exceeding the average duration plus the adjustment. Such an adjustment may be chosen using any known techniques using standard deviation information.
  • adjustments may be determined for other complexity region types, such as military base (e.g., 35 minutes, due to strict verification procedures for access permits) and/or regions with aerial power lines (e.g., ⁇ 10 minutes, because aerial power lines may be located without special equipment).
  • military base e.g., 35 minutes, due to strict verification procedures for access permits
  • aerial power lines e.g., ⁇ 10 minutes, because aerial power lines may be located without special equipment.
  • various scaling factors may be established for the duration estimate. For example, if a ticket is determined to be high profile with a certain reason code (e.g., as in act 1202 shown in FIG. 12 ), the reason code may be used to index an appropriate scaling factor. In some embodiments, the scaling factor may be 1.15 for a high profile ticket with no reason code given, 1.38 for the reason code “Fiber Optic,” and 1.23 for reason code “HCPhone” (or high capacity phone line).
  • a similar, but not necessarily identical, set of scaling factors may be chosen for tickets with high profile potential under reason code historical high profile (e.g., as determined in act 1210 shown in FIG. 12 ).
  • the scaling factors for no reason code, reason code “Fiber Optic” and reason code “HCPhone” may be, respectively, 1.08, 1.3 and 1.18.
  • a ticket's hourly status indicator is set to “true” (e.g., as in act 1214 shown in FIG. 12 )
  • the corresponding duration estimate may be scaled based on an estimated size of the dig area (e.g., in length or in area). More specifically, the scaling factor may be obtained by dividing the length of the dig area by a base value (e.g., 0.5 miles), or by dividing the area of the dig area by a base value (e.g. 10000 square feet).
  • a base value e.g., 0.5 miles
  • a base value e.g. 10000 square feet
  • a scaling factor such as 1.23 for emergency and 1.82 for short notice.
  • a scaling factor of less than 1 e.g., 0.9, 0.8, or 0.6
  • the technician may be more efficient during the subsequent visit because he is already familiar with the work site.
  • any adjustments determined at act 1304 and scaling factors determined at act 1306 may be applied in a suitable manner to the initial duration estimate determined at act 1302 .
  • all adjustments may be applied (e.g., added to the duration estimate), and then all scaling factors may be applied (e.g., multiplied with the duration estimate).
  • Other methods may also be possible, such as breaking down the duration estimate into different components (e.g., one for each facility type) and applying appropriate adjustments and/or scaling factors to the individual components, in addition to, or instead of applying adjustments and/or scaling factors to the overall duration estimate.
  • time assessment is performed on the basis of a locate request ticket in the above described example, it should be appreciated that the present disclosure is not so limited. Rather, time assessment may be performed with respect to any suitable unit of work, which may be larger or smaller than a locate operation corresponding to a locate request ticket. For instance, in various embodiments, time assessment may be performed with respect to a collection of related locate operations, or with respect to one or more tasks within a single locate operation.
  • Examples of tasks include, but are not limited to, traveling to a work site, reviewing a ticket in preparation for the corresponding locate operation, reviewing a relevant map, equipment preparation, locating one or more facilities, marking one or more facilities, preparing documentation (e.g., electronically or on paper) upon completion of a ticket, and/or preparing for departure from work site. Where appropriate, each of these tasks may be further broken down into subtasks, for example, based on facility type.
  • a set of business rules e.g., one or more of business rules 240 shown in FIG. 2 .
  • An exemplary set of time assessment business rules is summarized in Table 2 below (BR-006 through BR-012) and described in greater detail in Tables 8-14.
  • risk assessment may include estimating the extent of potential damages (e.g., economic losses, property and/or environmental damages, personal injuries, etc.) in the event of an accident during subsequent excavation. Additionally, or alternatively, risk assessment may include estimating a likelihood that an accident would occur given a set of circumstances (e.g., as described in a locate request ticket and/or inferred therefrom).
  • potential damages e.g., economic losses, property and/or environmental damages, personal injuries, etc.
  • risk assessment may include estimating a likelihood that an accident would occur given a set of circumstances (e.g., as described in a locate request ticket and/or inferred therefrom).
  • Risk assessment may be of interest to different entities associated with locate and/or marking operations. For instance, a locate service provider may wish to assess a level of potential liability for damages in an accident where the locate service provider is at fault (e.g., failing to complete a locate operation by a required deadline or inadequately performing a location operation). On the other hand, a facilities owner may wish to assess the extent of potential damage (e.g., the number of customers who may experience service interruption and/or costs for repairing damaged facilities). If the scope of potential damages is sufficiently large, the facilities owner may decide to dispatch an in-house locate technician to perform a locate operation, instead of contracting the operation to a locate service provider.
  • a level of potential liability for damages in an accident where the locate service provider is at fault (e.g., failing to complete a locate operation by a required deadline or inadequately performing a location operation).
  • a facilities owner may wish to assess the extent of potential damage (e.g., the number of customers who may experience service interruption and/or costs for repairing damaged facilities). If the scope of
  • the facilities owner may determine that more stringent safety procedures may be appropriate where personal injuries are likely (e.g., where a work site is located in a populous area, such as near a school or a shopping mall), and therefore may also decide to dispatch its own team of locate technicians for a better quality guarantee.
  • the risk associated with a locate request ticket may be represented as a numerical score (e.g., a number between 1 and 100) or a broad category (e.g., high, medium or low). As discussed in greater detail below, the score or category may be determined based on historical data, such as the frequency and extent of damage among a certain class of previously completed tickets. This risk measure may be used to flag some of the incoming tickets for special consideration and/or handling. For example, it may be required that a high risk ticket be handled only by a technician with a high level of skill. Alternatively, or additionally, a high risk ticket may require supervisory review after completion, to check for any errors that may have been made by the technician performing the requested locate operations. In this manner, risk assessment may reduce the likelihood of accidents, and may thereby improve the profitability of the locate service provider's operations.
  • a numerical score e.g., a number between 1 and 100
  • a broad category e.g., high, medium or low.
  • the score or category may be determined based on historical data
  • FIG. 14 shows an illustrative process 1400 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to compute a risk measurement (e.g., a numerical score or category) associated with a locate request ticket, in accordance with some embodiments.
  • a risk measurement e.g., a numerical score or category
  • a risk score may be established for each facility type to be located. For example, gas, electric and water may be assigned a risk score of 2.5, 0.7 and 0.2 respectively. These scores may be determined based on a number of different factors, such as the frequency of damages related to a facility type (e.g., the percentage of gas locates that resulted in damage reports) and the extent of damages related to a facility type (e.g., the average monetary value of claims resulting from damages to gas pipes). Finer distinctions may also be made, such as assigning different risk scores based on attributes of facilities of the same type.
  • damages to water mains may result in very high claim amounts (e.g., streets may collapse due to a ruptured water main), while damages to water lines leading a customer's premise may be minor and easy to repair.
  • the diameters of gas pipes may be taken into account, where thicker pipes may be associated with lower gas pressure and may be more at risk for explosions.
  • the various risk scores determined at act 1402 may be summed to obtain an overall risk score for the ticket.
  • one or more appropriate scaling factors may be determined for adjusting the overall risk score.
  • the ticket assessment engine may access a database of past damage reports to determine whether the work site and/or dig area for the current ticket is within a given radius (e.g., 500 yards) of one or more past damage reports and, if so, computes the total amount of claims from all of the damage reports within this radius. This total amount may in turn be used to lookup an appropriate scaling factor for the risk score, for example, as shown in Table 16 below.
  • scaling factors may, in some embodiments, be determined based on proximity to one or more mis-locates.
  • a mis-locate is said to have occurred when an error in connection with a locate and/or marking operation is discovered (e.g., during subsequent excavation), although the error may not have manifested itself as an accident.
  • proximity to one or more past trouble tickets may also be used in determining a scaling factor.
  • Trouble tickets may include any previously completed tickets whose records indicate one or more operational irregularities. For example, a past ticket may be designated as a trouble ticket if the technician dispatched to the work site had difficulty locating a certain type of facilities and had to call his supervisor for special instructions.
  • the ticket assessment engine may determine whether the excavator who submitted the excavation notice corresponding to the current ticket has a significant history of damages.
  • This history can be measured in a number of different ways. For example, an average damage amount (e.g., in dollar value) per excavation (or locate operation) may be computed for at least some of the excavators for whom historical information is available. The average may be computed over a certain time frame (e.g., the past six months, or one, two, three, five or ten year). The average across different excavators may also be computed.
  • the ticket assessment engine may compare a particular excavator's average damage amount against the average across all excavators, for example, by expressing the former as a percentage of the latter. This percentage may be used to look up a corresponding scaling factor for the overall risk score of the ticket (e.g., as shown in Table 17 below).
  • a damage count (e.g., the number of damage reports irrespective of the dollar amount for each report) may be obtained for each excavator and compared against an average damage count across different excavators, for example, over a certain time frame (e.g., the past six months, or one, two, three, five or ten year).
  • a particular excavator's damage count may be expressed as a percentage of the average damage count, and the percentage may be used to look up an appropriate scaling factor (e.g., as shown in Table 17 below).
  • Complexity designations such as high profile may also be used to determine one or more appropriate scaling factors for the overall risk score. For example, if a ticket is determined to be high profile with a certain reason code (e.g., as in act 1202 shown in FIG. 12 ), the reason code may be used to index an appropriate scaling factor. In some embodiments, the scaling factor may be 1.8 for a high profile ticket with no reason code given, 4.0 for the reason code “Fiber Optic,” and 2.5 for reason code “HCPhone” (e.g., as shown in Table 18 below).
  • the corresponding risk estimate may be scaled based on an estimated size of the dig area (e.g., in length or in area).
  • the scaling factor may be obtained by dividing the length of the dig area by a base value (e.g., 0.5 miles), or by dividing the area of the dig area by a base value (e.g. 10000 square feet).
  • the service type of a ticket e.g., as determined in act 1218 shown in FIG. 12
  • value assessment may be performed according to different measures of value. For instance, value assessment may be performed from the perspective of a locate service provider based on business value created by performing a locate operation. In some embodiments, such business value may simply be the revenue collected for performing the locate operation. Alternatively, or additionally, a measure of net profit may be used, where various operating costs may be subtracted from the revenue.
  • a measure of profit may take into account information from one or more contracts established between a locate service provider and a facilities owner (or some other entity contracting with the locate service provider to perform locate operations).
  • contractual information include, but are not limited to, contractual provisions specifying bonuses and/or penalties for certain tickets.
  • a locate contract may provide that a penalty (e.g., a suitable percentage of the contract price for performing a locate and/or marking operation) be assessed if the locate service provider fails to meet a deadline specified in a locate request ticket. Accordingly, the value associated with the ticket may be a function of time that has a sharp decline at the specified deadline.
  • the locate contract may further provide that a penalty be assessed for each billing period during which the locate service provider fails to timely respond to an excessive number of tickets.
  • a penalty may be assessed for any suitable manner, for example, in the form of a fixed percentage (e.g., 1%, 2%, 3% or 5%) applied to all tickets, or with step increases (e.g., penalizing more heavily when a higher percentage of tickets are completed late).
  • the value associated with the current ticket may depend not only on the time at which the requested operation is performed, but also on the number of tickets that have been completed late in the same billing period. For example, if the percentage of tickets that have been completed late in the same billing period is approaching 5%, the decline in value at the ticket deadline may include not only the penalty for missing the deadline of the individual ticket, but also the penalty for missing the deadlines of 5% of the tickets in that billing period.
  • value assessment may be performed from the perspective of an entity other than the locate service provider, such as a facilities owner, an excavator, a one-call center, a community (e.g., city, town, village, and/or other form of municipality) and/or an insurance company.
  • entity other than the locate service provider such as a facilities owner, an excavator, a one-call center, a community (e.g., city, town, village, and/or other form of municipality) and/or an insurance company.
  • a facilities owner may measure value in terms of value at risk (e.g., potential costs for repairing damages to facilities and/or restoring services in the event of an accident).
  • a community may use a value-at-risk measure, but the potential damages may be different (e.g., repairing property damage and/or environmental cleanup).
  • value need not be restricted to monetary value. It may be any custom defined value, or even a time-varying function.
  • the value estimate may be provided to a scheduling and dispatch application (e.g., the scheduling and dispatch application 260 shown in FIG. 2 ), which may use the value estimate to prioritize activities.
  • the value estimate may be used as a means to encourage a desired scheduling behavior. For example, if a ticket falls within a certain geographic area known to have heavy traffic during certain times of day, the value estimate may be defined as a function that has lower value during the periods of heavy traffic and higher values elsewhere. This may encourage the scheduling and dispatch application to avoid dispatching the ticket during the periods of heavy traffic.
  • the ticket assessment engine may access an up-to-date source of weather information and define the value estimate as a time-varying function according to the weather forecast for the work site.
  • the value estimate function may be defined in such a way that the scheduling and dispatch application is encouraged to avoid dispatching a technician to the work site in weather conditions that may hinder the locating and marking of underground facilities (e.g., rain or snow).
  • FIG. 15 shows an illustrative process 1500 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to compute an estimated value (e.g., expected revenue) for a locate request ticket.
  • an estimated value e.g., expected revenue
  • the ticket assessment engine may determine if the ticket is a duplicate ticket, such as a re-mark, re-stake or re-note ticket. Under some service contracts, such tickets may not be billed if the re-mark, re-stake or re-note is necessitated due to some action, or lack of action, by the locate service provider. Additionally, some service contracts may specify that two tickets transmitted on the same day are duplicate tickets if the corresponding work sites are sufficiently close to each other, and that only one of the duplicate tickets may be billed.
  • a duplicate ticket such as a re-mark, re-stake or re-note ticket.
  • the ticket assessment engine sets the revenue to zero at act 1504 . Otherwise, the ticket assessment engine may determined the applicable billing method at act 1506 , for example, whether the ticket should be billed at a flat rate, per unit of work performed, or per hour worked.
  • the ticket assessment engine may proceed to act 1508 and consult a billing rate table to select an appropriate flat rate, for example, based on the type of facility located and/or the identity of the facility owner. Otherwise, the ticket assessment engine may proceed to act 1510 and determine an appropriate billing rate, which may be either per unit of work performed (e.g., unit length of facility marked, unit area of dig area located, or some other custom-defined unit of work) or per hour worked. Then the ticket assessment engine may proceed to act 1512 to obtain an estimated scope of the ticket (e.g., as determined during the process 1100 shown in FIG. 11 ) or an estimated duration of the ticket (e.g., as determined during the process 1300 shown in FIG. 13 ). Based on the rate information and the scope or time information, the ticket assessment engine may compute an estimated revenue amount for the ticket.
  • a billing rate table to select an appropriate flat rate, for example, based on the type of facility located and/or the identity of the facility owner. Otherwise, the ticket assessment engine may proceed to act 1510 and determine an appropriate billing rate,
  • process 1500 may alternatively be performed on a per facility type basis. That is, a revenue estimate may be determined for each facility type to be located using a process similar to the process 1500 . Then the separate revenue estimates may be summed to obtain a total estimate for the ticket.
  • value assessment may take into account one or more other assessment outcomes in addition to, or instead of, estimated scope or duration. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 17 and discussed in greater detail below, value assessment may, directly or indirectly, be informed by assessment outcomes relating to location, complexity, risk, and resource.
  • a set of business rules e.g., one or more of business rules 240 shown in FIG. 2 .
  • An exemplary set of value assessment business rules is summarized in Table 2 below (BR-019 through BR-022) and described in greater detail in Tables 20-23.
  • resource assessment may include identifying one or more resources (e.g., equipment and/or personnel) needed and/or recommended to adequately perform a requested locate operation. For instance, ticket information, auxiliary information and/or outcomes from other types of assessment (e.g., scope and/or complexity) may be analyzed to determine whether any resource requirements and/or recommendations exist for the requested locate operation.
  • resources e.g., equipment and/or personnel
  • auxiliary information and/or outcomes from other types of assessment e.g., scope and/or complexity
  • FIG. 16A shows an illustrative process 1600 A that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to identify one or more pieces of equipment that may be required and/or recommended for a locate operation but may not be available to a locate technician under ordinary circumstances (e.g., not included in a standard set of equipment carried by a locate technician).
  • one or more maps may be retrieved based on a work site location that is obtained either from the ticket information or as an outcome of location assessment.
  • the retrieved maps may be analyzed to identify any equipment that may be useful in performing the requested locate operation. For example, a facilities map may be retrieved and analyzed to determine whether one or more manholes are located at or near the work site and/or whether a locate technician would need to connect a locate transmitter to a connection point in a manhole.
  • a “sissy hook” (or “sissy bar”), or a similar device for facilitating manhole recover removal, may be recommended.
  • safety devices may be required by a worker's safety organization such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
  • OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
  • An insurance company may also require the use of certain safety devices as a precondition to payment of damage or injury claims.
  • a hot stick may be recommended, which could be used to secure the connection between the locate transmitter and the connection point without the locate technician physically entering the manhole.
  • one or more street maps may also be retrieved and analyzed at act 1602 A. For instance, it may be determined based on the work site location and one or more street maps that the work site is in an urban setting, in which case a less persistent marking material (e.g., washable paint) may be recommended so as to reduce the impact of the locate marks on the aesthetic appearance of the work site. On the other hand, if it is determined that the work site is in a high traffic area (e.g., on or near a highway), a more persistent marking material (e.g., oil-based paint) may be recommended so as to reduce the likelihood of the locate marks wearing off prior to excavation.
  • a less persistent marking material e.g., washable paint
  • a more persistent marking material e.g., oil-based paint
  • the ticket assessment engine may, at act 1604 A, retrieve and analyze historical information (e.g., one or more records of previously completed locate and/or marking operations). For example, it may be determined based on work site location and historical information that the work site likely has bad tracer wires, in which case a more advanced locate transmitter and/or receiver may be needed to obtain sufficient signal strength (e.g., locate transmitter and/or receiver with different frequency ranges). Alternatively, or additionally, a different type of locate device may be recommended, such as a sonar or ground penetrating radar device (e.g., the “Inspector 07” locator marketed by Subsurface Instruments, Inc.), which may be used to locate underground facilities without being hooked up to tracer wires.
  • a sonar or ground penetrating radar device e.g., the “Inspector 07” locator marketed by Subsurface Instruments, Inc.
  • the ticket assessment engine may examine a dig area description (e.g., as provided in a free text portion of the locate request ticket) to identify any special circumstances that may require addition equipment.
  • a dig area description e.g., as provided in a free text portion of the locate request ticket
  • the dig area description may indicate that the work site is within a construction zone, in which case the locate technician may be required to wear a hard hat while on site.
  • the need to remove manhole covers may be inferred based on information other than facilities maps. As one example, if the work site is located in an urban or densely populated area, it is likely that the locate technician would encounter at least one manhole. As another example, an image of the work site (e.g., a VWL image based on an aerial image of the work site) may be consulted to determine whether one or more manholes are present. As yet another example, the need to remove manhole covers may be explicitly indicated in a free text portion of the locate request ticket (e.g., in a locate instructions section).
  • one or more contracts established between a locate service provider and a facilities owner may specify particular tools/equipment requirements for some types of locate operations, in which case the ticket assessment engine would consult auxiliary information such as contract information and any particular contractual obligations therein relating to tool and/or equipment requirements.
  • the ticket assessment engine may recommend or require certain equipment without analyzing any auxiliary information. For instance, a locate technician may be required or recommended to review one or more facilities maps upon arrival at a work site to familiarize himself with the layout of underground facilities at the work site (e.g., general directions of various facilities lines, locations of connection points, etc.) and to plan his work accordingly. Therefore, the ticket assessment engine may identify one or more relevant facilities maps (e.g., based on the work site location) as being recommended or required for the locate operation.
  • a locate technician may be required or recommended to review one or more facilities maps upon arrival at a work site to familiarize himself with the layout of underground facilities at the work site (e.g., general directions of various facilities lines, locations of connection points, etc.) and to plan his work accordingly. Therefore, the ticket assessment engine may identify one or more relevant facilities maps (e.g., based on the work site location) as being recommended or required for the locate operation.
  • resource assessment may identify a personnel skill level or certification required and/or recommended to perform a locate operation. For example, in some jurisdictions, only a technician with gas certification may be dispatched to perform a locate operation involving gas pipes. In another example, one or more assessment outcomes (e.g., scope, location, complexity, time and/or risk) may be used to determine a minimum skill level requirement for the locate operation. As a more specific example, a ticket may be assigned a high complexity level due to complex layout of underground facilities at or near the work site, in which case it may be desirable to dispatch a technician with knowledge and/or familiarity of the geographical area encompassing the work site.
  • assessment outcomes e.g., scope, location, complexity, time and/or risk
  • personnel skill level may include both long term measurements (e.g., years of experience and/or cumulative training) and short term measurements (e.g., recent performance evaluations).
  • statistics may be collected regarding each technician's performance patterns. For instance, a technician may consistent perform at a higher level during certain hours of day (e.g., in the morning or in the afternoon), and may be assigned different skill levels depending on the time of day of dispatch.
  • FIG. 16B shows an illustrative process 1600 B that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to identify one or more requirements and/or recommendations for selecting a suitable technician to perform a requested locate operation.
  • skill requirements and/or recommendations may refer broadly to any suitable attributes of a technician, including experience level, past performance level (e.g., both long term and short term), certifications, and/or security clearance.
  • the ticket assessment engine may determine skill requirements based on the types of facilities to be located. For example, a contract with a facility owner (e.g., gas) may require that only technicians with the appropriate certification (e.g., gas certification) be dispatched to locate facilities owned by that facility owner. This may be done by consulting a lookup table that maps facility types to skill requirements (e.g., the lookup table 850 shown in FIG. 8 ).
  • a facility owner e.g., gas
  • the appropriate certification e.g., gas certification
  • the ticket assessment engine may determine whether the ticket is associated with any complexity types (e.g., as determined during the process 1200 shown in FIG. 12 ). If so, the ticket assessment engine may look up any skill requirements associated with the identified complexity types. For example, a complexity reason code “Military Base” may indicate that only technicians with certain levels of security clearance may gain access to the work site. As another example, for a high profile ticket (e.g., by reason of high profile facilities types and/or proximity to historical damages), a high level of experience and/or good performance may be recommended.
  • any complexity types e.g., as determined during the process 1200 shown in FIG. 12 . If so, the ticket assessment engine may look up any skill requirements associated with the identified complexity types. For example, a complexity reason code “Military Base” may indicate that only technicians with certain levels of security clearance may gain access to the work site. As another example, for a high profile ticket (e.g., by reason of high profile facilities types and/or proximity to historical damages), a high level of experience and/or
  • the ticket assessment engine may obtain a risk score for the ticket (e.g., as determined during the process 1400 shown in FIG. 14 ) and look up any applicable skill requirements. For example, a technician with a high level of experience and/or good performance may be recommended and/or required for a high risk ticket.
  • FIG. 17 shows an illustrative example of a ticket assessment process executed by a multi-stage ticket assessment engine (e.g., the ticket assessment engine 230 shown in FIGS. 2 and 2A ), having a network of assessment modules or subprocesses.
  • the assessment modules may be arranged in multiple stages (e.g., six stages), where an assessment module at each stage may receive as input one or more intermediate outcomes of assessment from one or more previous stages. For instance, in the embodiment shown in FIG.
  • a first stage may include a scope assessment module 1710 A and a location assessment module 1710 B
  • a second stage may include a complexity assessment module 1820 A
  • a third stage may include a duration assessment module 1730 A and a risk assessment module 1730 B
  • a fourth stage may include a resource assessment module 1740 A
  • a fifth stage may include an adjusted duration assessment module 1750 A
  • a sixth stage may include a value assessment module 1760 A.
  • the ticket assessment process may receive as initial input a locate request ticket (e.g., the ticket 300 shown in FIG. 3 ) as part of ticket information 225 .
  • Various information elements may be extracted from the input ticket (e.g., using a ticket parsing process such as the one shown in FIG. 5 and described above) and provided to various assessment modules.
  • scope-related information such as polygon and/or dig area indicator coordinates and/or member codes identifying one or more notified facilities owners may be extracted and provided to the scope assessment module 1710 A.
  • one or more relevant facilities maps 255 A may be accessed (e.g., from the auxiliary information storage 250 shown in FIG. 2 ) and provided to the scope assessment module 1710 A. Based on these pieces of information, the scope assessment module 1710 A may output the number of facilities to be located pursuant to the input ticket, as well as an indication of whether the facilities to be located include one or more high profile gas facilities.
  • the member codes shown at 314 may indicate a total of four facilities types to be located (e.g., sewer, water, gas, and cable).
  • location-related information such as work site address and/or GPS coordinates may be extracted from the input ticket and provided to the location assessment module 1710 B.
  • one or more relevant street maps 255 B may be accessed (e.g., from the auxiliary information storage 250 shown in FIG. 2 ) and provided to the location assessment module 1710 B, which may analyze the street maps 255 B to determine whether the work site is likely to be in a rural area (e.g., as distinguished from an urban or suburban area). The outcome of that determination may be output by the location assessment module 1710 B.
  • the work site address shown at 304 A may be extracted from the ticket 300 and provided to the locate assessment module 1710 B, which may determine that the work site is not located in a rural area.
  • one or more outputs of the first stage may be provided to the complexity assessment module 1720 A, which may analyze those intermediate assessment outcomes and assign a complexity category to the input ticket.
  • the complexity assessment module 1720 A may implement the following decision table.
  • the scope assessment module 1710 A may determine that the input ticket does request that one or more high profile gas facilities be located, and the location assessment module 1710 B may determine that the work site is not located in a rural area. As a result, the complexity assessment module 1720 A may assign a complexity level of “High” to the input ticket.
  • one or more outputs of the first and second stages may be provided to the duration assessment module 1730 A, which may analyze those intermediate assessment outcomes and output an estimated duration for completing the input ticket.
  • the duration assessment module 1730 A may assume that a certain amount of time (e.g., 10 minutes) may be needed to locate each type of facilities, and that the total duration may be scaled according to the complexity category (e.g., scaling factors of 1, 1.2 and 1.5 may be applied, respectively, to the complexity categories low, medium and high).
  • the scope assessment module 1710 A may determine that the input ticket requests a total of four facilities to be located. Because the complexity assessment module 1720 A has assigned a complexity level of “High” to the input ticket. the duration assessment module 1730 A may compute an estimated duration for the input ticket as follows:
  • the number of facilities to be located and the complexity category may be provided to the risk assessment module 1730 B, which may analyze those intermediate assessment outcomes and assign a risk category to the input ticket.
  • the risk assessment module 1730 B may implement the following decision table.
  • the risk assessment module 1730 B may assign a risk level of “High” to the input ticket.
  • This outcome may be output by the overall assessment process as a final outcome, Risk Assessment Outcome 1772 , which may be used by other ticket manage system components, such as the scheduling and dispatch application 260 shown in FIG. 2 .
  • the output of the risk assessment module 1730 B may also be an intermediate outcome consumed by an assessment module at a subsequent stage, such as the resource assessment module 1740 A at the fourth stage, which may determine an appropriate technician skill level according to the risk category assigned to the input ticket.
  • the resource assessment module 1740 A may determine that a high risk ticket may require a technician skill level of “expert,” a medium risk ticket may require a technician skill level of “experienced” or higher, and a low risk ticket may be dispatched to any technician, including those at a “trainee” level.
  • the resource assessment module 1740 A may determine that an expert technician may be required.
  • the resource assessment outcome may be output as a final outcome, Resource Assessment Outcome 1774 , for use by other ticket manage system components.
  • one or more outputs of the previous stages may be provided to the adjusted duration assessment module 1750 A, which may adjust the estimated duration based on technician skill level.
  • the adjusted duration assessment module 1750 A may apply scaling factors of 1, 1.1 and 1.3, respectively, to tickets with technician skill levels of expert, experienced and trainee.
  • the adjusted duration assessment module 1750 A may apply one or more scaling factors to the estimated duration based on a resource assessment outcome relating to required or recommended equipment. For instance, the estimated duration may be adjusted upward if a piece of additional or more advanced equipment (e.g., an “Inspector 07” locator) is required or recommended.
  • the adjusted duration assessment module 1750 A may compute an adjusted duration for the input ticket as follows:
  • the adjusted duration may be output as a final outcome, Time Assessment Outcome 1776 , for use by other ticket manage system components.
  • one or more outputs of the previous stages may be provided to the value assessment module 1760 A, which may analyze those pieces of information and estimate the amount of profit to be gained by completing the input ticket.
  • the value assessment module 1760 A may access contractual information from one or more databases to determine an amount of revenue that the locate service provider can expect to collect for completing the input ticket.
  • the value assessment module 1760 A may also access employee and/or company information from one or more databases to determine an estimated cost for completing the ticket, which may include technician compensation, materials costs and/or overhead costs.
  • the value assessment module 1760 A may determine that the expected revenue rate is $10 per type of facilities located and the expected cost is $0.5 per minute worked.
  • the value assessment module 1760 A may compute the estimated profit as follows:
  • the estimated profit may be output as a final outcome, Value Assessment Outcome 1778 , for use by other ticket manage system components.
  • FIG. 17 Although various implementation details are shown in FIG. 17 and described above, it should be appreciated that such details are provided merely for purposes of illustration, and that the present disclosure is not limited to these specific examples.
  • various assessment modules need not be arranged in linearly ordered stages. Rather, the network of assessment modules can have any suitable configuration (e.g., including one or more loops).
  • the businesses rules implemented by the assessment modules of FIG. 17 are provided solely for purposes of illustration, as other business rules may also be suitable (e.g., the business rules shown in Tables 2-26 below).
  • FIG. 18 shows an example of a work order 1800 that may be created from an incoming locate request ticket (e.g., the ticket 300 shown in FIG. 3 ).
  • the work order 1800 may include a plurality of information elements extracted from the ticket 300 , such as ticket number 1802 , address of work site 1804 , excavation information 1806 , due date information 1808 , excavator information 1810 , etc. These information elements may be presented in the work order 1800 in a different format compared to the ticket 300 .
  • the work order 1800 may also include additional information elements, such as a work order number 1812 different from the ticket number (e.g., multiple different work orders may be created based on the same ticket), an expected duration 1814 (e.g., as determined during the process 1300 shown in FIG. 13 ) and work order task information 1816 listing the facility types to be located within this work order.
  • additional information elements such as a work order number 1812 different from the ticket number (e.g., multiple different work orders may be created based on the same ticket), an expected duration 1814 (e.g., as determined during the process 1300 shown in FIG. 13 ) and work order task information 1816 listing the facility types to be located within this work order.
  • the work order 1800 may be forwarded by the ticket assessment engine to other software applications for further processing.
  • the scheduling and dispatch application 260 (as shown in FIG. 2 ) may schedule the work order to commence at a certain date and time (e.g., Jan. 4, 2009 at 9:00 AM, as shown in FIG. 18 ).
  • a feedback mechanism (e.g., the backend assessment module 290 shown in FIG. 2 ) may be provided in accordance with some embodiments to review completed tickets and perform various information updates.
  • the various processes carried out by the ticket assessment engine 230 may rely on historical information, such as statistical information regarding previously completed tickets. For improved performance and reliability, it may be desirable to update the historical and/or statistical information on an on-going basis, as more completed tickets are accumulated over time.
  • the backend assessment module 290 may be programmed to make adjustments to the assessment business rules 240 shown in FIG. 2 .
  • any historical averages used in the assessment business rules 240 may be updated on a regular basis.
  • an illustrative business rule BR-007 is shown in Table 9 below, which is based on historical average durations of locate operations.
  • the duration of a 3-locate ticket for which sewer is one of the facility types to be located may be, on average, three minutes shorter than that of a 3-locate ticket without a sewer locate.
  • Such an adjustment in duration may be adjusted regularly (e.g., daily, weekly, monthly, annually, etc.), or according to any other suitable schedule, based on data collected from recently completed locate operations.
  • the analysis of a previously completed locate operation may be informed by an outcome of the excavation activities that took place subsequent to the locate operation.
  • the duration of the locate operation was two minutes shorter than average.
  • an accident occurred during subsequent excavation and a probable cause of the accident was misplacement of locate marks.
  • the duration of the locate operation may be considered an anomaly and may not be used to adjust the historical average duration used for assessing future tickets.
  • new rules may be added as new patterns are observed from newly accumulated information. For example, a pattern may emerge that locate operations within 2 miles of central Manhattan, N.Y. are, on average, four minutes longer than locate operations conducted elsewhere. Accordingly, a new rule may be defined to adjust the estimated duration upward by four minutes for all locate request tickets within 2 miles of central Manhattan, N.Y. Alternatively, a new complexity type may be created (e.g., “high density urban”) and all locate operations within 2 miles of central Manhattan, N.Y. may be assigned the new complexity type. New business rules may then be defined to adjust the estimated duration upward for all locate operations having the new complexity type.
  • a new complexity type may be created (e.g., “high density urban”) and all locate operations within 2 miles of central Manhattan, N.Y. may be assigned the new complexity type. New business rules may then be defined to adjust the estimated duration upward for all locate operations having the new complexity type.
  • the facilities maps available from one-call centers and/or facility owners may not always contain sufficient and accurate information.
  • the only available facilities maps may have been created many years ago and may not contain absolute location information such as lat/long coordinates.
  • Some of the street-level landmarks shown on the maps may have been moved or no longer exist. In such a situation, it may be difficult to determine the exact location of some of the facilities shown on the maps.
  • the GIS 610 shown in FIG. 6 may be used as part of a system for continually improving the quality of available facilities maps.
  • the GIS 610 may be used to digitize existing maps printed on paper or cloth and augment the digitized maps with geospatial metadata.
  • the geospatial metadata added to facilities maps may be generated at least partially based on previously completed locate request tickets.
  • the backend assessment module 290 shown in FIG. 2 may be adapted to recognize some geographic areas as areas with insufficient information and may forward to the GIS 610 the results of completed location operations in those areas, which may include technician logs and/or geotagged images with technician annotations indicating marked facilities. Using this information, the GIS 610 may be able to derive accurate location information for the marked facilities and augment the facilities maps accordingly with some appropriate geospatial metadata.
  • the backend assessment module 290 may be programmed to discover inconsistencies between existing facilities maps and the actual result of a completed locate operation, and to notify the GIS 610 of the discovered inconsistencies.
  • the GIS 610 may be adapted to receive from a human user an indication that there is an error on an existing facilities map. In either situation, the GIS 610 may respond by verifying the report of inconsistency and correcting the facilities map accordingly.
  • the backend assessment module 290 may be programmed to perform time-related analyses based on completed tickets.
  • the types of time-related analyses of interest may vary according the entity from whose perspective the analyses are performed. For instance, from the perspective of a locate service provider, it may be desirable to analyze not only total on-site time (e.g., the length of time between a technician arriving at a work site and the technician departing from the work site upon completion of the requested locate operation), but also a breakdown of the total duration into individual tasks, such as equipment preparation, locating, marking final documentation and/or personal breaks. Each task may be further broken down, for example, into subtasks each pertaining to a particular type of facilities.
  • the locate service provider may also analyze travel time, for example, between successive locate operations and/or daily, weekly or monthly totals. These types of fine-grained analyses (e.g., analyzing durations of smaller units of work) may help the locate service provider identify potential quality and/or efficiency issues.
  • the backend assessment module may compare each technician's record against fleet-wide and/or historical records and may, as a result, identify a technician who consistently spends too much (or too little) time when locating a particular type of facilities. This may suggest further training for the technician with respect to the particular facilities type to ensure that the technician correctly follows the recommended procedures. As another example, the backend assessment module may identify a technician whose patterns of personal breaks negatively impact his work efficiency, in which case coaching may be appropriate.
  • Time-related analyses may also be performed from the perspective of an entity other than a locate service provider, such as a regulatory body, a one-call center and/or an insurance company.
  • a regulatory body or one-call center may be more interested in timely completion of tickets (e.g., reporting percentage of tickets that are completed on time and/or identifying tickets that are completed late) and less interested in work duration (e.g., length of time taken to complete the requested locate operation or a task within the requested locate operation).
  • Statistics on response time e.g., length of time between receiving a ticket from a one-call center and completing the requested locate operation
  • the backend assessment module 290 may be programmed to review completed tickets and identify suitable candidates for human review. For instance, a regulatory body may used the backend assessment module to identify high risk and/or high value tickets to be audited.
  • a quality control application e.g., the quality control application 270 shown in FIG. 2
  • the quality control application may flag those tickets with potential quality issues (e.g., technician unable to gain access to dig area, insufficient locate signals, inclement weather during operation, etc.)
  • the backend assessment module may itself be programmed to perform some or all of the quality control analysis.
  • backend assessment may be employed to reduce the volume of completed tickets that require human review, without unacceptable degradation in safety.
  • Examples of manual, semi-automated and automated quality assessment techniques that may be implemented as part of backend assessment can be found in one or more of the following references, each of which is incorporated herein by reference:
  • Example rules of assessment business rules 240 Number Category Impacts Name Description BR-001 Complexity Time, Keywords - Use keywords to predict complexity Risk, Complexity potential and/or high Resource profile potential BR-002 Complexity Time, Complexity Determine whether excavation notice Risk, Region - is within a Complexity Region Resource Complexity BR-003 Complexity Time, Proximity to Use proximity to historical high Risk, Historical High profile tickets to estimate high Resource Profile - High profile potential Profile BR-004 Complexity Time, Project/Hourly Determine if a project/hourly scope Risk, Scope - applies to the excavation notice Resource, Complexity Revenue BR-005 Complexity Time, Emergency/Short Determine if an emergency/short Risk, Notice Type - notice type applies to the excavation Resource Complexity notice BR-006 Time Time Locate Count - Use number of locates to set initial Time estimate of ticket duration BR-007 Time Time Facility Type - Use facility types to be located to Time adjust estimated ticket duration BR-008 Time Time High Profile - Use high profile certainty to adjust
  • Historical damage reports will be retained along with excavator, damage cost, facility type, and latitude/longitude coordinates which define the damage location. For example: MIN DAMAGE MAX DAMAGE RISK MULTIPLIER 1 1000 1.1 1000 10000 1.3 10000 100000 2.0 100000 1000000 4.0
  • Business Rule ID BR-21.1
  • Business Rule ID BR-21.2
  • Business Rule Description Duplicate Ticket, Contract-specific attributes
  • inventive embodiments are presented by way of example only and that, within the scope of the appended claims and equivalents thereto, inventive embodiments may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described and claimed.
  • inventive embodiments of the present disclosure are directed to each individual feature, system, article, material, kit, and/or method described herein.
  • the above-described embodiments can be implemented in any of numerous ways.
  • the embodiments may be implemented using hardware, software or a combination thereof.
  • the software code can be executed on any suitable processor or collection of processors, whether provided in a single computer or distributed among multiple computers.
  • FIG. 19 shows an illustrative computer 1900 that may be used for improving information management, dissemination, and utilization in the locate industry and other field service industries, in accordance with some embodiments.
  • the computer 1900 comprises a memory 1910 , a processing unit 1912 (which may include one or more processors), one or more communication interfaces 1914 , one or more display units 1916 , and one or more user input devices 1918 .
  • the memory 1910 may comprise any tangible computer-readable media, and may store computer instructions for implementing various components of a ticket management system, such as the ticket parser 210 and the ticket assessment engine 230 shown in FIG. 2 and the geographic information system 610 shown in FIG. 6 .
  • the processing unit 1912 may be used to execute the instructions implementing these software components.
  • the communication interface(s) 1914 may be coupled to a wired or wireless network, bus, or other communication means and may therefore allow the computer 1900 to transmit communications to and/or receive communications from other devices.
  • the display unit(s) 1916 may be provided, for example, to allow a human user to view assessment outcomes produced by the ticket assessment engine 230 .
  • the user input device(s) 1918 may be provided, for example, to allow the human user to make any desired manual adjustments to the assessment outcomes.
  • the various methods or processes outlined herein may be coded as software that is executable on one or more processors that employ any one of a variety of operating systems or platforms. Additionally, such software may be written using any of a number of suitable programming languages and/or programming or scripting tools, and also may be compiled as executable machine language code or intermediate code that is executed on a framework or virtual machine.
  • inventive concepts may be embodied as a computer readable storage medium (or multiple computer readable storage media) (e.g., a computer memory, one or more floppy discs, compact discs, optical discs, magnetic tapes, flash memories, circuit configurations in Field Programmable Gate Arrays or other semiconductor devices, or other non-transitory medium or tangible computer storage medium) encoded with one or more programs that, when executed on one or more computers or other processors, perform methods that implement the various embodiments of the invention discussed above.
  • the computer readable medium or media can be transportable, such that the program or programs stored thereon can be loaded onto one or more different computers or other processors to implement various aspects of the present invention as discussed above.
  • program or “software” are used herein in a generic sense to refer to any type of computer code or set of computer-executable instructions that can be employed to program a computer or other processor to implement various aspects of embodiments as discussed above. Additionally, it should be appreciated that according to one aspect, one or more computer programs that when executed perform methods of the present invention need not reside on a single computer or processor, but may be distributed in a modular fashion amongst a number of different computers or processors to implement various aspects of the present invention.
  • Computer-executable instructions may be in many forms, such as program modules, executed by one or more computers or other devices.
  • program modules include routines, programs, objects, components, data structures, etc. that perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types.
  • functionality of the program modules may be combined or distributed as desired in various embodiments.
  • data structures may be stored in computer-readable media in any suitable form.
  • data structures may be shown to have fields that are related through location in the data structure. Such relationships may likewise be achieved by assigning storage for the fields with locations in a computer-readable medium that conveys relationship between the fields.
  • any suitable mechanism may be used to establish a relationship between information in fields of a data structure, including through the use of pointers, tags or other mechanisms that establish relationship between data elements.
  • inventive concepts may be embodied as one or more methods, of which an example has been provided.
  • the acts performed as part of the method may be ordered in any suitable way. Accordingly, embodiments may be constructed in which acts are performed in an order different than illustrated, which may include performing some acts simultaneously, even though shown as sequential acts in illustrative embodiments.
  • a reference to “A and/or B”, when used in conjunction with open-ended language such as “comprising” can refer, in one embodiment, to A only (optionally including elements other than B); in another embodiment, to B only (optionally including elements other than A); in yet another embodiment, to both A and B (optionally including other elements); etc.
  • the phrase “at least one,” in reference to a list of one or more elements, should be understood to mean at least one element selected from any one or more of the elements in the list of elements, but not necessarily including at least one of each and every element specifically listed within the list of elements and not excluding any combinations of elements in the list of elements.
  • This definition also allows that elements may optionally be present other than the elements specifically identified within the list of elements to which the phrase “at least one” refers, whether related or unrelated to those elements specifically identified.
  • “at least one of A and B” can refer, in one embodiment, to at least one, optionally including more than one, A, with no B present (and optionally including elements other than B); in another embodiment, to at least one, optionally including more than one, B, with no A present (and optionally including elements other than A); in yet another embodiment, to at least one, optionally including more than one, A, and at least one, optionally including more than one, B (and optionally including other elements); etc.

Abstract

Locate and/or marking operations involve detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities. One or more attributes of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket are assessed to provide one or more ticket assessment outcomes. Ticket information is obtained from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing the locate request ticket. One or more business rules are applied to at least some of the ticket information to generate the ticket assessment outcome(s) for the attribute(s) of the locate and/or marking operation. The ticket assessment outcome(s) is/are transmitted and/or stored so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching a locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation.

Description

    CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION
  • This application claims a priority benefit, under 35 U.S.C. §119(a), to Canadian application serial no. (not yet assigned), entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Assessing Locate Request Tickets,” filed on Jun. 23, 2010, under attorney docket no. PAT 71588-1 CA.
  • This application claims a priority benefit, under 35 U.S.C. §119(e), to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/220,491, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Assessing Field Service Operation Tickets,” filed on Jun. 25, 2009 under Attorney Docket No. D0687.70034US00.
  • Each of the above-identified applications is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
  • BACKGROUND
  • Fixed and mobile computer-based information systems are becoming cheaper, more rugged, and increasingly networked. As a result, technological advances are changing the way businesses collect, analyze, and manage information. For example, certain processes and certain types of equipment and instrumentation are becoming more automatic in nature, especially with regard to the capture and manipulation of data and the conversion of data into useful information.
  • The area of field service operations is an example of an area that is experiencing growth in information technology. Field service operations may be any operation in which companies dispatch technicians and/or other staff to remote locations in order to perform certain activities, for example, installations, services and/or repairs. Field service operations may exist in industries, such as, but not limited to, network installations, utility installations, security systems, construction, medical equipment, heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) and the like.
  • An example of a field service operation in the construction industry is a so-called “locate and marking operation,” also commonly referred to more simply as a “locate operation” (or sometimes merely as “a locate”). In a typical locate operation, a locate technician visits a work site in which there is a plan to disturb the ground (e.g., excavate, dig one or more holes and/or trenches, bore, etc.) so as to determine a presence or an absence of one or more underground facilities (such as various types of utility cables and pipes) in a dig area to be excavated or disturbed at the work site.
  • In many states, an excavator who plans to disturb ground at a work site is required by law to notify any potentially affected underground facility owners prior to undertaking an excavation activity. Advanced notice of excavation activities may be provided by an excavator (or another party) by contacting a “one-call center.” One-call centers typically are operated by a consortium of underground facility owners for the purposes of receiving excavation notices and in turn notifying facility owners and/or their agents of a plan to excavate. As part of an advanced notification, excavators typically provide to the one-call center various information relating to the planned activity, including a description of the dig area to be excavated or otherwise disturbed.
  • FIG. 1 illustrates an example in which a locate operation is initiated as a result of an excavator 110 providing an excavation notice to a one-call center 120. An excavation notice also is commonly referred to as a “locate request,” and may be provided by the excavator to the one-call center via an electronic mail message, information entry via a website maintained by the one-call center, or a telephone conversation between the excavator and a human operator at the one-call center. The locate request may include an address or some other location-related information describing the geographic location of a work site at which the excavation is to be performed, as well as a description of the dig area (e.g., a text description), such as its location relative to certain landmarks and/or its approximate dimensions, within which there is a plan to disturb the ground.
  • Based on this information, the one-call center identifies certain underground facilities that may be affected by the proposed excavation at the work site. For example, one-call centers generally have access to various existing maps of underground facilities in their jurisdiction, referred to as “facilities maps.” Facilities maps typically are provided by underground facilities owners within the jurisdiction and show, for respective different utility types, where underground facilities purportedly may be found relative to some geographic reference frame or coordinate system (e.g., a grid, a street or property map, GPS latitude and longitude coordinates, etc.).
  • Most often, using such facilities maps, a one-call center identifies a significant buffer zone around an identified work site (i.e., based on the address or location information provided by an excavator in the locate request), so as to make an over-inclusive identification of underground utilities that are implicated by the proposed excavation (e.g., to err on the side of caution). This practice of creating a buffer zone around an identified work site with reference to one or more facilities maps commonly is referred to as generating a “polygon” or “polygon map.” Based on these generally over-inclusive polygons (and in some instances significantly over-inclusive polygons), the one-call center identifies all of the underground facilities that may fall within the polygon so as to notify the corresponding facility owners and/or their agents of the proposed excavation. Again, it should be appreciated that polygons or polygon maps utilized by one-call centers for this purpose typically embrace a geographic area that includes but goes well beyond the actual work site, and in many cases the geographic area enclosed by a given polygon is significantly larger than the actual dig area in which excavation or other similar activities are planned.
  • Once facilities implicated by the locate request are identified by a one-call center (e.g., via the polygon process), the one-call center generates a “locate request ticket” (also known as a “locate ticket,” or simply a “ticket”). The locate request ticket typically identifies the work site of the proposed excavation and a description of the dig area, typically lists on the ticket all of the underground facilities implicated by the proposed excavation (e.g., by providing a member code for the facility owner of an underground facility that falls within a given polygon), and may also include various other information relevant to the proposed excavation (e.g., the name of the excavation company, a name of a property owner or party contracting the excavation company to perform the excavation, etc.). The one-call center sends the ticket to one or more underground facility owners 140 and/or one or more locate service providers 130 (who may be acting as contracted agents of the facility owners) so that they can conduct a locate and marking operation to verify a presence or absence of the underground facilities in the dig area. For example, in some instances, a given underground facility owner 140 may operate its own fleet of locate technicians (e.g., locate technician 145), in which case the one-call center 120 may send the ticket to the underground facility owner 140. In other instances, a given facility owner may contract with a locate service provider to receive locate request tickets and perform a locate and marking operation in response to received tickets on their behalf.
  • More specifically, upon receiving the locate request, a locate service provider or a facility owner (hereafter referred to as a “ticket recipient”) may dispatch a locate technician to the work site of planned excavation to determine a presence or absence of one or more underground facilities in the dig area to be excavated or otherwise disturbed. A first step for the locate technician includes utilizing an underground facility “locate device,” which is an instrument for detecting facilities that are concealed in some manner, such as cables and pipes that are located underground, to verify the presence or absence of underground facilities indicated in the locate request ticket as potentially present in the dig area (e.g., via the facility owner member codes listed in the ticket). An underground facility locate device is used to detect electromagnetic fields that are generated by a “test” signal provided along a length of a target facility to be identified. Locate devices typically include both a signal transmitter to provide the test signal (e.g., which is applied by the locate technician to a tracer wire disposed along a length of a facility), and a signal receiver which is generally a hand-held apparatus carried by the locate technician as the technician walks around the dig area to search for underground facilities. The signal receiver indicates a presence of a facility when it detects electromagnetic fields arising from the test signal. Conversely, the absence of a signal detected by the receiver of the locate device generally indicates the absence of the target facility.
  • Subsequently, the locate technician then generally marks the presence (and in some cases the absence) of a given underground facility in the dig area based on the various signals detected (or not detected) using the locate device. For this purpose, the locate technician conventionally utilizes a “marking device” to dispense a marking material on, for example, the surface of the ground along a detected underground facility. Marking material may be any material, substance, compound, and/or element, used or which may be used separately or in combination to mark, signify, and/or indicate. Examples of marking materials may include, but are not limited to, paint, chalk, dye, and/or iron. Marking devices, such as paint marking wands and/or paint marking wheels, provide a convenient method of dispensing marking materials onto surfaces, such as onto the surface of the ground.
  • In some environments, arrows, flags, darts, or other types of physical marks may be used to mark the presence or absence of an underground facility in a dig area, in addition to or as an alternative to a material applied to the ground (such as paint, chalk, dye) along the path of a detected utility. The marks resulting from any of a wide variety of materials and/or objects used to indicate a presence or absence of underground facilities generally are referred to as “locate marks.” Often, different color materials and/or physical objects may be used for locate marks, wherein different colors correspond to different utility types. For example, the American Public Works Association (APWA) has established a standardized color-coding system for utility identification for use by public agencies, utilities, contractors and various groups involved in ground excavation (e.g., red=electric power lines and cables; blue=potable water; orange=telecommunication lines; yellow=gas, oil, steam). In some cases, the technician also may provide one or more marks to indicate that no facility was found in the dig area (sometimes referred to as a “clear”).
  • As mentioned above, the foregoing activity of identifying and marking a presence or absence of one or more underground facilities generally is referred to for completeness as a “locate and marking operation.” However, in light of common parlance adopted in the construction industry, and/or for the sake of brevity, one or both of the respective locate and marking functions may be referred to in some instances simply as a “locate operation” or a “locate” (i.e., without making any specific reference to the marking function). Accordingly, it should be appreciated that any reference in the relevant arts to the task of a locate technician simply as a “locate operation” or a “locate” does not necessarily exclude the marking portion of the overall process.
  • The locate service provider 130 may handle a high volume of locate requests on a daily basis. For example, the locate service provider 130 may have locate offices (or profit centers) in different geographical regions and each locate office may have a hundred or more locate technicians in the field each day. Depending on its size, each locate office may respond to hundreds or even thousands of locate requests on a given day.
  • The locate service provider 130 may use one or more ticket processing systems to process incoming locate request tickets from the one-call center 120. For example, the ticket processing system may extract identifying information such as a ticket number from an incoming ticket and create a database entry for that ticket number. The database entry may be used throughout the life cycle of the ticket to keep track of pertinent information, such as the status of the ticket (e.g., whether the ticket has been dispatched to a locate technician and, if so, which locate technician).
  • The ticket processing system may populate the database entry with additional information retrieved from the ticket. For example, if the ticket includes an address for a corresponding work site, the ticket processing system may store the address in an appropriate field in the database entry.
  • SUMMARY
  • The inventors have appreciated that, although the Pipeline Safety Reauthorization Act of 1988 requires all states to establish one-call coverage for pipelines, the specific operations and practices of one-call centers may vary from region to region. For example, different jurisdictions may have different regulations regarding ticket content (e.g., the minimum amount of information that must be included in a ticket) and ticket due date (e.g., the deadline by which a locate operation must be performed in response to an incoming ticket).
  • Also, different one-call centers may obtain information from different sources and package the information into tickets in different manners. For example, depending on the particular excavator who provides an excavation notice and the particular one-call center that accepts and processes the excavation notice, a resulting locate request ticket may identify the location and boundaries of a proposed work site/dig area in a number of different ways, using street addresses, map grids, and/or latitudinal and longitudinal (lat/long) coordinates.
  • The inventors have appreciated that such disparities in ticket information may have adverse effects on the quality and efficiency of locate operations. For example, inadequate or inaccurate information regarding the work site and/or dig area location may cause delays in locate operations (e.g., a locate technician may be unable to ascertain the exact location and/or boundaries of the work site and/or dig area during a first visit and may need to return to the work site at some later time when improved location information becomes available). These delays may increase the operating costs of a locate service provider and may also increase the risk of damaging underground facilities.
  • The inventors have further appreciated that conventional ticket processing systems used by locate service providers may have limited assessment capabilities. That is, conventional ticket processing systems may offer limited capabilities in deriving information that is not explicitly included in the incoming tickets. For example, little or no assessment is done to estimate various aspects (or attributes) of a requested locate operation, such as location, scope, time, complexity, risk, value, resource requirements and the like. The lack of information regarding these and other aspects of locate request tickets may lead to various inefficiencies, e.g., in the scheduling of the locate operations and/or the allocation of resources to the locate operations. There may also be an increased risk of damaging underground facilities. As a result, profitability of the locate service providers may be adversely affected.
  • Thus, the inventors have recognized a need for improved information management, dissemination, and utilization in the locate industry and other field service industries in which mobile technicians are dispatched in response to incoming service requests.
  • In view of the foregoing, one embodiment of the present invention is directed to an apparatus for assessing one or more attributes of a locate operation requested in a locate request ticket. The apparatus comprises at least one processor programmed to extract ticket information from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing the locate request ticket; apply one or more business rules to at least some of the ticket information to obtain a ticket assessment outcome for each of the one or more attributes; and dispatch at least one locate technician to perform the locate operation, based at least in part on the ticket assessment outcome for each of the one or more attributes.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing a complexity of one or more locate operations requested in a locate request ticket. The apparatus comprises at least one processor programmed to extract one or more information elements from the locate request ticket, and associate one or more complexity types to the locate request ticket based at least in part on the one or more information elements.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing a level of risk associated with one or more locate operations requested in a locate request ticket. The apparatus comprises at least one processor programmed to extract one or more information elements from the locate request ticket, and determine a risk value associated with the locate request ticket based at least in part on the one or more information elements.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing at least one attribute of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the apparatus comprising: at least one communication interface; at least one memory to store processor-executable instructions; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable instructions, the at least one processor: A) obtains ticket information from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing the locate request ticket; B) applies one or more business rules to at least some of the ticket information to generate at least one ticket assessment outcome for the at least one attribute; and C) controls the at least one communication interface to transmit, and/or controls the at least one memory to store, the at least one ticket assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one ticket assessment outcome.
  • Another embodiment is directed to a method, performed in a system comprising at least one processor, at least one memory, and at least one communication interface, for assessing at least one attribute of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) obtaining ticket information from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing, via the at least one processor, the locate request ticket; B) applying one or more business rules to at least some of the ticket information, via the at least one processor, to generate at least one ticket assessment outcome for the at least one attribute; and C) transmitting via the at least one communication interface, and/or storing in the at least one memory, the at least one ticket assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one ticket assessment outcome.
  • Another embodiment is directed to at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with at least one program including processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform a method for assessing at least one attribute of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) obtaining ticket information from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing the locate request ticket; B) applying one or more business rules to at least some of the ticket information to generate at least one ticket assessment outcome for the at least one attribute; and C) transmitting and/or storing the at least one ticket assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one ticket assessment outcome.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing complexity of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the apparatus comprising: at least one communication interface; at least one memory to store processor-executable instructions; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable instructions, the at least one processor: A) analyzes ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigns at least one complexity designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) controls the at least one communication interface to transmit, and/or controls the at least one memory to store, the at least one complexity designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one complexity designation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to a method, performed in a system comprising at least one processor, at least one memory, and at least one communication interface, for assessing complexity of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing, via the at least one processor, ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigning, via the at least one processor, at least one complexity designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) transmitting via the at least one communication interface, and/or storing in the at least one memory, the at least one complexity designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one complexity designation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with at least one program including processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform a method for assessing complexity of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigning at least one complexity designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) transmitting and/or storing the at least one complexity designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one complexity designation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing risk associated with a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the apparatus comprising: at least one communication interface; at least one memory to store processor-executable instructions; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable instructions, the at least one processor: A) analyzes ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigns at least one risk designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) controls the at least one communication interface to transmit, and/or controls the at least one memory to store, the at least one risk designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one risk designation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to a method, performed in a system comprising at least one processor, at least one memory, and at least one communication interface, for assessing risk associated with a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigning at least one risk designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) transmitting and/or storing the at least one risk designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one risk designation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with at least one program including processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform a method for assessing risk associated with a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) assigning at least one risk designation to the locate request ticket based at least in part on A); and C) transmitting and/or storing the at least one risk designation so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one risk designation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for assessing a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the apparatus comprising: at least one communication interface; at least one memory to store processor-executable instructions; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable instructions, the at least one processor: A) in a first stage of assessment, produces a first assessment outcome at least in part by analyzing at least some ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) in a second stage of assessment, produces a second assessment outcome based at least in part on the first assessment outcome; and C) controls the at least one communication interface to transmit, and/or controls the at least one memory to store, at least one of the first assessment outcome and the second assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to a method, performed in a system comprising at least one processor, at least one communication interface, and at least one memory, for assessing a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) in a first stage of assessment performed by the at least one processor, producing a first assessment outcome at least in part by analyzing at least some ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; B) in a second stage of assessment performed by the at least one processor, producing a second assessment outcome based at least in part on the first assessment outcome; and C) transmitting via the at least one communication interface, and/or storing in the at least one memory, at least one of the first assessment outcome and the second assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation.
  • Another embodiment is directed to at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with at least one program including processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform a method for assessing a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) in a first stage of assessment, producing a first assessment outcome at least in part by analyzing at least some ticket information obtained from the locate request ticket; and B) in a second stage of assessment, producing a second assessment outcome based at least in part on the first assessment outcome.
  • Another embodiment is directed to an apparatus for managing information assets used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets, each locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the apparatus comprising: at least one communication interface; at least one memory to store processor-executable instructions; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable instructions, the at least one processor: A) analyzes a record of a completed locate and/or marking operation; and B) updates, based at least in part on A), at least one information asset used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets. In one aspect, the at least one information asset comprises at least one business rule to be applied to ticket information to obtain one or more ticket assessment outcomes.
  • Another embodiment is directed to a method, performed in a system comprising at least one processor and at least one memory, for managing information assets used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets, each locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing, via the at least one processor, a record, stored in the at least one memory, of a completed locate and/or marking operation; and B) updating, based at least in part on A), at least one information asset stored in the at least one memory and used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets. In one aspect, the at least one information asset comprises at least one business rule to be applied to ticket information to obtain one or more ticket assessment outcomes.
  • Another embodiment is directed to at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with at least one program including processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform a method for managing information assets used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets, each locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising: A) analyzing a record of a completed locate and/or marking operation; and B) updating, based at least in part on A), at least one information asset used for assessing locate and/or marking operations requested in locate request tickets. In one aspect, the at least one information asset comprises at least one business rule to be applied to ticket information to obtain one or more ticket assessment outcomes.
  • For purposes of the present disclosure, the term “dig area” refers to a specified area of a work site within in which there is a plan to disturb the ground (e.g., excavate, dig holes and/or trenches, bore, etc.), and beyond which there is no plan to excavate in the immediate surroundings. Thus, the metes and bounds of a dig area are intended to provide specificity as to where some disturbance to the ground is planned at a given work site. It should be appreciated that a given work site may include multiple dig areas.
  • The term “facility” refers to one or more lines, cables, fibers, conduits, transmitters, receivers, or other physical objects or structures capable of or used for carrying, transmitting, receiving, storing, and providing utilities, energy, data, substances, and/or services, and/or any combination thereof. The term “underground facility” means any facility beneath the surface of the ground. Examples of facilities include, but are not limited to, oil, gas, water, sewer, power, telephone, data transmission, cable television (TV), and/or internet services.
  • The term “locate device” refers to any apparatus and/or device for detecting and/or inferring the presence or absence of any facility, including without limitation, any underground facility.
  • The term “marking device” refers to any apparatus, mechanism, or other device that employs a marking dispenser for causing a marking material and/or marking object to be dispensed, or any apparatus, mechanism, or other device for electronically indicating (e.g., logging in memory) a location, such as a location of an underground facility. Additionally, the term “marking dispenser” refers to any apparatus, mechanism, or other device for dispensing and/or otherwise using, separately or in combination, a marking material and/or a marking object. An example of a marking dispenser may include, but is not limited to, a pressurized can of marking paint. The term “marking material” means any material, substance, compound, and/or element, used or which may be used separately or in combination to mark, signify, and/or indicate. Examples of marking materials may include, but are not limited to, paint, chalk, dye, and/or iron. The term “marking object” means any object and/or objects used or which may be used separately or in combination to mark, signify, and/or indicate. Examples of marking objects may include, but are not limited to, a flag, a dart, and arrow, and/or an RFID marking ball. It is contemplated that marking material may include marking objects. It is further contemplated that the terms “marking materials” or “marking objects” may be used interchangeably in accordance with the present disclosure.
  • The term “locate mark” means any mark, sign, and/or object employed to indicate the presence or absence of any underground facility. Examples of locate marks may include, but are not limited to, marks made with marking materials, marking objects, global positioning or other information, and/or any other means. Locate marks may be represented in any form including, without limitation, physical, visible, electronic, and/or any combination thereof.
  • The terms “locate and marking operation,” “locate operation,” and “locate” are used interchangeably and refer to any activity to detect, infer, and/or mark the presence or absence of an underground facility. In some instances, the term “marking operation” is used to more specifically refer to that portion of a locate operation in which a marking material and/or one or more marking objects is/are employed to mark a presence or an absence of one or more underground facilities. The term “locate technician” refers to an individual performing a locate operation. A locate operation often is specified in connection with a dig area, at least a portion of which may be excavated or otherwise disturbed during excavation activities.
  • The terms “locate request” and “excavation notice” are used interchangeably to refer to any communication to request a locate and marking operation. The term “locate request ticket” (or simply “ticket”) refers to any communication or instruction to perform a locate operation. A ticket might specify, for example, the address or description of a dig area to be marked, the day and/or time that the dig area is to be marked, and/or whether the user is to mark the excavation area for certain gas, water, sewer, power, telephone, cable television, and/or some other underground facility. The term “historical ticket” refers to past tickets that have been completed.
  • It should be appreciated that all combinations of the foregoing concepts and additional concepts discussed in greater detail below (provided such concepts are not mutually inconsistent) are contemplated as being part of the inventive subject matter disclosed herein. In particular, all combinations of claimed subject matter appearing at the end of this disclosure are contemplated as being part of the inventive subject matter disclosed herein. It should also be appreciated that terminology explicitly employed herein that also may appear in any disclosure incorporated by reference should be accorded a meaning most consistent with the particular concepts disclosed herein.
  • BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
  • The drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead generally being placed upon illustrating the principles of the invention.
  • FIG. 1 shows an example in which a locate operation is initiated as a result of an excavator serving an excavation notice to a one-call center.
  • FIG. 2 shows an example of a ticket management system, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure, comprising a number of software components for performing various functions, such as parsing incoming locate request tickets, assessing parsed tickets according to appropriate business rules, and scheduling and dispatching locate technicians to perform locate operations.
  • FIG. 2A shows an illustrative implementation of a ticket assessment engine comprising a network of ticket assessment modules arranged in multiple stages.
  • FIG. 3 shows an example of a locate request ticket that may be received by a ticket management system, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 4 shows an example of a virtual white lines (VWL) image associated with a ticket received by a ticket management system, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 5 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket parsing application to convert an incoming locate request ticket into a parsed ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 6 shows an example in which a ticket assessment engine accesses one or more stored images that have been processed by a geographic information system, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 7 shows an example of a facilities map with an overlaid VWL image, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 8 shows an illustrative set of lookup tables that may be used by a ticket assessment engine, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 9 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to selecting the best available location information and refine the location information when necessary, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 10 illustrates an exemplary method for refining location information, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 11 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to assess the scope of a locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 12 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to assess the complexity of a locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 13 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to estimate the duration of a locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 14 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to compute a risk measurement associated with a locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 15 shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to compute an estimated value for a locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 16A shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to identify one or more required and/or recommended pieces of equipment for performing a requested locate operation, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 16B shows an illustrative process that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to identify one or more requirements and/or recommendations for selecting a suitable technician to perform a requested locate operation, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 17 shows an illustrative example of a multi-stage ticket assessment engine having a network of assessment modules.
  • FIG. 18 shows an example of a work order that may be created from an incoming locate request ticket, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 19 shows an illustrative computer that may be used for improving information management, dissemination, and utilization in the locate industry and other field service industries, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • DETAILED DESCRIPTION I. Overview
  • Various embodiments described herein relate to systems, methods and apparatus for improved information management, dissemination and utilization in field service operations in which mobile technicians are dispatched in response to service requests. In particular, some exemplary embodiments relate to systems, methods and apparatus for automatically and intelligently assessing locate request tickets to provide information that can be used to improve activity scheduling, resource allocation, quality control, and/or regulatory compliance. While the particular example of locate request tickets is provided herein primarily for purposes of illustration, it should be appreciated that the inventive concepts described herein may be more generally applicable to other types of field service operations.
  • As discussed above, the inventors have appreciated that there is a lack of an established data standard for use when sharing information among various entities in the locate industry, such as excavators, one-call centers, facility owners and locate service providers. As a result, the availability and consistency of data may not be always guaranteed. Accordingly, in some exemplary embodiments, a ticket management system is provided that associates a level of confidence with at least some input data to indicate how reliable the data is. For example, a level of confidence may be assigned to a data unit as it enters the ticket manage system, so that the propagation of unreliable information may be limited. In some embodiments, confidence levels may be used to resolve conflicts, so that information from a more trust-worthy source may be chosen over information from a less trust-worthy source. Additionally, multiple related pieces of information may be compared, and a confidence level may be increased when the related pieces of information are consistent with each other.
  • In some further embodiments, a ticket management system is provided that includes a ticket assessment engine for analyzing incoming locate request tickets. The ticket assessment engine may be programmed to derive useful information that is not directly available from the tickets themselves. A number of different types of assessments may be performed, including, but not limited to, those listed below. Furthermore, the different types of assessments may be performed in one or more stages, where an assessment outcome from one stage may influence an assessment outcome at a subsequent stage.
      • Location: In location assessment, various locations of interest may be derived and/or estimated, such as a location of a work site in which excavation activities are planned. In some instances, insufficient location information may be provided in a locate request ticket. For example, a location description may be vague or ambiguous (e.g., a street name without any house numbers). In other instances, multiple conflicting pieces of location information may be given (e.g., a street address and a pair of lat/long coordinates that do not match). In these situations, additional analysis may be needed to ascertain the location of the work site. Other examples of location information that may be assessed include a location of one or more landmarks at or near the work site, a location of one or more dig area indicators provided on a virtual white lines (VWL) image, and the like.
      • Scope: In scope assessment, any descriptive information regarding a requested locate operation may be analyzed from incoming locate request tickets, such as information describing the extent and/or nature of the requested work. For example, the size of a dig area, as measured in length or in area, may be indicative of the scope of a requested locate operation. The depth of excavation and the number of different facilities to be located may also be relevant.
      • Complexity: Complexity assessment may identify one or more aspects of a requested locate operation that may influence a manner in which the locate operation is to be conducted. For example, a locate operation may be classified as high complexity when a high profile facility asset (e.g., gas pipes and/or fiber-optic communication cables) is involved or when the work site is in a restricted access area (e.g., a military base or gated community). Such a classification may be used, for example, to determine whether a highly skilled technician and/or particular/special equipment may be required, and/or whether a delay in completing the locate operation is likely.
      • Time: Various time-related aspects of a requested locate operation may be assessed, such as a deadline by which the locate operation must be completed and/or an expected duration (e.g., an expected amount of time needed to complete the locate operation). In some situations, the expected duration for a requested locate operation may be determined based on its estimated scope (e.g., the number and types of different facilities involved) and/or complexity (e.g., delays due to access restrictions, special skills and/or equipment required, etc.).
      • Risk: Risk assessment may include estimating a measure of damages in an event of an accident (e.g., when underground facilities are damaged during excavation due to an improperly or inaccurately performed locate and/or marking operation). Examples of damages include, but are not limited to, economic losses, damages to property, environmental damages, and/or personal injuries. Certain intangible losses may also be taken into account, such as loss of customer satisfaction. In some embodiments, a locate service provider may wish to assess a level of potential liability for damages in an accident where the locate service provider is at fault (e.g., failing to complete a locate operation by a required deadline or inadequately performing a location operation). For example, a locate operation involving one or more main utility lines (e.g., water mains serving an entire neighborhood) may be considered high risk, because an accident involving a main utility line may expose the locate service provider to a large range of damages. By contrast, a locate operation involving only service lines (e.g., utility lines leading to a customer's premise) may be considered low risk, because the potential scope of damages may be relatively small in an accident involving a service line.
      • Value: Value assessment may be performed according to different measures of value. For instance, value assessment may be performed from the perspective of a locate service provider based on business value created by performing a locate operation. In some embodiments, such business value may simply be the revenue collected for the locate operation. In other embodiments, a measure of net profit may be used, where various operating costs may be subtracted from the revenue. For example, a measure of profit may take into account information from one or more contracts established between a locate service provider and a facilities owner (or some other entity contracting with the locate service provider to perform locate operations). Examples of contractual information include, but are not limited to, contractual provisions specifying bonuses and/or penalties for certain tickets. In some further embodiments, a more sophisticated measure such as value at risk may be used.
      • Resource: Resource assessment may include identifying one or more resources (e.g., equipment and/or personnel) needed to adequately perform a requested locate operation. In some embodiments, resource assessment may identify a personnel skill level or certification required to perform a locate operation. For example, in some jurisdictions, only a technician with gas certification may be dispatched to perform a locate operation involving gas pipes. In another example, personnel skill level may encompass both long term measurements, such as years of experience, and short term measurement, such as recent performance evaluations. In some further embodiments, resource assessment may identify one or more tools and/or pieces of equipment required or recommended for a locate operation. For example, if a locate request ticket indicates that one or more gas facilities are to be located, a gas detection tool may be required or recommended. In some instances, one or more contracts established between a locate service provider and a facilities owner (or some other entity contracting with the locate service provider to perform locate operations) may specify particular tools/equipment requirements for some types of locate operations.
  • The inventors have appreciated that the assessment outcomes provided by a ticket assessment engine may be used to improve various aspects of the business operations of a locate service provider, such activity scheduling, resource allocation, quality control, and/or regulatory compliance. In some embodiments, the ticket assessment engine may be programmed to provide an estimated measurement, ranking, score, classification and/or some other suitable value for each of the assessment targets listed above, or any other desirable assessment targets. These outcomes may then be input into one or more other components of the ticket management system, for example, an activity scheduling application, a ticket review application for quality control and training, and/or a customer billing application.
  • The ticket assessment engine may access various information sources in order to produce the desired assessment outcomes. For example, the ticket assessment engine may make use of facility plats available from the facility owners to determine whether certain geographical areas should be classified as high risk or high complexity areas. As another example, the ticket assessment engine may access a database containing past damage reports to determine whether a given excavator has a history of frequent and/or costly damages. As yet another example, the ticket assessment engine may access a database containing information regarding previously completed tickets to search for notes and/or remarks regarding a given geographical location.
  • The inventors have further appreciated that various types of ticket assessment may be carried out by an entity other than a locate service provider, such as a facilities owner, an excavator, a one-call center, a community (e.g., city, town, village, and/or other form of municipality) and/or an insurance company. These entities may perform ticket assessment based on their own interests and concerns. For instance, in assessing potential damages in an event of an accident, a facilities owner may take into account loss of customer satisfaction due to service interruption, which may in turn lead to economic losses for the facilities owner (e.g., customer canceling service contract). As another example, a facilities owner may assess the complexity of a requested locate and/or marking operation and determine whether it may be desirable to dispatch its own personnel to monitor the operation. In some instances, the facilities owner may even decide to dispatch its own personnel to perform the requested operation, instead of a locate technician dispatched by a locate service provider. As yet another example, a facilities owner or regulatory body may use ticket assessment to identify high risk locate and/or marking operations that may require auditing prior to excavation, to ensure that the locate service provider's technicians have adequately performed the operations.
  • Following below are more detailed descriptions of various concepts related to, and embodiments of, inventive systems, methods and apparatus for improved information management, dissemination and utilization in field service applications and, in particular, for assessing locate request tickets. It should be appreciated that various concepts introduced above and discussed in greater detail below may be implemented in any of numerous ways, as the disclosed concepts are not limited to any particular manner of implementation. For instance, the present disclosure is not limited to the particular arrangements of components shown in the various figures, as other arrangements may also be suitable. Such examples of specific implementations and applications are provided primarily for illustrative purposes.
  • Generic terms such as “engine,” “application” or “module” may be used herein when referring to one or more of software components of a ticket management system. Such terms should not be interpreted as being limiting in any way. Also, each of the software components described herein may be implemented in any suitable way, for example, as processor-executable instructions stored in at least one physical storage device (e.g., a non-volatile memory device and/or a volatile memory device) of a general purpose computer or some other suitable hardware system. The general purpose computer or hardware system may comprise at least one hardware processor for executing the instructions stored in the physical storage device, and may further comprise at least one input/output (I/O) interface for receiving inputs from input sources or devices and for sending outputs to output recipients or devices. In some embodiments, the hardware processor on which a software component executes may be in a mobile or portable device, such as a mobile telephone, personal digital assistant, a marking device (e.g., for spray painting lines or other marks on the ground), or any other type of mobile or portable device.
  • II. System Architecture and Components
  • FIG. 2 shows an example of a ticket management system 200 comprising a number of software components for performing various functions, such as parsing incoming locate request tickets, assessing parsed tickets according to appropriate business rules, and scheduling and dispatching locate technicians to perform locate operations. Generally, the ticket management system 210 may be a management software application run by a locate service provider, such as the locate service provider 130 shown in FIG. 1, although this is not required.
  • In the embodiment shown in FIG. 2, the ticket management system 200 receives locate request tickets 205 from one or more suitable sources, such as the one-call center 120 shown in FIG. 1. Each ticket typically includes one or more text strings describing various parameters of the requested locate operation, such as time, location and types of facilities. In some instances, one or more images depicting the work site and/or dig area may also be attached to the ticket. For purposes of the present disclosure, “ticket information” refers generally to any information included in or derived from locate request tickets (e.g., as issued by a one-call center).
  • Depending on the originating one-call centers, different types of information may be stored in the text portions of the tickets 205 in different formats. Therefore, a ticket parser 210 may be provided, which may be programmed to recognize an origin of a ticket 205 and perform the parsing accordingly to output a parsed ticket 215. The parsed ticket 215 may be created according to a standardized ticket format, which may be any suitable set of rules or conventions for representing and organizing data, designed to facilitate efficient handling of data by various software components. For example, the standardized format may be an Extensible Markup Language (XML) format. Further details regarding ticket parsing are described below in connection with FIG. 5.
  • In the embodiment shown in FIG. 2, ticket information, which may include one or more of the original ticket 205, the parsed ticket 215, and any images of the work site and/or dig area that may have been attached to or otherwise included with the ticket 205, is stored in a ticket database 220. The ticket database 220 may be any substantially persistent storage of data, for example, a relational database that is created and maintained using a suitable database software. The relational database may store relationships between excavation companies, one-call centers, facility owners, locate service providers, facilities maps, locate request tickets, and the like.
  • Any stored ticket information, including the parsed ticket 215, along with any associated images, may be retrieved from the ticket database 220 in a suitable manner and supplied to a ticket assessment engine 230 for processing and analysis. In some instances, the ticket assessment engine 230 may identify one or more prerequisite activities that must be completed before the requested locate operation can be undertaken. For example, the ticket assessment engine 230 may determine, based on the received ticket information, that a safety personnel must be dispatched to ensure that a manhole is clear of any hazardous gases before a locate technician may enter the manhole to perform a requested locate operation, or that a vacuum truck is to be dispatched to dig one or more potholes before a locate technician can begin a requested locate operation. Such prerequisite tasks may be performed by different work crews (e.g., with different equipment and/or skill sets) and may be scheduled separately from the requested locate operation.
  • As another example, the ticket 205 (and hence ticket information derived therefrom) may be related to a so-called “project ticket,” which is a request for a locate operation that may encompass an appreciably large linear distance or geographic area, and hence may require a significant number of hours to complete (e.g., the work site may be several miles along a highway, or may include an entire housing development complex). The ticket assessment engine 230 may break up such a project in a suitable manner into multiple work orders (e.g., work orders 235A-C) and assess the ticket information accordingly (e.g., producing separate assessment outcomes for each individual work order). When appropriate, subsequent processing such as scheduling and dispatch may also be performed on a per work order basis.
  • In the embodiment shown in FIG. 2, the ticket assessment engine 230 applies an appropriate set of business rules 240 to evaluate ticket information. For example, there may be different business rules for assessing each of the following aspects: location, scope, complexity, time, risk, value, and/or resource. Exemplary business rules for some of these aspects are described in greater detail below in connection with FIGS. 9-16 and Tables 1-26. However, it should be appreciated that the present disclosure is not limited to the specific business rules discussed herein. For example, a business rule engine (not shown) may be used to allow business users to dynamically modify existing business rules and/or define new rules.
  • As discussed above, ticket assessment implemented by the ticket assessment engine 230 may proceed in one or more stages, where an assessment outcome from one stage may be an input to a subsequent stage of assessment. Accordingly, in some embodiments, the ticket assessment engine 230 may comprise one or more modules arranged in multiple stages, where each module may assess a different aspect of the requested locate operation. For instance, in one exemplary embodiment, the ticket assessment engine 230 may comprise multiple modules for assessing, respectively, location, scope, complexity, time, risk, value, and/or resource. Each module may implement a corresponding set of business rules, such as the business rules shown in Tables 1-26, and different modules may implement the corresponding set of business rules at different assessment stages within the engine 230. Examples of a ticket assessment engine 230 based on multiple assessment modules are described in greater detail below in connection with FIGS. 2A and 19.
  • In applying the business rules 240 to assess the ticket information, the ticket assessment engine 230 may rely on auxiliary input information such as facilities maps, past damage reports, excavator history, traffic, weather, and the like. These pieces of information may be accessed as needed from an auxiliary information storage 250, which may include one or more databases and/or lookup tables. Examples of various types of auxiliary input information used by the ticket assessment engine 230 are described in greater detail below in connection with FIGS. 6-8.
  • In the embodiment shown in FIG. 2, the ticket assessment engine 230 provides as an exemplary output one or more work orders 235A-C and populates the work order(s) with corresponding “assessment outcomes.” An assessment outcome may be a numeric value (which may have any of a variety of possible units of measure, or no particular unit of measure, and may or may not be based on some range or scale), one or more symbols or alpha-character indicators (e.g., Y/N for “yes/no,” T/F for “true/false,” H/M/L for “high,” “medium,” “low,” etc.), and/or one or more words/phrases. The ticket assessment engine 230 may output one or more assessment outcomes per ticket analyzed, such that a set of assessment outcomes are provided per ticket. As noted above in Section I, exemplary categories of assessment outcomes include, but are not limited to, scope, complexity, duration, risk, value, and resources. The populated work orders may then be forwarded to any number of components in the ticket management system 200. For example, the populated work orders may be forwarded to a scheduling and dispatch application 260, which may allocate an appropriate technician to each work order based on at least some of the assessment outcomes, such as estimated duration, estimated value and/or resource requirements. Alternatively, the populated work orders may be stored in a database that can be accessed by one or more components in the ticket management system 200.
  • It should be appreciated that the ticket assessment engine 230 may be implemented in any suitable manner, as the present disclosure is not limited in this respect. In some embodiments, the ticket assessment engine 230 may be implemented using Windows Workflow Foundation (WF), which is a Microsoft® technology for defining, executing, and managing workflows. For example, a workflow definition may be loaded for assessment from a .xml file, using rules loaded from a .rules file. When a new ticket is ready for assessment, a new instance of the workflow may be instantiated in a new WF thread. At the completion of successful ticket assessment, the assessment runtime may update the system database with the calculated output and mark the ticket as ready for scheduling.
  • The ticket assessment outcomes may be used by the scheduling and dispatch application 260 in any suitable manner, as the present disclosure is not limited in this respect. In some embodiments, a value assessment outcome may be used as a weighting factor. For example, a ticket that is assessed as having high value may be weighted to encourage the scheduling and dispatch application 260 to dispatch the ticket ahead of other tickets that are assessed as having lower values. A risk assessment outcome may be used in a similar fashion, to encourage the dispatch of higher risk tickets ahead of lower risk tickets. This may provide for more opportunities for review and quality assessment for the higher risk tickets.
  • In some further embodiments, a resource assessment outcome may be used by the scheduling and dispatch application 260 as a constraining factor in assigning technicians and/or equipment to tickets. For example, a ticket may be assessed as requiring a gas-certified, skill level 4 (GAS/4) locate technician. This may be used as a hard constraint, so that only locate technicians with GAS/4 or higher certification may be assigned to the ticket. Alternatively, the skill attribute may be used as a soft constraint, so that the ticket may be assigned to a lesser qualified locate technician only if a locate technician with GAS/4 or higher certification is not available. In such a situation, appropriate business rules may be implemented by the scheduling and dispatch application 260 to determine whether any potential negative effects (such as increased risk, increased duration, and/or decreased profitability) are outweighed by the potential benefits of completing the requested locate operation earlier.
  • In yet some further embodiments, the scheduling and dispatch application 260 may determine, based on one or more ticket assessment outcomes, that it is unnecessary to dispatch any technician to perform a requested locate and/or marking operation. For example, a scope assessment outcome may indicate a number and/or a type of facilities to be located as represented in the locate request ticket. In some instances, amongst the facilities noted in the ticket, there may be no underground facilities implicated (e.g., because the work site is located in a rural area that has only aerial power and phone lines and no underground gas pipes); in this case, the scope assessment outcome may indicate zero facilities of an underground type. As another example, a risk assessment outcome may indicate a low risk associated with the requested locate and/or marking operation (e.g., because all relevant facilities maps suggest that the closest underground facilities are at least some threshold distance away from a specified dig area). In these and similar situations, the locate request ticket may be flagged for an “office clear” (i.e., clearing the ticket without dispatching any locate technician to the work site), which may yield a higher profit margin for the locate service provider than a ticket for which a technician is dispatched. In some embodiments, the office clear may be performed automatically by analyzing the dig area (e.g., its shape, size, and/or location) against one or more relevant facilities maps. Alternatively, the office clear may be performed manually or semi-automatically, where a human operator screens the ticket to confirm that no underground facilities are likely present in the dig area.
  • When a technician reports the completion of a work order, the scheduling and dispatch application 260 may forward the work order to a quality control application 270, along with any activity logs and/or technician reports. The quality control application 270 may determine whether the work order has been adequately responded to, for example, by checking the activity logs to determine whether every facility type listed on the work order is accounted for. The quality control application 270 may also be programmed to present a user interface through which human supervisors may review the completed work order and determine whether the technician is in need of additional training in any particular area. Examples of manual, semi-automated and automated quality assessment techniques that may be suitable for implementing the quality control application 270 of the ticket management system 200 may be found in one or more of the following references, each of which is incorporated herein by reference:
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/493,109, filed on Jun. 26, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Quality Assessment of a Field Service Operation;”
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/557,732, filed on Aug. 7, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Quality Assessment of a Field Service Operation Based on Geographic Information;”
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/571,356, filed on Sep. 30, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Analyzing Locate and Marking Operations with Respect to Facilities Maps;”
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/572,202, filed on Oct. 1, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Analyzing Locate and Marking Operations with Respect to Historical Information;”
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/568,087, filed on Sep. 28, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Generating an Electronic Record of Environmental Landmarks Based on Marking Device Actuations;”
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/572,260, filed on Oct. 1, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Analyzing Locate and Marking Operations with Respect to Environmental Landmarks;” and
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/703,809, filed on Apr. 14, 2010, entitled “Marking Apparatus Equipped with Ticket Processing Software for Facilitating Marking Operations, and Associated Methods.”
  • Because of a high volume of work orders processed by a locate service provider, it may in some situations be infeasible for every work order to receive a quality assessment, especially one that requires human review. Accordingly, in some embodiments, one or more assessment outcomes may be used to filter the completed work orders to identify those work orders that may require specific quality assessment involving human review. For instance, a risk assessment outcome may be used to filter out low- or medium-risk work orders, so that only high-risk work orders are submitted for human review. In case a numerical measure of risk is used, a suitable threshold may be selected to identify high-risk work orders. Alternatively, a combination of assessment outcomes may be used for filtering. For example, one or more filtering rules may be applied to any suitable combination of assessment outcomes (e.g., location, scope, complexity, time, risk, value and/or resource) to identify candidate work orders for human review. As a more specific example, a filtering rule may take into account any suitable combination of the following information: one or more types of facilities to be located, client identity (e.g., identity of a facilities owner), type of excavation to be carried out subsequent to the locate operation, excavator identity, damage history for a geographical area encompassing the work site, and damage history associated with the client and/or excavator. Other types of information may also be taken into account, as the inventive concepts described herein relating to filtering are not limited to any specific examples of filtering criteria.
  • The scheduling and dispatch application 260 may also forward the completed work order to a billing application 280, which may apply various billing rules to calculate a fee to be billed to each customer. For example, the billing application may use the activity logs to determine the amount of time the technician spent on each facility type and compute a fee accordingly to be billed to that facility owner.
  • In some embodiments, the ticket assessment system 200 may further include a feedback mechanism, such as a backend assessment module 290. As shown in FIG. 2, the backend assessment module 290 may monitor completed work orders received from the scheduling and dispatch application 260 and send appropriate updates to various other components of the ticket management system 200. For example, the backend assessment module 290 may maintain statistical information regarding the completed work orders and provide the statistical information to a business rule engine (not shown), which may update the business rules 240 accordingly. Similarly, the backend assessment module 290 may provide updates to some of the historical information stored in the auxiliary information storage 250.
  • In some instances, a work order may be closed by a technician for reasons other than having completed the requested location operation. For example, the technician may be unable to gain access to a work site, or may discover significant discrepancy between the dig area description and the actual dig area. The technician may then close the current work order and request that a new work order be generated. Upon detecting such a situation, the backend assessment module 290 may generate an appropriate new work order, e.g., with more accurate work site and/or dig area information, and submit it to the scheduling and dispatch application 260 for re-dispatch.
  • Additionally, the backend assessment module 290 may be adapted to receive information from the quality control application 280. For example, upon reviewing a completed work order via the quality control application 280, a human supervisor may discover a significant problem and may determine that a re-mark or re-stake operation is necessary. This information may be provided to the backend assessment module 290, which may generate a new work order accordingly and perform appropriate updates to the information stored in the auxiliary information storage 250.
  • Turning now to FIG. 2A, an illustrative implementation of a ticket assessment engine (e.g., the ticket assessment engine 230 of FIG. 2) is shown, comprising a network of ticket assessment modules arranged in multiple assessment stages. In this example, there are N different stages of assessment within the assessment engine, numbered 1 through N. Each stage may include one or more assessment modules (e.g., labeled in FIG. 2A as “Assessment 1-A,” “Assessment 1-B,” “Assessment N-A,” etc.), wherein each module comprises a corresponding set of business rules (e.g., business rules 240 in FIG. 2) that are used to assess various elements of ticket information. To this end, each module may receive as input one or more of the following: ticket information 225, auxiliary information 255, (e.g., facilities maps, stored images, historical records, environmental data and/or lookup tables), and/or one or more assessment outcomes from one or more previous stages of assessment.
  • For instance, as illustrated in FIG. 2A, a first stage assessment (Stage 1 Assessment) may include two modules, Assessment 1-A and Assessment 1-B, each receiving ticket information and auxiliary information as input. Assessment 1-A may produce Outcome 231, which may be fed into a Stage 2 Assessment module, Assessment 2-A. Assessment 1-B may produce Outcome 232, which may also be fed into Assessment 2-A. Furthermore, Outcome 232 may be used at an even later stage of assessment, e.g., at Assessment N-A. Further still, Outcome 232 may be output by the ticket assessment engine as a “final” assessment outcome. In this respect, Outcome 231 produced by Assessment 1-A may be an “intermediate” assessment outcome, in that it is used only internally, by other assessment modules, and is not output by the ticket assessment engine.
  • In addition to receiving Outcome 231 and Outcome 232, produced respectively by the modules Assessment 1-A and Assessment 1-B, Assessment 2-A may access other information, such as the ticket information 225 input to the ticket assessment engine and/or auxiliary information 255 accessible to the ticket assessment engine. The output of Assessment 2-A, namely, Outcome 233, may be output by the ticket assessment engine as a final outcome, and may be fed into a later stage assessment module, e.g., Assessment N-A. Finally, Assessment N-A may produce Outcome 234 based on inputs from different stages of assessment, e.g., Outcome 232 and Outcome 233.
  • Although some specific arrangements of assessment modules are shown in FIG. 2A, it should be appreciated that those arrangements are merely illustrative. Other suitable arrangements may also be used, as the present disclosure is not limited in this respect. Also, any suitable types of assessment may be implemented by the assessment modules, including, but not limited to, scope, location, complexity, risk, value, time and/or resource. A more specific illustrate example of a multi-stage ticket assessment engine is discussed in greater detail below, in connection with FIG. 17.
  • III. Exemplary Locate Request Ticket
  • FIG. 3 shows an example of a locate request ticket 300 that may be received by the ticket management system 200, for example, via email from the one-call center 120 shown in FIG. 1. The ticket 300 may contain various pieces of information stored in a number of fields, including:
      • Ticket number 302. A ticket type (e.g., new, emergency, re-mark or survey) may also be indicated
      • Location information 304A (e.g., street address, nearby cross streets, subdivision, city and/or county) and 304B (e.g., lat/long coordinates provided in decimal degrees). Although not shown, location information may also include coordinates for one or more dig area indicators on a VWL image associated with the ticket.
      • Excavation information 306, including reason (e.g., installing conduit), scope (e.g., 392 feet), depth (e.g., 18-30 inches), method (e.g., by drill and trencher) and property type (e.g., private property).
      • Timing information 308, including scheduled excavation date and time (e.g., Jan. 6, 2008 at 7:00 a.m.), duration of excavation (e.g., 3 days), and due date for the corresponding locate operation request (e.g., Jan. 5, 2008). Although not shown, timing information may also include a scheduled end date and time for the excavation activities, and/or a date and time after which locate marks may expire and a re-mark operation may be needed.
      • Excavator information 310, including name, address, contact information such as business and/or mobile phone number, fax number and email address, and the party who contracted the excavator (e.g., as indicated in the “Work Being Done For” field). Although not show, excavator information may also include a user identifier for the excavator (e.g., a login name used by the excavator to create the ticket via a one-call center's web site).
      • One-call center information 312, including the date and time at which the ticket was created and the customer service representative who created the ticket. Although not shown, one-call center information may also include a one-call center identification (e.g., an alphanumeric identifier for the one-call center that created the ticket) and/or information identifying a method of entry for the ticket (e.g., by phone or email, or via a web site).
      • Member codes 314, indicating the different types of facilities that need to be located and/or the facilities owners that are notified of the ticket.
  • It should be appreciated that the above list of information elements is merely illustrative, as other combinations of information elements may also be suitable. For example, when preparing a locate request ticket, a one-call center may draw a polygon on a map corresponding to the work site. This polygon may be overlaid onto one or more facilities maps to determine which types of facilities are implicated. For example, a facility type (or owner) may be indicated on the locate request ticket in the member code section 314 if and only if at least one utility line of that type (or owner) touches or intersects with the polygon. In some instances, the one-call center may provide the coordinates for the vertices of the polygon in the locate request ticket, along with other information describing the location and boundaries of the work site and/or dig area.
  • As another example, the ticket may include locate instructions provided by an excavator who initiated the ticket, which may be in the form of free text. As yet another example, the ticket may include information indicating whether the planned excavation activities include any boring (e.g., on a street, driveway and/or sidewalk) and/or blasting. As yet another example, the ticket may indicate whether a permit has been obtained for a related construction project (e.g., installing a swimming pool or building a foundation for a structure).
  • In some embodiments, one or more images or graphical representations of the work site and/or dig area may be attached to the ticket 300. For instance, a so-called virtual white lines (VWL) image may be attached, which may contain a digital image of the work site including the dig area (or some other suitable digital data representing the geographic location of the dig area) along with electronic annotations delimiting the dig area.
  • An example of a VWL image 400 is shown in FIG. 4. As shown, the dig area is indicated on an aerial image by a set of dashed lines 410 forming a rectangle. The lines 410 are more generally referred to as “dig area indicators,” which may be any electronically generated markings indicating a point, line, path and/or area of the planned excavation.
  • In some embodiments, the VWL image 400 may be created by the excavator using a suitable VWL application (not shown), such as those described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/050,555 and U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/151,769 and No. 61/151,815, all of which are incorporated by reference herein in their entireties. For example, the excavator may use the VWL application to obtain an aerial image of a geographical location encompassing the planned dig area and use a drawing tool of the VWL application to add the dig area indicators 410 to the aerial image.
  • IV. Ticket Parsing
  • As discussed above, locate request tickets originating from different one-call centers may store information in different formats (e.g., different one-call centers may use different commercial software to generate locate request tickets). Therefore, a ticket parsing application, such as the ticket parser 210 shown in FIG. 2, may be used to convert incoming tickets to a standardized format recognized by various components within a ticket management system.
  • FIG. 5 shows an illustrative process 500 that may be performed by a ticket parsing application to convert an incoming locate request ticket into a parsed ticket.
  • At act 502, the ticket parsing application may identify a source or origin of an incoming ticket (e.g., a particular one-call center that generated the incoming ticket). This may be accomplished in a number of different ways. For example, the ticket parsing application may simply search the ticket to determine whether the originating one-call center is identified in the ticket itself. Alternatively, if the ticket is received via email, the ticket parsing application may identify the originating one-call center by examining the sender's email address. As yet another example, the ticket parsing application may search the ticket for some indication of a geographic area to which the work site belongs (e.g., a city or town name) and identify a one-call center serving that geographic area.
  • At act 504, the ticket parsing application may retrieve or otherwise identify a set of parsing rules corresponding to the one-call center identified at act 502. The parsing rules may allow the ticket parsing application to detect the locations of various information elements within the incoming ticket. In some instances, the information elements may be stored in respective fields in the incoming ticket. There may be a fixed ordering among the various fields, and each field may be a text block (e.g., an alphanumeric character string) of a fixed length. Thus, each field or text block may be found at a corresponding fixed offset from the beginning of the incoming ticket. Alternatively, some of the fields may have variable lengths, and one or more designated markers may be used to demarcate the end of a field (or the beginning of the next field). In that case, the ticket parsing application may locate and process the various fields in a sequential fashion.
  • At acts 506 and 508, the ticket parsing application may identify an information element (e.g., a text block) that has not be processed and proceed to extract information from the identified information element. For example, for a text block corresponding to an address field, the ticket parsing application may simply copy the entire string from the text block. Some minor transformations may be performed at act 510, such as truncating a street name that exceed a predetermined maximum length. More significant transformations may also be performed. For example, the ticket parsing application may be programmed to recognize alphanumeric codes and/or abbreviations specific to each one-call center and map those codes and/or abbreviations to some suitable standard representations.
  • At act 512, the ticket parsing application may populate appropriate fields in the parsed ticket with the information obtained at acts 506 and 508. Then, at act 514, the ticket parsing application may determine whether there is at least one unprocessed information element in the incoming ticket. If the determination is positive, the ticket parsing application may return to act 506 to identify a next unprocessed information element. Otherwise, the ticket parsing application may end the process 500, and the parsed ticket may be forwarded to a ticket assessment engine for further processing and analysis.
  • It should be appreciated that the process 500 for parsing an incoming ticket is merely illustrative. Depending on the one-call centers' actual practices, other processes and methods may also be suitable for converting an incoming locate request ticket to a standardized format.
  • V. Auxiliary Information Sources
  • As discussed above in connection with FIG. 2, the ticket assessment engine 230 may access various types of auxiliary information from the auxiliary information storage 250 in order to produce the desired assessment outcomes. For example, as shown in FIG. 6, the assessment engine 230 may retrieve one or more stored images 605 from the auxiliary information storage 250, along with any associated metadata (e.g., geospatial metadata). As discussed in greater detail below, the stored images 605 may be created or modified by a geographic information system (GIS) 610 based on one or more input images 615.
  • For purposes of the present disclosure, an input image 615 may be represented by any source data that, when processed electronically by a suitable computer system, enables the computer system to display an image on a display device. This source data may be in any of a variety of suitable computer-readable formats, including PDF, JPG, BMP, GIF, PNG and the like.
  • In some instances, the source data for an image may be generated by scanning a tangible two-dimensional image source, such as paper or cloth. Alternatively, the source data may be generated by an image acquisition device as the result of acquiring a “real-world” scene. Examples of an image acquisition device include a digital camera (either still-frame or video), which may generate pixel information as part of the source data for an image. An image acquisition device may also be a laser scanning device that scans three-dimensional objects to produce coordinate information in a three-dimensional space.
  • The following is a non-exhaustive list of exemplary input images (or source data) using which the GIS 610 may create or modify the stored images 605.
      • Manual “free-hand” paper sketches of a geographic area, which may include one or more buildings, natural or man-made landmarks, property boundaries, streets, intersections and/or public works or facilities such as street lighting, signage, fire hydrants, mail boxes, parking meters, etc.
      • Various maps indicating surface features and/or extents of geographical areas, such as street/road maps, topographical maps, military maps, parcel maps, tax maps, town and county planning maps, polygon maps maintained by one-call centers and/or facility owners, virtual maps, etc.
      • Facilities maps illustrating installed underground facilities, such as gas, power, telephone, cable, fiber optics, water, sewer, drainage, etc. Street-level features or landmarks (e.g., streets, buildings, aboveground facilities, etc.) may also be indicated in relation to the depicted underground facilities. Facilities maps may be provided in paper and/or electronic form and may be maintained by, for example, one or more facility owners. For example, a gas company may maintain maps of gas lines, a power company may maintain maps of power lines, and so on.
      • Architectural, construction and/or engineering drawings and virtual renditions of a space/geographic area, including “as built” and/or post-construction drawings.
      • Land surveys, which are plots produced at ground level using references to fixed points such as the center line of a street to indicate the metes and bounds of a building, parcel, utility, roadway, or other object or installation, as well as other related location data.
      • Photographic renderings/images, including street level, topographical, satellite, and aerial photographic renderings/images, any of which may be updated periodically to capture changes in a given geographic area over time (e.g., seasonal changes such as foliage density, which may variably impact the visibility of some features in the geographic area).
      • A grid (e.g., a pattern of horizontal and vertical lines) used as a reference to provide representational geographic information, which may be added as an overlay to an acquired “real world” scene, a drawing, a map, etc.
      • “Bare” data representing geo-encoded information (e.g. lat/long coordinates identifying one or more points), which may be used to construct a virtual image without having captured any “real-world” scene. Such “bare” data may be in any of a variety of computer-readable formats, including XML.
  • In accordance with some embodiments, input images or source data such as those listed above may be analyzed and/or manipulated by the GIS 610 shown in FIG. 6. For example, the GIS 610 may be programmed to “geotag” an input image by associating geospatial metadata with features in the input image. The geospatial metadata may include any suitable combination of lat/long coordinates, altitude, bearing, place names, etc. As another example, the GIS 610 may be programmed to create a computer-aided design (CAD) drawing showing aboveground and/or underground facilities installed in a geographic area, and to associate geospatial metadata with at least some of the facilities shown on the drawing. As yet another example, the GIS 610 may be programmed to align two geotagged images, for example, by scaling one or both of the images and aligning one or more reference points. This process is sometimes referred to as “georeferencing,” and may be useful in combining one or more facilities maps showing different types of facilities installed in the same geographic area.
  • Thus, the GIS 610 may provide a framework for manipulating and displaying images in ways that may facilitate a variety of location-related analyses. As shown in FIG. 6, the ticket assessment engine may be adapted to invoke one or more services provided by the GIS 610. For example, the assessment engine may submit a geotagged VWL image (e.g., the VWL image 400 shown in FIG. 4) to the GIS 610 and request that the dig area indicators (e.g., the dig area indicators 410) be shown on a facilities map. Upon receiving the request, the GIS 610 may obtain a relevant facilities map, for example, by retrieving one or more existing maps from the auxiliary information storage 250 and combing them if necessary, or by creating a CAD drawing showing all facilities known to be present in the geographic area shown on the VWL image 400. The GIS 610 may then render the dig area indicators 410 as an overlay on the facilities map based on the geospatial metadata associated with the VWL image and the facilities map. An example of the resulting facilities map 700 with the dig area indicators 410 is shown in FIG. 7.
  • Images are merely one example of a variety of different types of information that may be used by a ticket assessment engine. Another example is a set of lookup tables, such as the lookup tables 800 shown in FIG. 8. In accordance with some embodiments, the ticket assessment engine may load one or more of these lookup tables and use them to map locate operation attributes to intermediate or final assessment outcomes. The locate operation attributes may be raw attributes directly obtained from locate request tickets, or derived attributes assigned by the ticket assessment engine based on some raw attributes.
  • In the exemplary embodiment shown in FIG. 8, the lookup tables 800 include a complexity lookup table 810, a time lookup table 820, a risk lookup table 830, a value lookup table 840 and a resource lookup table 850.
  • The complexity lookup table 810 may be used to assign a suitable measure of complexity to a requested locate operation, and may be indexed with a variety of different locate operation attributes. For example, the complexity look up table 810 may map the number of facilities to be located and/or each individual facility type (e.g., gas, cable, electric, water, etc.) to a suitable complexity level (e.g., high, medium or low). As another example, the complexity lookup table 810 may map work site details such as high traffic or restricted access to corresponding complexity reason codes that are recognized by various components within a ticket management system (e.g., the ticket management system 200 shown in FIG. 2).
  • Similar to the complexity lookup table 810, the time lookup table 820 and the risk lookup table 830 may be used, respectively, to assign an estimated duration and a suitable measure of risk to a requested locate operation. For example, the time look up table 820 may map each individual facility type (e.g., gas, cable, electric, water, etc.) to a duration estimate per unit length or unit area, and the risk lookup table 830 may map each individual facility type to a suitable risk score. Additionally, the time lookup table 820 and the risk lookup table 830 may, respectively, map work site details such as high traffic or restricted access to corresponding scaling factors for increasing or decreasing a duration estimate and a risk score.
  • The value lookup table 840 may be used to associate a value to a requested locate operation. The value may be simply the expected revenue to be collected for the work performed, or some other suitable measure of value such as net profit (e.g., revenue less cost) or value at risk. In some embodiments, the value lookup table 840 may correlate complexity with value (e.g., mapping high complexity to high value, medium complexity to medium value, and low complexity to low value), where the complexity level is determined at least in part using the complexity lookup table 810. In some further embodiments, the value look up table 840 may map each individual facility type (e.g., gas, cable, electric, water, etc.) to a value estimate, which may be a flat rate or a rate per unit length. In yet some further embodiments, the value lookup table 840 may map ticket types (e.g., emergency, short notice, re-mark, etc.) to corresponding adjustment values for increasing or decreasing a value. For example, extra fees may be collected for an emergency locate operation, while a re-mark operation may not be billed to a customer if the locate service provider is at fault (e.g., the locate service provider did not adequately respond to the locate request ticket during a first visit, which was already billed to the customer).
  • The resource lookup table 850 may used to determine any equipment requirements and/or technician certification and/or minimum skill level requirements for a requested locate operation. For example, locate technician skill levels may be ranked from 1-10, with 10 being the most skilled. The resource lookup table 850 may map high complexity to skill levels 8-10, medium complexity to skill levels 4-7, low complexity to skill levels 1-3, where the complexity level is determined at least in part using the complexity lookup table 810. As another example, the resource look up table 850 may map each individual facility type (e.g., gas, cable, electric, water, etc.) to one or more technician certifications (e.g., gas-certified, cable-certified, electric-certified, water-certified, etc.). As yet another example, the resource lookup table 850 may map each individual facilities type (e.g., gas) to one or more required or recommended tools or pieces of equipment (e.g., a gas detection tool).
  • It should be appreciated that the set of lookup tables 800 is provided herein for purposes of illustration only. For example, although lookup tables may provide quick access to data, other types of data structures may also be used to store the information contents described above. Also, a ticket assessment engine may access other types of information contents in addition to, or instead of, those described above. For example, in determining a risk level associated with a requested locate operation, a ticket assessment engine may access historical records of previously completed locate request tickets to determine whether there is a high concentration of past damage reports within the proximity of the currently requested locate operation. A historical record of a previously completed locate request ticket may also store information collected during the corresponding locate and/or marking operation. For example, the record may store an actual duration of the operation and/or actual durations of various tasks that are part of the operation. The record may further indicate whether an accident occurred during subsequent excavation (e.g., whether one or more underground facilities were damaged during excavation).
  • As another example, a ticket assessment engine may access records pertaining to excavation companies and/or individual excavators. Such records may contain information such as excavation company name and address, individual excavator name and address, excavator type (e.g., pool installer, landscaper, construction company, facility installer, etc), and/or damage history. In some embodiments, a ticket assessment engine may use the excavator type information and the damage history information to assess the level of risk associated with a currently requested location operation. For example, the ticket assessment engine may return a high risk classification for a requested locate operation when a corresponding excavation company and/or individual excavator has a significant history of damaging facilities. The ticket assessment engine may further increase a technician skill level requirement for the requested locate operation, as a way to ensure accurate marking and reduce risk.
  • VI. Location Assessment
  • As discussed above, location information provided in a locate request ticket may in some instances be incomplete and/or inaccurate. For example, the address for the work site may be vague or ambiguous (e.g., a street name without any house numbers), or multiple conflicting pieces of location information may be given (e.g., a street address and a pair of lat/long coordinates that do not match). In these situations, additional analysis may be needed to increase the level of confidence that a locate technician is being dispatched to the correct location. For example, additional location information may be extracted from a textual description of the work site that is included in the ticket, and/or from one or more virtual white lines (VWL) images associated with the ticket.
  • FIG. 9 shows an illustrative process 900 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to selecting the best available location information and refine the location information when necessary.
  • At act 902, the ticket assessment engine may collect one or more pieces of location information from a locate request ticket (e.g., the parsed ticket 215 as shown in FIG. 2). For example, the ticket assessment engine may extract from the ticket a work site address, coordinates for vertices of a polygon generated by the originating one-call center, and/or any VLW images attached to the ticket. In some instances, the ticket may additionally contain portions of free text (e.g., in a “Remarks” field recording an excavator's description of the dig area and/or the reason for excavation). The ticket assessment engine may be programmed to intelligently extract location information from these portions of free text, for example, by searching for relevant phrases such as “next to,” “across from,” “near,” etc. Alternatively, the ticket assessment engine may prompt a human user to read the portions of free text and manually enter any relevant location information.
  • At act 904, the ticket assessment engine may select a piece of location information from the multiple pieces of location information collected at act 902. This selection may be based on levels of confidence, that is, the ticket assessment engine may select the piece of location information that is deemed the most trustworthy or reliable. In some embodiments, a geotagged VWL image may be considered the most reliable among all types of location information. As such, it may be selected whenever available. If a geotagged VWL image is not available, then a complete address (e.g., with city, street name and house number) may be selected over other pieces of location information, such as a one-call center polygon. If neither a geotagged VWL image nor a complete address is available, then coordinates for the centroid of a one-call center polygon may be computed and reverse-geocoded to obtain an address.
  • The ticket assessment engine may also perform one or more consistency checks on the collected location information. For example, the ticket assessment engine may reverse-geocode at least some of the available coordinates to determine if the coordinates correspond to a point that falls within the city, county, and/or state indicated on the ticket.
  • At act 906, the ticket assessment engine may determine whether the location information selected at act 904 has a sufficiently high confidence level. If the determination is positive, then the process 900 ends and the selected location information may be recorded and used throughout the rest of the assessment process carried out by the ticket assessment engine. If the determination is negative, the ticket assessment engine may make a best-effort attempt at refining the location information at act 908.
  • FIG. 10 illustrates an exemplary method for refining location information. In this example, a street name (e.g., “Main Street”) is available, but without a house number. A one-call center polygon 1000 is also available. The ticket assessment engine may programmed to determine the coordinates for the points 1005A and 1005B, at which Main Street intersects the one-call center polygon 1000. These coordinates may then be reverse-geocoded to obtain an address range on Main Street that falls within the one-call center polygon 1000. If the address range is sufficiently small, the ticket assessment engine may simply select the address range as the prevailing location information. If, however, the address range is too large, the ticket assessment engine may narrow it down by computing the centroid of the one-call center polygon 1000 and selecting one or more addresses 1005C that are closest to the computed centroid.
  • It should be appreciated that the various rules and methods described above in connection with FIGS. 9 and 10 are merely illustrative, as other rules and methods may also be used to select, verify and/or refine location information. Also, the ticket assessment engine may invoke the services of a geographic information system (e.g., the GIS 610 shown in FIG. 6) to perform any of the computational tasks described above.
  • VI. Scope Assessment
  • In assessing the scope of a locate request ticket, a ticket assessment engine may determine the nature and amount of work to be done in response to the ticket. The result of scope assessment may be used in a number of subsequent assessment processes, such complexity, time, risk, value and/or resource requirements. For example, during scope assessment, the number and types of facilities to be located may be determined or verified, which may in turn be used to determine complexity (e.g., whether a high profile facility type is involved), time (e.g., an estimated duration for each facility type), risk (e.g., whether a high risk facility, such as gas, is involved), value (e.g., an estimated revenue to be collected for each facility type) and/or resource requirements (e.g., certification requirements for each facility type).
  • In some instances, a one-call center may compile some form of ticket scope information and include the information in a locate request ticket. For example, a one-call center may generate a polygon and determine, based on the polygon, which facility types are to be listed on the ticket. However, such information from one-call centers may not always be accurate, and therefore it may be desirable to independently generate and verify ticket scope information.
  • FIG. 11 shows an illustrative process 1100 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to assess the scope of a locate request ticket.
  • At act 1102, the ticket assessment engine may extract various pieces of information from the ticket to determine at least one characteristic of the planned dig area (e.g., size, shape and/or boundaries). For example, if a geotagged VWL image is available, the ticket assessment engine may determine the dig area boundaries based on the dig area indicators and the geospatial metadata associated with the VWL image. As discussed above, the ticket assessment engine may associate a higher level of confidence to the VWL image, compared to a polygon generated by the one-call center. Therefore, in some embodiments, the VWL image may be used in lieu of the one-call center polygon in determining ticket scope.
  • The ticket assessment may also use other types of information during act 1102. In some embodiments, the ticket assessment engine may search for scope information in one or more free text portions of the ticket. For example, the ticket assessment engine may be programmed to search for keywords related to landmarks (e.g., sidewalk, playground, etc.) and/or directions (e.g., north, east, south, west, etc.). If one or more keywords are found, the ticket assessment engine may prompt a human user to read the free text and enter any additional scope information.
  • At act 1104, the ticket assessment engine may determine the reason for and/or method of excavation, which may be used to determine other scope-related parameters such as excavation depth and/or dig area size.
  • The reason for excavation may sometimes be given explicitly in the ticket. For example, as shown in FIG. 3, the ticket 300 may indicate under the excavation information 306 and the excavator information 310 that a conduit is being installed for a telephone company. In other situations, the reason for excavation may be found in a free text description given by the excavator, and the ticket assessment engine may search for informative keywords or key phrases in the free text description. For example, words such as “pool” and “mailbox” may be commonly used when describing the reason for excavation, and the ticket parsing application may be programmed to recognize these words and extract relevant portions of the free text. In some further situations, the reason for excavation may be inferred based on excavator information. For instance, if the excavator is a plumbing company, the reason for excavation is likely to be installing water and/or sewer lines. On the other hand, if the excavator is a pool contractor, the reason for excavation is likely to be installing a swimming pool.
  • In some embodiments, the excavation information may indicate a method of excavation, which may be helpful in estimating the extent of the excavation activities. Certain methods of excavation, such as blasting and/or boring, may be more likely to cause accidents compared to other methods. For example, where blasting is planned, it may be desirable to include in the dig area a circular area of a certain radius centered at the planned location of blasting. As another example, where boring is planned, it may be desirable to include in the dig area all areas within a certain distance from the planned locations of boring. The particular radius and/or distance may be selected based on a number of different factors, e.g., government regulations, contractual obligations, insurance requirements, industry best practices, and/or the locate service provider's risk tolerance levels.
  • At act 1106, the ticket assessment engine may determine or verify the number and types of facilities to be located. Alternatively, the ticket assessment engine may verify the list of one-call center members (or facilities owners) who are notified of the ticket. As discussed above, it may be desirable to independently verify this type of information, even though it may be already provided by the one-call center.
  • The ticket assessment may use a variety of auxiliary information (e.g., as stored in the auxiliary information storage 250 shown in FIG. 2) in determining or verifying the number and types of facilities to be located. For example, the ticket assessment engine may access one or more facilities maps illustrating installed underground facilities and street-level landmarks. In some instances, the facilities maps may be geotagged, which may enable overlaying a polygon or dig area indicators onto the facilities maps (e.g., as shown in FIG. 7) to determine whether one or more items on the facilities maps fall within the dig area or are sufficiently close to the dig area.
  • Continuing to act 1108, the ticket assessment engine may determine scope information for each individual facility type determined at act 1106. For example, the ticket assessment engine may compare the dig area boundaries (e.g., as indicated by dig area indicators or a polygon) against a respective facilities map. This may facilitate subsequent time estimation (e.g., different facility types may have different duration estimates per unit length or unit area). It may also facilitate billing after the ticket has been completed (e.g., some facility owners may be billed on a per ticket basis, while other facility owners may be billed per unit of work performed).
  • Although detailed examples of scope-related analyses are described above in connection with FIG. 11, it should be appreciated that the inventive concepts disclosed herein are not limited to any specific implementations. For example, to the extent that the analyses are independent from each other, they may be performed in any suitable order (e.g., not necessarily in the order presented in FIG. 11). As a more specific example, the determination of excavation reason and/or method at act 1104 may be carried out prior to, or concurrently with, the determination of dig area characteristics at act 1102. Other variations may also be possible.
  • V. Complexity Assessment
  • In various embodiments, a ticket may be considered more or less complex for a number of different reasons, such as the number and types of facilities to be located, work site characteristics and/or some other suitable combination of factors. Therefore, complexity assessment may very broadly encompass any types of analysis to categorizes and/or annotate a ticket in such a way that facilitates subsequent handling of the ticket. For example, the outcomes of complexity assessment may be presented in any suitable manner (e.g., using numerical scores and/or user-defined categories), and may inform any other assessment process, such as time, risk, value or resource requirements. Furthermore, complexity assessment may take into account any suitable input information, such as information directly available from a ticket, or information derived based on the ticket and/or other auxiliary information.
  • FIG. 12 shows an illustrative process 1200 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to assess the complexity of a locate request ticket, in accordance with some embodiments.
  • At act 1202, the ticket assessment engine may perform a keyword search on the ticket to look for any keywords that may trigger a complexity designation. For example, service contracts with some facility owners may include special requirements for the handling of certain types of “high profile” facilities (e.g., gas pipes and/or fiber optic cables), and a locate service provider may receive higher compensation for complying with these special requirements. A locate service provider may also have internal regulations designating certain facilities as being “high profile.” This may be done, for example, for risk management purposes. Thus, when the ticket assessment engine detects the presence of one or more high profile facility types (e.g., gas or fiber optic), the ticket may be put into a complexity category of “high profile.” Additionally, one or more reason codes and/or descriptions may be given to indicate why the ticket has been categorized under “high profile.”
  • In some embodiments, the designation of “high profile” may also take into account a location of the work site. For example, although telephone and/or electric facilitates may not ordinarily be considered “high profile,” one or more sections of these facilities may be designated as such because they serve a special area, such as a hospital or military base. (This may be the case even if the work site itself is outside the special area.) Accordingly, the ticket assessment engine may use the work site location in conjunction with one or more facilities maps to determine whether any facilities to be located serve one or more special areas. If so, the ticket may be put into the “high profile” category along with an appropriate reason code and/or description.
  • Continuing with FIG. 12, the ticket assessment engine records, at act 1204, the complexity category assigned to the locate request ticket during act 1202, along with any reason codes and/or descriptions. This recording may be done in any suitable manner that allows the assigned complexity category to be later accessed using some information associated with the ticket. For example, the ticket assessment engine may store the assigned category in a database entry that can be indexed using a ticket serial number. Alternatively, the ticket assessment engine may insert the assigned complexity category into a work order created for the ticket (e.g., work orders 235A-C shown in FIG. 2).
  • At act 1206, the ticket assessment may determine whether the work site falls within some complexity region. For example, the ticket assessment engine may access a data storage (e.g., the auxiliary information storage 250) to obtain a set of polygons representing, respectively, a set of predetermined complexity regions. Each of the polygons may be specified by the set of coordinates for its vertices, and may be associated with a complexity category indicating why the region has been designated as a complexity region. A more detailed description of the complexity category may also be provided.
  • The ticket assessment engine may then geocode an address of the work site and determine whether the resulting coordinates fall within any of the complexity regions represented by the polygons. If the coordinates do fall within at least one complexity region, the ticket assessment engine may proceed to act 1208 to store the corresponding complexity category and/or complexity category description.
  • It should be appreciated that the polygons representing complexity regions may be generated in a number of different ways, as the present disclosure is not limited in this respect. For example, a geographical information system (e.g., the GIS 610 shown in FIG. 6) may be used to analyze one or more facilities maps, either alone or in combination, to identify any geographical area with a high concentration of underground facilities. As another example, some commercially available digital map data may contain information delimiting various geographical regions of interest, such as highways, railroad tracks, parks, hospitals, military bases, schools, gated communities, zoning parcels, etc. A geographical information system may be used to automatically assign complexity categories to some of these regions. The corresponding delimitation information may then be extracted from the digital map data and used to compute polygons.
  • Additionally, a geographical information system may be adapted to allow a human user to manually define a complexity region. For example, a supervisory personnel may, based on local knowledge, designate a certain geographic area as a complexity region and provide an appropriate description (e.g., the area may be known to have defective tracer wires along a certain type of facility, which may increase the difficulty in locating that type of facility). The geographic information system may present a graphic user interface to allow the supervisory personnel to electronically mark the boundaries of the complexity region.
  • Returning to FIG. 12, the ticket assessment engine may determine at act 1210 whether the work site is in the proximity of a past ticket categorized as “high profile.” For example, the ticket assessment engine may search a database of past tickets to determine whether the work site is within a given radius (e.g. 100 yards) of a past ticket with a “high profile” designation. If so, the ticket assessment engine may assign the complexity category “high profile potential” to the current ticket and record a reason code “historical high profile” at act 1212.
  • At act 1214, the ticket assessment engine may determine whether the locate request ticket is subject to special billing rules. For example, the ticket assessment engine may determine whether the ticket has a linear scope of 0.5 miles or greater (e.g., as determined during the scope assessment process 1100), or whether the work site is at a remote location that requires extended travel. Additionally, the ticket assessment engine may search one or more text fields (e.g., locate instructions, remarks and/or excavation type description) for keywords that might be relevant for billing. Then the ticket assessment engine may consult one or more billing tables to determine whether any special billing rules apply to the current ticket. For example, at act 1216, the ticket assessment engine may set a hourly status indicator to “true,” indicating that the ticket should be billed per unit of work performed, rather than at a flat rate.
  • It should be appreciated that the billing tables used by the ticket assessment engine may contain information that is specific to a particular geographic area. For example, different facility owners serving different geographical areas may be billed at different rates using different methods. Therefore, multiple billing tables may be prepared and selected for use based on the geographic areas in which the locate service provider is operating.
  • Proceeding to act 1218, the ticket assessment engine may determine a service type (e.g., “emergency,” “short notice,” “re-mark,” “re-stake,” or “re-note”) by performing a keyword search. The search may taken into account common abbreviations such as “shrt” for “short.” If a relevant keyword is found, the ticket assessment engine may record the corresponding service type at act 1220. This information may be used, for example, during the scheduling and dispatch process to determine a due date or deadline for the ticket. It may also be used in determining an appropriate fee to be billed to a customer.
  • As discussed in connection with FIG. 2, some of the above-described functionalities relating to complexity assessment may be expressed via a set of business rules (e.g., one or more of business rules 240 shown in FIG. 2). An exemplary set of complexity assessment business rules is summarized in Table 2 below (BR-001 through BR-005) and described in greater detail in Tables 3-7.
  • VI. Time Assessment
  • As discussed above, various time-related aspects of a locate request ticket may be assessed, such as a due date of the ticket, an estimated duration of the requested locate operation and/or an expiration date of locate marks.
  • In some embodiments, the time at which a locate request ticket is generated (e.g., when an excavator notifies a one-call center regarding planned excavation activities) may be used to estimate one or more deadlines. For example, depending on a service type associated with the ticket (e.g., emergency, short notice, re-mark, etc.), a locate service provider may have more or less time to respond to the ticket. As a more specific examples, the locate service provider may be required (e.g., by government regulations and/or locate contract provisions) to respond to an emergency ticket within a short window of time (e.g., two to four hours after the ticket is generated), whereas normal tickets may be completed within a longer window of time (e.g., 48 or 72 hours after the ticket is generated).
  • The time of ticket generation may also be used to determine when the locate marks placed by a technician at the work site will expire. For instance, in some jurisdictions, an excavator may be required by law or regulation to request a “re-mark” operation if the planned excavation activities are not completed within a certain period of time (e.g., on the order of days, such as seven or 14 days) after the original ticket is generated. In response to such a request, a new (but related) work order may be created to dispatch a locate technician to the work site to repeat the locate operation and/or refresh the locate marks previously placed (e.g., by spraying more paint on the ground at previously marked locations). If the planned excavation activities are not completed within a longer period of time (e.g., on the order of weeks, such as three or four weeks), the ticket itself may be said to have expired, and the excavator may be required by law or regulation to initiate a new locate request ticket.
  • In some further embodiments, the duration of a locate request ticket (i.e., the amount of time worked by a locate technician to complete the requested locate operation) may be estimated using statistical information collected from previously complete locate request tickets. For example, a ticket assessment engine may access a historical average and/or standard deviation for tickets of a certain type (e.g., tickets having a certain combination of features). This information may then be used to establish an adjustment and/or scaling factor to be applied to future tickets of the same type (e.g., having the same combination of features).
  • FIG. 13 shows an illustrative process 1300 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to estimate the duration of a locate request ticket, in accordance with some embodiments.
  • At act 1302, the ticket assessment engine may establish an initial duration estimate, for example, based on the total number of facilities to be located (e.g., as determined or verified during the scope assessment process 1100). More specifically, if the ticket is an N-locate ticket (i.e., there are N different types of facilities to be located), the ticket assessment engine may obtain the historical average duration for all previously complete N-locate tickets. Alternatively, the ticket assessment engine may obtain the standard deviation in addition to the average, and determine a duration estimate such that, with high probability, at least a desired percentage (e.g., 95 percents) of all N-locate tickets will have a duration not exceeding the duration estimate. Such an estimate may be computed using any known techniques, such as Chebychev's inequality.
  • In addition to the number of facilities types to be located, other ticket characteristics may also be used to determine a subset of previously completed tickets based on which a historical average duration is computed. For example, a historical average duration may be computed for all previously completed tickets located within a certain geographical area (e.g., as specified by a geofence). As another example, a historical average duration may be computed for all previously completed tickets having one or more common types of facilities (e.g., gas, cable, water, electric, etc.). As yet another example, a historical average duration may be computed for all previously completed tickets having a suitable combination of ticket characteristics, such as all tickets completed within the past three months in a specified city or neighborhood.
  • At act 1304, the ticket assessment engine may, based on a number of different factors, determine on or more adjustments to be applied to the initial duration estimate established at act 1302. For example, an adjustment may be assigned to each facility type based on observed averages. More specifically, if an N-locate ticket having a first facility type (e.g., gas) is on average 4 minutes longer than an N-locate ticket not having the first facility type, then an adjustment of 4 minutes may be assigned to the facility type “Gas.” On the other hand, if an N-locate ticket having a second facility type (e.g., sewer) is on average 3 minutes shorter than an N-locate ticket not having the second facility type, then an adjustment of −3 minutes may be assigned to the facility type “Sewer.”
  • As another example, an adjustment may be determined based on complexity region type (e.g., as determined at during act 1206 shown in FIG. 12). More specifically, it may have been observed that an average ticket having a complexity region type “Gated” (e.g., the work site is within a gated community requiring some form of access approval, such as an access code) is 15 minutes longer than an overall average. Then an adjustment of 15 minutes may be assigned to all tickets having a complexity region type “Gated.” Alternatively, an appropriate adjustment may be chosen to guarantee that, with high probability, all tickets with complexity region type “Gated” will have a duration not exceeding the average duration plus the adjustment. Such an adjustment may be chosen using any known techniques using standard deviation information.
  • Similarly, adjustments may be determined for other complexity region types, such as military base (e.g., 35 minutes, due to strict verification procedures for access permits) and/or regions with aerial power lines (e.g., −10 minutes, because aerial power lines may be located without special equipment).
  • At act 1306, various scaling factors may be established for the duration estimate. For example, if a ticket is determined to be high profile with a certain reason code (e.g., as in act 1202 shown in FIG. 12), the reason code may be used to index an appropriate scaling factor. In some embodiments, the scaling factor may be 1.15 for a high profile ticket with no reason code given, 1.38 for the reason code “Fiber Optic,” and 1.23 for reason code “HCPhone” (or high capacity phone line).
  • A similar, but not necessarily identical, set of scaling factors may be chosen for tickets with high profile potential under reason code historical high profile (e.g., as determined in act 1210 shown in FIG. 12). For example, the scaling factors for no reason code, reason code “Fiber Optic” and reason code “HCPhone” may be, respectively, 1.08, 1.3 and 1.18.
  • Other complexity designations may also be used to establish scaling factors. For example, if a ticket's hourly status indicator is set to “true” (e.g., as in act 1214 shown in FIG. 12), the corresponding duration estimate may be scaled based on an estimated size of the dig area (e.g., in length or in area). More specifically, the scaling factor may be obtained by dividing the length of the dig area by a base value (e.g., 0.5 miles), or by dividing the area of the dig area by a base value (e.g. 10000 square feet). Similarly, the service type of a ticket (e.g., as determined in act 1218 shown in FIG. 12) may be used to look up a corresponding scaling factor, such as 1.23 for emergency and 1.82 for short notice. On the other hand, a scaling factor of less than 1 (e.g., 0.9, 0.8, or 0.6) may be used for a re-mark or re-note operation, assuming the same technician who performed the previous operation is dispatched to perform the re-mark or re-note, in which case the technician may be more efficient during the subsequent visit because he is already familiar with the work site.
  • It should be appreciated that all of the scaling factors may be determined based on average and/or standard deviation information using techniques similar to those described above for establishing adjustments. Other techniques may also be possible, such as manual optimizations.
  • Proceeding to act 1308, any adjustments determined at act 1304 and scaling factors determined at act 1306 may be applied in a suitable manner to the initial duration estimate determined at act 1302. For example, all adjustments may be applied (e.g., added to the duration estimate), and then all scaling factors may be applied (e.g., multiplied with the duration estimate). Other methods may also be possible, such as breaking down the duration estimate into different components (e.g., one for each facility type) and applying appropriate adjustments and/or scaling factors to the individual components, in addition to, or instead of applying adjustments and/or scaling factors to the overall duration estimate.
  • Although time assessment is performed on the basis of a locate request ticket in the above described example, it should be appreciated that the present disclosure is not so limited. Rather, time assessment may be performed with respect to any suitable unit of work, which may be larger or smaller than a locate operation corresponding to a locate request ticket. For instance, in various embodiments, time assessment may be performed with respect to a collection of related locate operations, or with respect to one or more tasks within a single locate operation. Examples of tasks include, but are not limited to, traveling to a work site, reviewing a ticket in preparation for the corresponding locate operation, reviewing a relevant map, equipment preparation, locating one or more facilities, marking one or more facilities, preparing documentation (e.g., electronically or on paper) upon completion of a ticket, and/or preparing for departure from work site. Where appropriate, each of these tasks may be further broken down into subtasks, for example, based on facility type.
  • As with complexity assessment, some or all of the above-described functionalities relating to time assessment may be expressed via a set of business rules (e.g., one or more of business rules 240 shown in FIG. 2). An exemplary set of time assessment business rules is summarized in Table 2 below (BR-006 through BR-012) and described in greater detail in Tables 8-14.
  • VII. Risk Assessment
  • In various embodiments, risk assessment may include estimating the extent of potential damages (e.g., economic losses, property and/or environmental damages, personal injuries, etc.) in the event of an accident during subsequent excavation. Additionally, or alternatively, risk assessment may include estimating a likelihood that an accident would occur given a set of circumstances (e.g., as described in a locate request ticket and/or inferred therefrom).
  • Risk assessment may be of interest to different entities associated with locate and/or marking operations. For instance, a locate service provider may wish to assess a level of potential liability for damages in an accident where the locate service provider is at fault (e.g., failing to complete a locate operation by a required deadline or inadequately performing a location operation). On the other hand, a facilities owner may wish to assess the extent of potential damage (e.g., the number of customers who may experience service interruption and/or costs for repairing damaged facilities). If the scope of potential damages is sufficiently large, the facilities owner may decide to dispatch an in-house locate technician to perform a locate operation, instead of contracting the operation to a locate service provider. As another example, the facilities owner may determine that more stringent safety procedures may be appropriate where personal injuries are likely (e.g., where a work site is located in a populous area, such as near a school or a shopping mall), and therefore may also decide to dispatch its own team of locate technicians for a better quality guarantee.
  • In some embodiments, the risk associated with a locate request ticket may be represented as a numerical score (e.g., a number between 1 and 100) or a broad category (e.g., high, medium or low). As discussed in greater detail below, the score or category may be determined based on historical data, such as the frequency and extent of damage among a certain class of previously completed tickets. This risk measure may be used to flag some of the incoming tickets for special consideration and/or handling. For example, it may be required that a high risk ticket be handled only by a technician with a high level of skill. Alternatively, or additionally, a high risk ticket may require supervisory review after completion, to check for any errors that may have been made by the technician performing the requested locate operations. In this manner, risk assessment may reduce the likelihood of accidents, and may thereby improve the profitability of the locate service provider's operations.
  • FIG. 14 shows an illustrative process 1400 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to compute a risk measurement (e.g., a numerical score or category) associated with a locate request ticket, in accordance with some embodiments.
  • At act 1402, a risk score may be established for each facility type to be located. For example, gas, electric and water may be assigned a risk score of 2.5, 0.7 and 0.2 respectively. These scores may be determined based on a number of different factors, such as the frequency of damages related to a facility type (e.g., the percentage of gas locates that resulted in damage reports) and the extent of damages related to a facility type (e.g., the average monetary value of claims resulting from damages to gas pipes). Finer distinctions may also be made, such as assigning different risk scores based on attributes of facilities of the same type. For example, damages to water mains may result in very high claim amounts (e.g., streets may collapse due to a ruptured water main), while damages to water lines leading a customer's premise may be minor and easy to repair. As another example, the diameters of gas pipes may be taken into account, where thicker pipes may be associated with lower gas pressure and may be more at risk for explosions.
  • At act 1404, the various risk scores determined at act 1402 may be summed to obtain an overall risk score for the ticket. Then, at act 1406, one or more appropriate scaling factors may be determined for adjusting the overall risk score. For example, the ticket assessment engine may access a database of past damage reports to determine whether the work site and/or dig area for the current ticket is within a given radius (e.g., 500 yards) of one or more past damage reports and, if so, computes the total amount of claims from all of the damage reports within this radius. This total amount may in turn be used to lookup an appropriate scaling factor for the risk score, for example, as shown in Table 16 below.
  • In addition to damage reports, scaling factors may, in some embodiments, be determined based on proximity to one or more mis-locates. A mis-locate is said to have occurred when an error in connection with a locate and/or marking operation is discovered (e.g., during subsequent excavation), although the error may not have manifested itself as an accident. In some further embodiments, proximity to one or more past trouble tickets may also be used in determining a scaling factor. Trouble tickets may include any previously completed tickets whose records indicate one or more operational irregularities. For example, a past ticket may be designated as a trouble ticket if the technician dispatched to the work site had difficulty locating a certain type of facilities and had to call his supervisor for special instructions.
  • As another example, the ticket assessment engine may determine whether the excavator who submitted the excavation notice corresponding to the current ticket has a significant history of damages. This history can be measured in a number of different ways. For example, an average damage amount (e.g., in dollar value) per excavation (or locate operation) may be computed for at least some of the excavators for whom historical information is available. The average may be computed over a certain time frame (e.g., the past six months, or one, two, three, five or ten year). The average across different excavators may also be computed.
  • Then the ticket assessment engine may compare a particular excavator's average damage amount against the average across all excavators, for example, by expressing the former as a percentage of the latter. This percentage may be used to look up a corresponding scaling factor for the overall risk score of the ticket (e.g., as shown in Table 17 below).
  • Alternatively, or additionally, a damage count (e.g., the number of damage reports irrespective of the dollar amount for each report) may be obtained for each excavator and compared against an average damage count across different excavators, for example, over a certain time frame (e.g., the past six months, or one, two, three, five or ten year). Again, a particular excavator's damage count may be expressed as a percentage of the average damage count, and the percentage may be used to look up an appropriate scaling factor (e.g., as shown in Table 17 below).
  • Complexity designations such as high profile may also be used to determine one or more appropriate scaling factors for the overall risk score. For example, if a ticket is determined to be high profile with a certain reason code (e.g., as in act 1202 shown in FIG. 12), the reason code may be used to index an appropriate scaling factor. In some embodiments, the scaling factor may be 1.8 for a high profile ticket with no reason code given, 4.0 for the reason code “Fiber Optic,” and 2.5 for reason code “HCPhone” (e.g., as shown in Table 18 below).
  • As another example, if a ticket's hourly status indicator is set to “true” (e.g., as in act 1214 shown in FIG. 12), the corresponding risk estimate may be scaled based on an estimated size of the dig area (e.g., in length or in area). In the embodiment described in Table 20 below, the scaling factor may be obtained by dividing the length of the dig area by a base value (e.g., 0.5 miles), or by dividing the area of the dig area by a base value (e.g. 10000 square feet). Similarly, the service type of a ticket (e.g., as determined in act 1218 shown in FIG. 12) may be used to look up a corresponding scaling factor, such as 2.85 for emergency, 3.46 for 2-hour short notice, and 3.11 for 3-hour short notice (e.g., as shown in Table 19 below).
  • VIII. Value Assessment
  • As discussed above, value assessment may be performed according to different measures of value. For instance, value assessment may be performed from the perspective of a locate service provider based on business value created by performing a locate operation. In some embodiments, such business value may simply be the revenue collected for performing the locate operation. Alternatively, or additionally, a measure of net profit may be used, where various operating costs may be subtracted from the revenue.
  • In some embodiments, a measure of profit may take into account information from one or more contracts established between a locate service provider and a facilities owner (or some other entity contracting with the locate service provider to perform locate operations). Examples of contractual information include, but are not limited to, contractual provisions specifying bonuses and/or penalties for certain tickets. For instance, a locate contract may provide that a penalty (e.g., a suitable percentage of the contract price for performing a locate and/or marking operation) be assessed if the locate service provider fails to meet a deadline specified in a locate request ticket. Accordingly, the value associated with the ticket may be a function of time that has a sharp decline at the specified deadline. As an other example, the locate contract may further provide that a penalty be assessed for each billing period during which the locate service provider fails to timely respond to an excessive number of tickets. Any suitable mechanism may be used to define when a penalty should be assessed, such as a percentage threshold (e.g., more than 5%, 10% or 15% of tickets being completed late). The penalty may also be assessed in any suitable manner, for example, in the form of a fixed percentage (e.g., 1%, 2%, 3% or 5%) applied to all tickets, or with step increases (e.g., penalizing more heavily when a higher percentage of tickets are completed late). Accordingly, the value associated with the current ticket may depend not only on the time at which the requested operation is performed, but also on the number of tickets that have been completed late in the same billing period. For example, if the percentage of tickets that have been completed late in the same billing period is approaching 5%, the decline in value at the ticket deadline may include not only the penalty for missing the deadline of the individual ticket, but also the penalty for missing the deadlines of 5% of the tickets in that billing period.
  • In some further embodiments, value assessment may be performed from the perspective of an entity other than the locate service provider, such as a facilities owner, an excavator, a one-call center, a community (e.g., city, town, village, and/or other form of municipality) and/or an insurance company. One or more of these entities may perform value assessments based on their interests and concerns. For instance, a facilities owner may measure value in terms of value at risk (e.g., potential costs for repairing damages to facilities and/or restoring services in the event of an accident). Likewise, a community may use a value-at-risk measure, but the potential damages may be different (e.g., repairing property damage and/or environmental cleanup).
  • Additionally, value need not be restricted to monetary value. It may be any custom defined value, or even a time-varying function. For example, as discussed above, the value estimate may be provided to a scheduling and dispatch application (e.g., the scheduling and dispatch application 260 shown in FIG. 2), which may use the value estimate to prioritize activities. Thus, the value estimate may be used as a means to encourage a desired scheduling behavior. For example, if a ticket falls within a certain geographic area known to have heavy traffic during certain times of day, the value estimate may be defined as a function that has lower value during the periods of heavy traffic and higher values elsewhere. This may encourage the scheduling and dispatch application to avoid dispatching the ticket during the periods of heavy traffic.
  • Similarly, the ticket assessment engine may access an up-to-date source of weather information and define the value estimate as a time-varying function according to the weather forecast for the work site. For instance, the value estimate function may be defined in such a way that the scheduling and dispatch application is encouraged to avoid dispatching a technician to the work site in weather conditions that may hinder the locating and marking of underground facilities (e.g., rain or snow).
  • FIG. 15 shows an illustrative process 1500 that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to compute an estimated value (e.g., expected revenue) for a locate request ticket.
  • At act 1502, the ticket assessment engine may determine if the ticket is a duplicate ticket, such as a re-mark, re-stake or re-note ticket. Under some service contracts, such tickets may not be billed if the re-mark, re-stake or re-note is necessitated due to some action, or lack of action, by the locate service provider. Additionally, some service contracts may specify that two tickets transmitted on the same day are duplicate tickets if the corresponding work sites are sufficiently close to each other, and that only one of the duplicate tickets may be billed.
  • If the ticket is determined to be a duplicate ticket, then the ticket assessment engine sets the revenue to zero at act 1504. Otherwise, the ticket assessment engine may determined the applicable billing method at act 1506, for example, whether the ticket should be billed at a flat rate, per unit of work performed, or per hour worked.
  • If the ticket is to be billed at a flat rate, the ticket assessment engine may proceed to act 1508 and consult a billing rate table to select an appropriate flat rate, for example, based on the type of facility located and/or the identity of the facility owner. Otherwise, the ticket assessment engine may proceed to act 1510 and determine an appropriate billing rate, which may be either per unit of work performed (e.g., unit length of facility marked, unit area of dig area located, or some other custom-defined unit of work) or per hour worked. Then the ticket assessment engine may proceed to act 1512 to obtain an estimated scope of the ticket (e.g., as determined during the process 1100 shown in FIG. 11) or an estimated duration of the ticket (e.g., as determined during the process 1300 shown in FIG. 13). Based on the rate information and the scope or time information, the ticket assessment engine may compute an estimated revenue amount for the ticket.
  • It should be appreciated that the process 1500 may alternatively be performed on a per facility type basis. That is, a revenue estimate may be determined for each facility type to be located using a process similar to the process 1500. Then the separate revenue estimates may be summed to obtain a total estimate for the ticket.
  • Furthermore, value assessment may take into account one or more other assessment outcomes in addition to, or instead of, estimated scope or duration. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 17 and discussed in greater detail below, value assessment may, directly or indirectly, be informed by assessment outcomes relating to location, complexity, risk, and resource.
  • As with other types of assessment, some of the above-described functionalities relating to value assessment may be expressed via a set of business rules (e.g., one or more of business rules 240 shown in FIG. 2). An exemplary set of value assessment business rules is summarized in Table 2 below (BR-019 through BR-022) and described in greater detail in Tables 20-23.
  • IX. Resource Assessment
  • As discussed above, resource assessment may include identifying one or more resources (e.g., equipment and/or personnel) needed and/or recommended to adequately perform a requested locate operation. For instance, ticket information, auxiliary information and/or outcomes from other types of assessment (e.g., scope and/or complexity) may be analyzed to determine whether any resource requirements and/or recommendations exist for the requested locate operation.
  • FIG. 16A shows an illustrative process 1600A that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to identify one or more pieces of equipment that may be required and/or recommended for a locate operation but may not be available to a locate technician under ordinary circumstances (e.g., not included in a standard set of equipment carried by a locate technician).
  • At act 1602A, one or more maps may be retrieved based on a work site location that is obtained either from the ticket information or as an outcome of location assessment. The retrieved maps may be analyzed to identify any equipment that may be useful in performing the requested locate operation. For example, a facilities map may be retrieved and analyzed to determine whether one or more manholes are located at or near the work site and/or whether a locate technician would need to connect a locate transmitter to a connection point in a manhole.
  • If it is determined that the locate technician likely needs to remove one or more manhole covers during the course of the locate operation, a “sissy hook” (or “sissy bar”), or a similar device for facilitating manhole recover removal, may be recommended. In some situations, such safety devices may be required by a worker's safety organization such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). An insurance company may also require the use of certain safety devices as a precondition to payment of damage or injury claims. Furthermore, if it is determined that a locate technician would need to connect a locate transmitter to a connection point in the manhole, a hot stick may be recommended, which could be used to secure the connection between the locate transmitter and the connection point without the locate technician physically entering the manhole.
  • As a further example, it may be determined, at act 1602A, based on work site location and one or more facilities maps, that the technician likely needs to open a telephone box on a pedestal, in which case the technician may be recommended to bring a pedestal wrench, or a similar tool, for facilitating the opening of a telephone box.
  • In addition to facilities maps, one or more street maps may also be retrieved and analyzed at act 1602A. For instance, it may be determined based on the work site location and one or more street maps that the work site is in an urban setting, in which case a less persistent marking material (e.g., washable paint) may be recommended so as to reduce the impact of the locate marks on the aesthetic appearance of the work site. On the other hand, if it is determined that the work site is in a high traffic area (e.g., on or near a highway), a more persistent marking material (e.g., oil-based paint) may be recommended so as to reduce the likelihood of the locate marks wearing off prior to excavation.
  • Continuing with FIG. 16A, the ticket assessment engine may, at act 1604A, retrieve and analyze historical information (e.g., one or more records of previously completed locate and/or marking operations). For example, it may be determined based on work site location and historical information that the work site likely has bad tracer wires, in which case a more advanced locate transmitter and/or receiver may be needed to obtain sufficient signal strength (e.g., locate transmitter and/or receiver with different frequency ranges). Alternatively, or additionally, a different type of locate device may be recommended, such as a sonar or ground penetrating radar device (e.g., the “Inspector 07” locator marketed by Subsurface Instruments, Inc.), which may be used to locate underground facilities without being hooked up to tracer wires.
  • As another example, it may be determined, at act 1604A, based on work site location and historical information, that the work site is likely to have such dry ground as to prevent adequate ground connection, in which case the technician may be recommended to bring a bottle of water to wet the ground before attempting to make a ground connection.
  • Continuing to act 1606A, the ticket assessment engine may examine a dig area description (e.g., as provided in a free text portion of the locate request ticket) to identify any special circumstances that may require addition equipment. For instance, the dig area description may indicate that the work site is within a construction zone, in which case the locate technician may be required to wear a hard hat while on site.
  • Although specific examples of equipment-related analyses are illustrated in FIG. 16A and described above, it should be appreciated that the inventive concepts disclosed herein are not limited to any specific implementations. For instance, the need to remove manhole covers may be inferred based on information other than facilities maps. As one example, if the work site is located in an urban or densely populated area, it is likely that the locate technician would encounter at least one manhole. As another example, an image of the work site (e.g., a VWL image based on an aerial image of the work site) may be consulted to determine whether one or more manholes are present. As yet another example, the need to remove manhole covers may be explicitly indicated in a free text portion of the locate request ticket (e.g., in a locate instructions section). Furthermore, one or more contracts established between a locate service provider and a facilities owner (or some other entity contracting with the locate service provider to perform locate operations) may specify particular tools/equipment requirements for some types of locate operations, in which case the ticket assessment engine would consult auxiliary information such as contract information and any particular contractual obligations therein relating to tool and/or equipment requirements.
  • Additionally, the ticket assessment engine may recommend or require certain equipment without analyzing any auxiliary information. For instance, a locate technician may be required or recommended to review one or more facilities maps upon arrival at a work site to familiarize himself with the layout of underground facilities at the work site (e.g., general directions of various facilities lines, locations of connection points, etc.) and to plan his work accordingly. Therefore, the ticket assessment engine may identify one or more relevant facilities maps (e.g., based on the work site location) as being recommended or required for the locate operation.
  • In some further embodiments, resource assessment may identify a personnel skill level or certification required and/or recommended to perform a locate operation. For example, in some jurisdictions, only a technician with gas certification may be dispatched to perform a locate operation involving gas pipes. In another example, one or more assessment outcomes (e.g., scope, location, complexity, time and/or risk) may be used to determine a minimum skill level requirement for the locate operation. As a more specific example, a ticket may be assigned a high complexity level due to complex layout of underground facilities at or near the work site, in which case it may be desirable to dispatch a technician with knowledge and/or familiarity of the geographical area encompassing the work site.
  • In some embodiments, personnel skill level may include both long term measurements (e.g., years of experience and/or cumulative training) and short term measurements (e.g., recent performance evaluations). Furthermore, statistics may be collected regarding each technician's performance patterns. For instance, a technician may consistent perform at a higher level during certain hours of day (e.g., in the morning or in the afternoon), and may be assigned different skill levels depending on the time of day of dispatch.
  • FIG. 16B shows an illustrative process 1600B that may be performed by a ticket assessment engine to identify one or more requirements and/or recommendations for selecting a suitable technician to perform a requested locate operation. As discussed above, skill requirements and/or recommendations may refer broadly to any suitable attributes of a technician, including experience level, past performance level (e.g., both long term and short term), certifications, and/or security clearance.
  • At act 1602B, the ticket assessment engine may determine skill requirements based on the types of facilities to be located. For example, a contract with a facility owner (e.g., gas) may require that only technicians with the appropriate certification (e.g., gas certification) be dispatched to locate facilities owned by that facility owner. This may be done by consulting a lookup table that maps facility types to skill requirements (e.g., the lookup table 850 shown in FIG. 8).
  • At act 1604B, the ticket assessment engine may determine whether the ticket is associated with any complexity types (e.g., as determined during the process 1200 shown in FIG. 12). If so, the ticket assessment engine may look up any skill requirements associated with the identified complexity types. For example, a complexity reason code “Military Base” may indicate that only technicians with certain levels of security clearance may gain access to the work site. As another example, for a high profile ticket (e.g., by reason of high profile facilities types and/or proximity to historical damages), a high level of experience and/or good performance may be recommended.
  • At act 1606B, the ticket assessment engine may obtain a risk score for the ticket (e.g., as determined during the process 1400 shown in FIG. 14) and look up any applicable skill requirements. For example, a technician with a high level of experience and/or good performance may be recommended and/or required for a high risk ticket.
  • Although detailed examples of resource assessment are described above in connection with FIGS. 16A-B, it should be appreciated that the inventive concepts disclosed herein are not limited to any specific implementations. For example, to the extent that the resource-related analyses are independent from each other, they may be performed in any suitable order (e.g., not necessarily in the orders presented in FIGS. 16A-B).
  • As with other types of assessment, some of the above-described functionalities relating to skill requirements assessment may be expressed via a set of business rules (e.g., one or more of business rules 240 shown in FIG. 2). An exemplary skill requirements assessment business rule is described in Table 26 below.
  • X. Detailed Example of Ticket Assessment
  • FIG. 17 shows an illustrative example of a ticket assessment process executed by a multi-stage ticket assessment engine (e.g., the ticket assessment engine 230 shown in FIGS. 2 and 2A), having a network of assessment modules or subprocesses. The assessment modules may be arranged in multiple stages (e.g., six stages), where an assessment module at each stage may receive as input one or more intermediate outcomes of assessment from one or more previous stages. For instance, in the embodiment shown in FIG. 17, a first stage may include a scope assessment module 1710A and a location assessment module 1710B, a second stage may include a complexity assessment module 1820A, a third stage may include a duration assessment module 1730A and a risk assessment module 1730B, a fourth stage may include a resource assessment module 1740A, a fifth stage may include an adjusted duration assessment module 1750A, and a sixth stage may include a value assessment module 1760A.
  • In the example shown in FIG. 17, the ticket assessment process may receive as initial input a locate request ticket (e.g., the ticket 300 shown in FIG. 3) as part of ticket information 225. Various information elements may be extracted from the input ticket (e.g., using a ticket parsing process such as the one shown in FIG. 5 and described above) and provided to various assessment modules. For example, scope-related information such as polygon and/or dig area indicator coordinates and/or member codes identifying one or more notified facilities owners may be extracted and provided to the scope assessment module 1710A. Additionally, one or more relevant facilities maps 255A may be accessed (e.g., from the auxiliary information storage 250 shown in FIG. 2) and provided to the scope assessment module 1710A. Based on these pieces of information, the scope assessment module 1710A may output the number of facilities to be located pursuant to the input ticket, as well as an indication of whether the facilities to be located include one or more high profile gas facilities.
  • As a more specific example, with reference to FIG. 3, the member codes shown at 314 (e.g., “FP=W&SA,” “KD=TWNSND WRTR,” “KC=PECO PLMG,” and “XZ=COMCAST CABLE B”) may indicate a total of four facilities types to be located (e.g., sewer, water, gas, and cable). The scope assessment module 1710A may further determine that a high profile gas facilities type is present (e.g., as indicated by the member code “KC=PECO PLMG”).
  • As another example, location-related information such as work site address and/or GPS coordinates may be extracted from the input ticket and provided to the location assessment module 1710B. Additionally, one or more relevant street maps 255B may be accessed (e.g., from the auxiliary information storage 250 shown in FIG. 2) and provided to the location assessment module 1710B, which may analyze the street maps 255B to determine whether the work site is likely to be in a rural area (e.g., as distinguished from an urban or suburban area). The outcome of that determination may be output by the location assessment module 1710B.
  • As a more specific example, with reference to FIG. 3, the work site address shown at 304A (e.g., “100 St. Francis Ln” in “Bensalem Twp”) may be extracted from the ticket 300 and provided to the locate assessment module 1710B, which may determine that the work site is not located in a rural area.
  • Proceeding to the second stage of assessment, one or more outputs of the first stage, such as the indication of whether one or more high profile gas facilities are to be located and the indication of whether the work site is located in a rural area, may be provided to the complexity assessment module 1720A, which may analyze those intermediate assessment outcomes and assign a complexity category to the input ticket. For example, the complexity assessment module 1720A may implement the following decision table.
  • TABLE 1A
    Location
    Complexity Rural Not Rural
    Scope High Profile Gas Medium High
    Not High Profile Gas Low Medium
  • As a more specific example, the scope assessment module 1710A may determine that the input ticket does request that one or more high profile gas facilities be located, and the location assessment module 1710B may determine that the work site is not located in a rural area. As a result, the complexity assessment module 1720A may assign a complexity level of “High” to the input ticket.
  • Proceeding to the third stage of assessment, one or more outputs of the first and second stages, such as the number of facilities to be located and the complexity category, may be provided to the duration assessment module 1730A, which may analyze those intermediate assessment outcomes and output an estimated duration for completing the input ticket. For example, the duration assessment module 1730A may assume that a certain amount of time (e.g., 10 minutes) may be needed to locate each type of facilities, and that the total duration may be scaled according to the complexity category (e.g., scaling factors of 1, 1.2 and 1.5 may be applied, respectively, to the complexity categories low, medium and high).
  • As a more specific example, the scope assessment module 1710A may determine that the input ticket requests a total of four facilities to be located. Because the complexity assessment module 1720A has assigned a complexity level of “High” to the input ticket. the duration assessment module 1730A may compute an estimated duration for the input ticket as follows:

  • 4 facilities types*10 minutes per facilities type*scaling factor 1.5=60 minutes.
  • Additionally, the number of facilities to be located and the complexity category may be provided to the risk assessment module 1730B, which may analyze those intermediate assessment outcomes and assign a risk category to the input ticket. For example, the risk assessment module 1730B may implement the following decision table.
  • TABLE 1B
    Number of Facilities
    Risk
    1 2 3 4 5
    Complexity High Medium Medium High High High
    Medium Low Low Medium Medium High
    Low Low Low Low Medium Medium
  • In this example, because the scope assessment module 1710A has determined that the input ticket requests a total of four facilities to be located, and the complexity assessment module 1720A has assigned a complexity level of “High” to the input ticket, the risk assessment module 1730B may assign a risk level of “High” to the input ticket. This outcome may be output by the overall assessment process as a final outcome, Risk Assessment Outcome 1772, which may be used by other ticket manage system components, such as the scheduling and dispatch application 260 shown in FIG. 2.
  • The output of the risk assessment module 1730B may also be an intermediate outcome consumed by an assessment module at a subsequent stage, such as the resource assessment module 1740A at the fourth stage, which may determine an appropriate technician skill level according to the risk category assigned to the input ticket. For instance, the resource assessment module 1740A may determine that a high risk ticket may require a technician skill level of “expert,” a medium risk ticket may require a technician skill level of “experienced” or higher, and a low risk ticket may be dispatched to any technician, including those at a “trainee” level. In this example, because the risk assessment module 1730B has assigned a risk level of “High” to the input ticket, the resource assessment module 1740A may determine that an expert technician may be required. As for the risk assessment outcome, the resource assessment outcome may be output as a final outcome, Resource Assessment Outcome 1774, for use by other ticket manage system components.
  • Proceeding to the fifth stage of assessment, one or more outputs of the previous stages, such as the estimated duration and the technician skill requirement, may be provided to the adjusted duration assessment module 1750A, which may adjust the estimated duration based on technician skill level. For example, the adjusted duration assessment module 1750A may apply scaling factors of 1, 1.1 and 1.3, respectively, to tickets with technician skill levels of expert, experienced and trainee. As another example, the adjusted duration assessment module 1750A may apply one or more scaling factors to the estimated duration based on a resource assessment outcome relating to required or recommended equipment. For instance, the estimated duration may be adjusted upward if a piece of additional or more advanced equipment (e.g., an “Inspector 07” locator) is required or recommended.
  • In the example illustrated in FIG. 17, because the duration assessment module 1730A has output 60 minutes as the estimated duration, and the resource assessment module 1740A has determined that an expert technician may be required, the adjusted duration assessment module 1750A may compute an adjusted duration for the input ticket as follows:

  • 60 minutes*scaling factor 1=60 minutes.
  • As for risk and resource, the adjusted duration may be output as a final outcome, Time Assessment Outcome 1776, for use by other ticket manage system components.
  • Proceeding to the sixth stage of assessment, one or more outputs of the previous stages, such as the number of facilities to be located and the adjusted duration, may be provided to the value assessment module 1760A, which may analyze those pieces of information and estimate the amount of profit to be gained by completing the input ticket. For example, the value assessment module 1760A may access contractual information from one or more databases to determine an amount of revenue that the locate service provider can expect to collect for completing the input ticket. The value assessment module 1760A may also access employee and/or company information from one or more databases to determine an estimated cost for completing the ticket, which may include technician compensation, materials costs and/or overhead costs. As a more specific example, the value assessment module 1760A may determine that the expected revenue rate is $10 per type of facilities located and the expected cost is $0.5 per minute worked.
  • In this example, because the scope assessment module 1710A has determined that a total of four facilities types are to be located and the adjusted duration assessment module 1730A has output 60 minutes as the adjusted duration, the value assessment module 1760A may compute the estimated profit as follows:

  • 4 facilities types*$10 per facilities type−60 minutes*$0.5 per minute=$10.
  • As for risk, resource and adjusted duration, the estimated profit may be output as a final outcome, Value Assessment Outcome 1778, for use by other ticket manage system components.
  • Although various implementation details are shown in FIG. 17 and described above, it should be appreciated that such details are provided merely for purposes of illustration, and that the present disclosure is not limited to these specific examples. For example, various assessment modules need not be arranged in linearly ordered stages. Rather, the network of assessment modules can have any suitable configuration (e.g., including one or more loops). Additionally, the businesses rules implemented by the assessment modules of FIG. 17 are provided solely for purposes of illustration, as other business rules may also be suitable (e.g., the business rules shown in Tables 2-26 below).
  • XI. Example of Work Order
  • FIG. 18 shows an example of a work order 1800 that may be created from an incoming locate request ticket (e.g., the ticket 300 shown in FIG. 3). As shown, the work order 1800 may include a plurality of information elements extracted from the ticket 300, such as ticket number 1802, address of work site 1804, excavation information 1806, due date information 1808, excavator information 1810, etc. These information elements may be presented in the work order 1800 in a different format compared to the ticket 300. The work order 1800 may also include additional information elements, such as a work order number 1812 different from the ticket number (e.g., multiple different work orders may be created based on the same ticket), an expected duration 1814 (e.g., as determined during the process 1300 shown in FIG. 13) and work order task information 1816 listing the facility types to be located within this work order.
  • The work order 1800 may be forwarded by the ticket assessment engine to other software applications for further processing. For example, the scheduling and dispatch application 260 (as shown in FIG. 2) may schedule the work order to commence at a certain date and time (e.g., Jan. 4, 2009 at 9:00 AM, as shown in FIG. 18).
  • XII. Backend and On-Going Assessments
  • As discussed above, a feedback mechanism (e.g., the backend assessment module 290 shown in FIG. 2) may be provided in accordance with some embodiments to review completed tickets and perform various information updates. For example, the various processes carried out by the ticket assessment engine 230 may rely on historical information, such as statistical information regarding previously completed tickets. For improved performance and reliability, it may be desirable to update the historical and/or statistical information on an on-going basis, as more completed tickets are accumulated over time.
  • Accordingly, in some embodiments, the backend assessment module 290 may be programmed to make adjustments to the assessment business rules 240 shown in FIG. 2. For example, any historical averages used in the assessment business rules 240 may be updated on a regular basis. As a more specific example, an illustrative business rule BR-007 is shown in Table 9 below, which is based on historical average durations of locate operations. As shown in Table 9, the duration of a 3-locate ticket for which sewer is one of the facility types to be located may be, on average, three minutes shorter than that of a 3-locate ticket without a sewer locate. Such an adjustment in duration may be adjusted regularly (e.g., daily, weekly, monthly, annually, etc.), or according to any other suitable schedule, based on data collected from recently completed locate operations.
  • It should be appreciated that the analysis of a previously completed locate operation may be informed by an outcome of the excavation activities that took place subsequent to the locate operation. In one illustrative scenario, it may be observed that the duration of the locate operation was two minutes shorter than average. However, it may be further observed that an accident occurred during subsequent excavation and a probable cause of the accident was misplacement of locate marks. In that case, the duration of the locate operation may be considered an anomaly and may not be used to adjust the historical average duration used for assessing future tickets.
  • In addition to making adjustments to existing business rules, new rules may be added as new patterns are observed from newly accumulated information. For example, a pattern may emerge that locate operations within 2 miles of central Manhattan, N.Y. are, on average, four minutes longer than locate operations conducted elsewhere. Accordingly, a new rule may be defined to adjust the estimated duration upward by four minutes for all locate request tickets within 2 miles of central Manhattan, N.Y. Alternatively, a new complexity type may be created (e.g., “high density urban”) and all locate operations within 2 miles of central Manhattan, N.Y. may be assigned the new complexity type. New business rules may then be defined to adjust the estimated duration upward for all locate operations having the new complexity type.
  • Additionally, the facilities maps available from one-call centers and/or facility owners may not always contain sufficient and accurate information. For example, for some historic urban neighborhoods, the only available facilities maps may have been created many years ago and may not contain absolute location information such as lat/long coordinates. Some of the street-level landmarks shown on the maps may have been moved or no longer exist. In such a situation, it may be difficult to determine the exact location of some of the facilities shown on the maps.
  • Thus, in accordance with some embodiments of the present disclosure, the GIS 610 shown in FIG. 6 may be used as part of a system for continually improving the quality of available facilities maps. For example, the GIS 610 may be used to digitize existing maps printed on paper or cloth and augment the digitized maps with geospatial metadata.
  • In some instances, the geospatial metadata added to facilities maps may be generated at least partially based on previously completed locate request tickets. For example, the backend assessment module 290 shown in FIG. 2 may be adapted to recognize some geographic areas as areas with insufficient information and may forward to the GIS 610 the results of completed location operations in those areas, which may include technician logs and/or geotagged images with technician annotations indicating marked facilities. Using this information, the GIS 610 may be able to derive accurate location information for the marked facilities and augment the facilities maps accordingly with some appropriate geospatial metadata.
  • As another example, the backend assessment module 290 may be programmed to discover inconsistencies between existing facilities maps and the actual result of a completed locate operation, and to notify the GIS 610 of the discovered inconsistencies. Alternatively, the GIS 610 may be adapted to receive from a human user an indication that there is an error on an existing facilities map. In either situation, the GIS 610 may respond by verifying the report of inconsistency and correcting the facilities map accordingly.
  • In some further embodiments, the backend assessment module 290 may be programmed to perform time-related analyses based on completed tickets. The types of time-related analyses of interest may vary according the entity from whose perspective the analyses are performed. For instance, from the perspective of a locate service provider, it may be desirable to analyze not only total on-site time (e.g., the length of time between a technician arriving at a work site and the technician departing from the work site upon completion of the requested locate operation), but also a breakdown of the total duration into individual tasks, such as equipment preparation, locating, marking final documentation and/or personal breaks. Each task may be further broken down, for example, into subtasks each pertaining to a particular type of facilities. The locate service provider may also analyze travel time, for example, between successive locate operations and/or daily, weekly or monthly totals. These types of fine-grained analyses (e.g., analyzing durations of smaller units of work) may help the locate service provider identify potential quality and/or efficiency issues.
  • For instance, in some embodiments, the backend assessment module may compare each technician's record against fleet-wide and/or historical records and may, as a result, identify a technician who consistently spends too much (or too little) time when locating a particular type of facilities. This may suggest further training for the technician with respect to the particular facilities type to ensure that the technician correctly follows the recommended procedures. As another example, the backend assessment module may identify a technician whose patterns of personal breaks negatively impact his work efficiency, in which case coaching may be appropriate.
  • Time-related analyses may also be performed from the perspective of an entity other than a locate service provider, such as a regulatory body, a one-call center and/or an insurance company. For instance, a regulatory body or one-call center may be more interested in timely completion of tickets (e.g., reporting percentage of tickets that are completed on time and/or identifying tickets that are completed late) and less interested in work duration (e.g., length of time taken to complete the requested locate operation or a task within the requested locate operation). Statistics on response time (e.g., length of time between receiving a ticket from a one-call center and completing the requested locate operation) may also be of interest.
  • In yet some further embodiments, the backend assessment module 290 may be programmed to review completed tickets and identify suitable candidates for human review. For instance, a regulatory body may used the backend assessment module to identify high risk and/or high value tickets to be audited. A quality control application (e.g., the quality control application 270 shown in FIG. 2) may be employed in conjunction with the backend assessment module to further filter the identified high risk and/or high value tickets. For instance, the quality control application may flag those tickets with potential quality issues (e.g., technician unable to gain access to dig area, insufficient locate signals, inclement weather during operation, etc.) Alternatively, the backend assessment module may itself be programmed to perform some or all of the quality control analysis. In either manner, backend assessment may be employed to reduce the volume of completed tickets that require human review, without unacceptable degradation in safety. Examples of manual, semi-automated and automated quality assessment techniques that may be implemented as part of backend assessment can be found in one or more of the following references, each of which is incorporated herein by reference:
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/493,109, filed on Jun. 26, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Quality Assessment of a Field Service Operation;”
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/557,732, filed on Aug. 7, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Quality Assessment of a Field Service Operation Based on Geographic Information;”
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/571,356, filed on Sep. 30, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Analyzing Locate and Marking Operations with Respect to Facilities Maps;”
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/572,202, filed on Oct. 1, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Analyzing Locate and Marking Operations with Respect to Historical Information;”
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/568,087, filed on Sep. 28, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Generating an Electronic Record of Environmental Landmarks Based on Marking Device Actuations;”
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/572,260, filed on Oct. 1, 2009, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Analyzing Locate and Marking Operations with Respect to Environmental Landmarks;” and
    • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/703,809, filed on Apr. 14, 2010, entitled “Marking Apparatus Equipped with Ticket Processing Software for Facilitating Marking Operations, and Associated Methods.”
  • TABLE 2
    Example rules of assessment business rules 240
    Number Category Impacts Name Description
    BR-001 Complexity Time, Keywords - Use keywords to predict complexity
    Risk, Complexity potential and/or high
    Resource profile potential
    BR-002 Complexity Time, Complexity Determine whether excavation notice
    Risk, Region - is within a Complexity Region
    Resource Complexity
    BR-003 Complexity Time, Proximity to Use proximity to historical high
    Risk, Historical High profile tickets to estimate high
    Resource Profile - High profile potential
    Profile
    BR-004 Complexity Time, Project/Hourly Determine if a project/hourly scope
    Risk, Scope - applies to the excavation notice
    Resource, Complexity
    Revenue
    BR-005 Complexity Time, Emergency/Short Determine if an emergency/short
    Risk, Notice Type - notice type applies to the excavation
    Resource Complexity notice
    BR-006 Time Time Locate Count - Use number of locates to set initial
    Time estimate of ticket duration
    BR-007 Time Time Facility Type - Use facility types to be located to
    Time adjust estimated ticket duration
    BR-008 Time Time High Profile - Use high profile certainty to adjust
    Time estimated ticket duration
    BR-009 Time Time High Profile Use high profile potential to adjust
    Potential - Time estimated ticket duration
    BR-010 Time Time Complexity Use complexity regions to adjust
    Regions - Time estimated ticket duration
    BR-011 Time Time Service Type - Use the service type (emergency or
    Time short notice) to adjust estimated
    ticket duration
    BR-012 Time Time Project/Hourly Adjust duration for project/hourly
    Scope - Time scope excavation notice
    BR-013 Risk Risk Facility Types - Use facility types to estimate risk
    Risk
    BR-014 Risk Risk Proximity to Use proximity to historical damage
    Historical High reports to adjust estimated risk
    Profile - Risk
    BR-015 Risk Risk Excavator Use excavator damage history to
    Damage History - adjust estimated risk
    Risk
    BR-016 Risk Risk High Profile Use high profile potential to adjust
    Potential - Risk estimated risk
    BR-017 Risk Risk Service Type - Use the service type (emergency or
    Risk short notice) to adjust estimated risk
    BR-018 Risk Risk Project/Hourly Adjust risk for project/hourly scope
    Scope - Risk excavation notice
    BR-019 Value Value Billing Rules Per Apply applicable Per Ticket billing
    Ticket - Value business rates and rules to determine
    value
    BR-020 Value Value Duplicate Ticket Apply duplicate ticket rules to
    Rules - Value determine if billing value is zero
    BR-021 Value Value Billing Rates By Apply applicable By Unit billing
    Unit- Value business rates and rules to determine
    value
    BR-022 Value Value Project/Hourly Adjust value for project/hourly scope
    Scope - Value excavation notice
    BR-023 Resource Resource Determine Determine skill requirements for the
    Resource excavation notice
    Requirements -
    Skill
  • TABLE 3
    First example complexity determination of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-001 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Keywords - Complexity BR Category: CPL
    Business Rule Use keywords to predict complexity potential and/or high
    Description profile potential
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID, locate
    instruction text, comment text, excavation type description
    Rule Operation IF excavation type description contains FiOS
    Example THEN complexity type = High Profile Potential
    Implementation The keywords will be stored in a decision table as an input column,
    with corresponding values for complexity type and high potential
    reason description. For example:
    KEYWORD HIGH PROFILE
    COMPLEXITY TYPE REASON DESCRIPTION
    FiOS High Profile Potential Fiber Optic
    Gated Gated
    AFB Military Base
    Aerial Aerial Power Lines
  • TABLE 4
    Second example complexity determination of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-002 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Complexity Region - Complexity BR Category: CPL
    Business Rule Determine whether excavation notice is within a Complexity Region
    Description
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID, latitude number,
    longitude number
    Rule Operation IF work location is inside a gated community
    Example THEN Complexity Type = Gated
    Implementation The complexity regions will be defined by Supervisors using the
    Scheduling interface. The complexity region is defined by a complexity
    type, high profile reason description (if applicable), and a series of
    latitude/longitude coordinates which define a complexity region polygon.
  • TABLE 5
    Third example complexity determination of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-003 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Proximity to Historical High Profile - BR Category: CPL
    High Profile
    Business Rule Use proximity to historical high profile tickets to estimate high
    Description profile potential
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID, lat number,
    long number, Facility Type Code, Facility Type Description
    Rule Operation IF work location is within a 100 yard radius of a high profile
    Example historical location
    THEN Complexity Type = High Profile Potential
    High Profile Potential Reason =
    Historical High Profile Reason
    Implementation Historical high profile tickets will be retained with high profile
    reason description and latitude/longitude coordinates which define
    the work location.
  • TABLE 6
    Fourth example complexity determination of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-004 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Project/Hourly Scope - Complexity BR Category: CPL
    Business Rule Determine if a project/hourly scope applies to the excavation notice
    Description
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID, Size of Locate
    Area, Footage, Miles, Bounded By, locate instruction text, comment text,
    excavation type description
    Rule Operation IF size of locate area in miles is greater than 0.5
    Example THEN Hourly Status Indicator = True
    Implementation The decision factors leading to hourly status designation center upon the
    complexity and size of the locate task, and travel considerations such as
    whether the worksite is a remote/rural/desert location. Decisions will be
    based upon dimensional fields (Size of Locate Area, Footage, Miles,
    Bounded By) and keyword fields (locate instruction text, comment text,
    excavation type description).
    Business rules such as this one, which are derived based upon billing
    tables, will need to undergo definition and validation prior to rollout in
    any given location. This is due to the fact that the rules can differ from
    contract-to-contract, and by area to area within a state.
  • TABLE 7
    Fifth example complexity determination of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-005 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Emergency/Short Notice Type - Complexity BR Category: CPL
    Business Rule Determine if an emergency/short notice type applies to the
    Description excavation notice
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID, Service Type,
    locate instruction text, comment text, excavation type description
    Rule Operation IF excavation type description contains Emergency
    Example THEN service type = Emergency
    Implementation For tickets with a routine ticket type, keywords will be searched for to
    determine if a short notice or emergency ticket type should in fact be
    applied to the excavation notice.
  • TABLE 8
    First example time estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-006 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Locate Count - Time BR Category: TME
    Business Rule Use number of locates to set an initial estimate of ticket duration.
    Description
    Fields Required work_order.work_order_id,
    work_order_locate_task.work_order_locate_task_id
    Rule Operation IF count(tasks) > 3
    Example THEN duration = 19
    Implementation The locate count values and corresponding ticket duration
    values are stored in locate_assess_cond. For example:
    LOCATE COUNT AVG DURATION
    1 7
    2 13
    3 19
  • TABLE 9
    Second example time estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-007 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Facility Type - Time BR Category: TME
    Business Rule Use facility types to be located to adjust estimated ticket duration
    Description
    Fields Required util_type_code.displ_type_code, util_locate_request.util_type_code,
    util_locate_request.util_locate_request_id,
    work_order_locate_task.util_locate_request_id,
    work_order_locate_task.work_order_id
    Rule Operation IF Facility Type Codes include Gas
    Example THEN duration = duration + 4
    Implementation The facility type values with associated adjustment values are stored in
    locate_assess_cond. Note that the reason that, for example, the sewer
    number might be a negative adjustment, is that statistics might tell us
    that 3-locate tickets with sewer are, on average, 3 minutes shorter in
    duration than 3-locate tickets without a sewer locate. For example:
    FACILITY TYPE DURATION ADJUSTMENT
    Gas
    4
    Sewer −3
    Water −2
  • TABLE 10
    Third example time estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-008 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name High Profile - Time BR Category: TME
    Business Rule Use high profile certainty to adjust estimated ticket duration
    Description
    Fields Required high_profile_reason_code.displ_reason_code,
    util_locate_high_profile_reason.high_profile_reason_code,
    util_locate_high_profile_reason.util_locate_request_id,
    util_locate_request.util_locate_request_id,
    work_order_locate_task.util_locate_request_id,
    work_order_locate_task.work_order_id
    Rule Operation IF High Profile Reason Code = HCPHONE
    Example THEN duration = duration * 1.23
    Implementation The high profile reason codes will be stored in a decision table as an
    input column, with corresponding multiplier values for ticket duration.
    For example:
    HIGH PROFILILE HP REASON DURATION
    REASON CODE DESCRIPTION MULTIPLIER
    None no reason 1.15
    FiOS Fiber Optic 1.38
    HCPHONE High Capacity 1.23
    Phone Line
  • TABLE 11
    Fourth example time estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-009 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name High Profile Potential - Time BR Category: TME
    Business Rule Use proximity to historical high profile areas to adjust
    Description estimated ticket duration
    Fields Required work_order.lat_nbr, work_order.long_nbr,
    high_profile_service_area.high_profile_reason_code,
    high_profile_reason_code.high_profile_reason_code,
    util_locate_request.util_locate_request_id,
    util_locate_high_profile_reason.util_locate_request_id,
    work_order_locate_task.work_order_id,
    work_order_locate_task.util_locate_request_id
    Rule Operation IF High Profile Potential Reason Code = HCPHONE
    Example THEN duration = duration * 1.18
    Implementation The high profile reason codes will be stored in a decision
    table as an input column, with corresponding multiplier
    values for ticket duration.
    For example:
    HI PROFILE HP POTENTIAL DURATION
    REASON CODE REASON DESCRIPTION MULTIPLIER
    None no reason 1.08
    FiOS Fiber Optic 1.30
    HCPHONE High Capacity 1.18
    Phone Line
  • TABLE 12
    Fifth example time estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-010 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Complexity Regions - Time BR Category: TME
    Business Rule Use complexity regions to adjust estimated ticket duration. Determine
    Description if work order is in a complexity region by determining whether the
    work order location is inside a defined complexity area.
    Fields Required complexity_reason_code.displ_reason_code,
    complexity_service_area.service_area_id,
    service_area_coordnat.seq_nbr, service_area_coordnat.lat_nbr,
    service_area_coordnat.long_nbr,
    service_area_coordnat.spatial_type_code,
    service_area.service_area_id, work_order.lat_nbr,
    work_order.long_nbr
    Rule Operation IF Complexity Region Type = Military Base
    Example THEN duration = duration + 35
    Implementation The complexity region type codes will be stored in a decision table
    as an input column, with corresponding multiplier values for ticket
    duration. For example:
    COMPLEXITY REGION TYPE DURATION ADJUSTMENT
    Gated 15
    Military Base 35
    Aerial −10
  • TABLE 13
    Sixth example time estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-011 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Service Type - Time BR Category: TME
    Business Rule Use the service type (emergency or short notice) to adjust
    Description estimated ticket duration
    Fields Required work_order_locate_task.work_order_id,
    excavatn_notice.ticket_type_code,
    client_locate_request.excavatn_notice_id,
    excavatn_notice.excavatn_notice_id,
    util_locate_request.util_locate_request_id,
    work_order_locate_task.util_locate_request_id,
    ticket_type_code.displ_type_code
    Rule Operation IF Service Type = Emergency
    Example THEN duration = duration * 1.43
    Implementation The service types will be stored in a decision table as an input
    column, with corresponding multiplier values for ticket duration.
    For example:
    DURATION
    SERVICE TYPE MULTIPLIER
    Emergency 1.23
    Short Notice 1.82
  • TABLE 14
    Seventh example time estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-012 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Project/Hourly Scope - Time BR Category: TME
    Business Rule Adjust duration for project/hourly scope excavation notice
    Description
    Fields Required excavatn_notice.site_dig_length,
    excavatn_notice.site_dig_width,
    excavatn_notice.site_dig_depth,
    excavatn_notice.site_dig_length_uom_code,
    excavatn_notice.site_dig_width_uom_code,
    excavatn_notice.site_dig_depth_uom_code,
    excavatn_notice.excavatn_notice_id,
    client_locate_request.client_locate_request_id,
    util_locate_request.client_locate_request_id,
    work_order_locate_task.util_locate_request_id,
    work_order_locate_task.work_order_id,
    Rule Operation IF excavation size greater than minimum for project scope status
    Example THEN duration = duration * (size of locate area in miles)/0.5
    Implementation The duration adjustment will be proportional to
    the appropriate locate size field, divided by
    the baseline appropriate to that field.
    1. If the dig dimension fields are not populated, ignore this rule.
    2. If the dig dimension fields are populated, and if the dig
    square footage is over the stored lookup value for square feet
    (e.g., 10,000), adjust the duration upwards in proportion to
    the ratio for square footage.
    3. If the dig dimension fields are populated, and item 2 does
    not apply, and if the dig length is above the stored lookup
    value for length in miles, adjust the duration upwards in
    proportion to the ratio for linear miles.
    For example:
    SCOPE MEASURABLE BASELINE
    Length of Locate Area 0.5 miles
    Footage 10000 sq ft
  • TABLE 15
    First example risk estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-013 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Facility Types - Risk BR Category: RSK
    Business Rule Use facility types to estimate risk
    Description
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID, Facility Type
    Rule Operation IF facility type descriptions contain gas and water
    Example THEN Risk = 2.5 + 0.2 = 2.7
    Implementation The facility types will be stored in a decision table as an input
    column, with corresponding values for additive facility type risk
    values. For example:
    FACILITY TYPE DESCRIPTION FACILITY TYPE RISK VALUE
    Gas 2.5
    Electric 0.7
    Water 0.2
  • TABLE 16
    Second example risk estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-014 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Proximity to Historical High Profile - Risk BR Category: RSK
    Business Rule Use proximity to historical damage reports to adjust estimated risk
    Description
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID, lat number, long
    number, damage latitude, damage longitude, damage amount
    Rule Operation IF work location is within a 500 yard radius of one or more damage
    Example report historical locations totaling $15,000
    THEN Risk = Risk * 2.0
    Implementation The $15,000 figure cited above is only an example, the actual
    criteria will be defined by Risk Management based upon historical
    statistics, and will be specific to an individual area. Historical
    damage reports will be retained along with excavator, damage cost,
    facility type, and latitude/longitude coordinates which define the
    damage location. For example:
    MIN DAMAGE MAX DAMAGE RISK MULTIPLIER
    1 1000 1.1
    1000 10000 1.3
    10000 100000 2.0
    100000 1000000 4.0
  • TABLE 17
    Third example risk estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-015 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Excavator Damage History - Risk BR Category: RSK
    Business Rule Use excavator damage history to adjust estimated risk
    Description
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID, lat number, long
    number, excavator, excavator damage amount, excavator damage count,
    excavator locate count
    Rule Operation IF High Profile Potential Reason Code Is Between 100 and 300
    Example THEN risk = risk * 2.0
    Implementation Historical damage reports will be retained along with excavator, damage
    cost, facility type, and latitude/longitude coordinates which define the
    damage location. For example:
    MAXIMUM EXCAVATOR DAMAGE AMOUNT PER LOCATE
    AS PERCENTAGE OF MEANMAXIMUM EXCAVATOR
    DAMAGE AMOUNT PER LOCATE AS PERCENTAGE OF
    MEAN RISK MULTIPLIER
     0  50 0.5
     50 100 1.0
    100 300 2.0
    300 600 4.0
    Additionally, risk multipliers will be applied for excavator
    damage count:
    MAXIMUM EXCAVATOR DAMAGE COUNT PER LOCATE
    AS PERCENTAGE OF MEANMAXIMUM EXCAVATOR
    DAMAGE COUNT PER LOCATE AS PERCENTAGE OF
    MEAN RISK MULTIPLIER
     0  50 0.5
     50 100 1.0
    100 300 1.3
    300 600 1.8
  • TABLE 18
    Fourth example risk estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-016 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name High Profile Potential - Risk BR Category: RSK
    Business Rule Use high profile potential to adjust estimated risk
    Description
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID, High Profile
    Potential (derived), High Profile Potential Reason (derived)
    Rule Operation IF High Profile Potential Reason Description = Fiber Optic
    Example THEN risk = risk * 4.0
    Implementation The high profile reason codes will be stored in a decision table as an
    input column, with corresponding multiplier values for risk.
    For example:
    HP POTENTIAL REASON HP POTENTIAL REASON
    DESCRIPTION RISK MULTIPLIER
    581 no reason 1.8
    585 Fiber Optic 4.0
    586 High Capacity Phone Line 2.5
  • TABLE 19
    Fifth example risk estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-017 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Service Type - Risk BR Category: RSK
    Business Rule Use the service type (emergency or short notice) to
    Description adjust estimated risk
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number,
    Task ID, Service Type
    Rule Operation IF Service Type = Emergency
    Example THEN risk = risk* 2.85
    Implementation The service types will be stored in a decision table
    as an input column, with corresponding multiplier
    values for ticket duration. For example:
    SERVICE TYPE RISK MULTIPLIER
    Emergency 2.85
    Short Notice - 2 hours 3.46
    Short Notice - 3 hours 3.11
  • TABLE 20
    Sixth example risk estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-018 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Project/Hourly Scope - Risk BR Category: RSK
    Business Rule Adjust risk for project/hourly scope excavation
    Description notice
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number,
    Task ID, Hourly Status Indicator, Size
    of Locate Area, Footage, Miles, Bounded By
    Rule Operation IF Hourly Status Indicator = True
    Example THEN risk = risk * (size of locate area
    in miles)/0.5
    Implementation The risk adjustment will be proportional to the
    appropriate locate size field, divided by the
    baseline appropriate to that field. For example:
    SCOPE MEASURABLE BASELINE
    Size of Locate Area 0.5 miles
    Footage 10000 sq ft
  • TABLE 21
    First example value estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-019 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Billing Rules Per Ticket - Value BR Category: VAL
    Business Rule Use estimated located value to estimate ticket value
    Description
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID, Member Code,
    Estimated Located Value (Derived from Billing Rate Tables)
    Rule Operation IF estimated located value equals $35.50
    Example THEN Value = $35.50
    Implementation If the billing method associated with the client is “Per Ticket” or “Per
    Transmission”, then assume a located, normal, closed ticket. Then
    lookup the billing rate value associated with the member code associated
    with the facility locate request and a located, normal, closed ticket.
  • TABLE 22
    Second example value estimation of assessment business rules 240
    Business Rule ID BR-020 (of Table 2)
    Business Rule Name Duplicate Ticket Rules - Value BR Category: VAL
    Business Rule Apply duplicate ticket rules to determine if date worked affects value
    Description
    Fields Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID, Duplicate Rule
    Required Applicability (Derived)
    Rule Operation IF duplicate rule is true
    Example THEN Value = 0
    Implementation A subset of the billing subsystem business rules deal with the application of
    duplicate ticket rules applicable to many service contracts. Many client
    contracts stipulate that the locating company cannot charge for services
    performed on a duplicate ticket. These contracts also stipulate what conditions
    define a duplicate ticket. For example, a contract may define a duplicate ticket as
    two or more tickets transmitted on the same business day with identical
    excavation sites.
    Business Rule ID: BR-21.0
    Business Rule Name: Duplicate Address on Same Day
    Business Rule Description Cannot bill for subsequent unique Tickets on the
    same day with the same address
    Fields Required Ticket#, AddressID, Date
    Rule Operation Find = [Ticket#, AddressID, Date]
    If Found > “true”
    Then No Charge
    Status on found record = NC
    END
    A variant of this rule involves tickets that must be re-worked. For example, the
    locator may mark facilities on an excavation site; the excavator subsequently
    damages or destroys the markings. In this scenario, the locating company is
    considered “not at fault” for the re-work, and according to the terms of the
    contract may charge the facility for this re-work.
    Business Rule ID: BR-21.1
    Business Rule Name: Duplicate Ticket, re-work
    Business Rule Description Cannot bill for duplicate tickets if at fault
    Fields Required Ticket Number, Ticket Type
    Rule Operation If Ticket = “Dup” And “At Fault” = True
    Then No Charge
    Status = NC
    END
    Another variant of this rule involves a more stringent definition of what
    constitutes a duplicate ticket. A contract may stipulate that the locating
    company cannot charge the facility for two tickets transmitted on the same day
    within a certain proximity to each other (although at different addresses).
    Business Rule ID: BR-21.2
    Business Rule Name: Duplicate Ticket, Contract-specific attributes
    Business Rule Description Cannot bill for duplicate tickets defined by
    contract-specific attributes
    Fields Required Ticket Number, Ticket Type, Contract-specific attributes
    Rule Operation If Ticket = “Dup”
    Then No Charge
    Status = NC
    END
  • TABLE 23
    Business Rule ID BR-AE-021
    Business Rule Name Billing Rates By Unit- Value BR Category: VAL
    Business Rule Apply applicable By Unit billing business rates and rules
    Description to determine value
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number,
    Task ID, Member Code, Billing Rate Table Criteria
    and Values
    Rule Operation IF member code equals 74538 and quantity equals 1
    Example THEN Value = 25.75
    Implementation If the billing method associated with the client is “By
    Unit”, then assume a quantity of 1 (this would mean that
    the lowest lineal feet in the billing table would be applied).
    Then lookup the billing rate value associated with the member
    code associated with the utility locate request and
    a quantity of one.
  • TABLE 24
    Business Rule ID BR-AE-022
    Business Rule Name Project/Hourly Scope - Value BR Category: VAL
    Business Rule Adjust value for project/hourly scope excavation notice
    Description
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID,
    Hourly Status Indicator, Size of Locate Area, Footage,
    Miles, Bounded By
    Rule Operation IF Hourly Status Indicator = True
    Example THEN value = 4 * (size of locate area in miles)/0.5
    Implementation Value for hourly projects is governed by the billing tables (per
    contractual terms). Most contracts pay on unit pay rather than
    hourly. If the contract allows for per hour billing, then the
    value adjustment will be proportional to the appropriate locate
    size field, multiplied by the baseline hours for that field,
    divided by the baseline appropriate to that field. For example:
    SCOPE BASELINE BASELINE
    MEASURABLE SIZE HOURS
    Size of 0.5 miles 4
    Locate Area
    Footage 10000 sq ft 3
  • TABLE 25
    Business Rule ID BR-AE-022
    Business Rule Name Project/Hourly Scope--Value BR Category:
    VAL
    SCOPE BASELINE BASELINE
    MEASURABLE SIZE HOURS
    Size of Locate Area 0.5 miles 4
    Footage 10000 sq ft 3
  • TABLE 26
    Business Rule ID BR-AE-023
    Business Rule Name Determine Resource Requirements - Skill BR Category: SKL
    Business Rule Determine skill requirements for the excavation notice
    Description
    Fields Required Excavation Notice ID, Work Order Number, Task ID,
    Service Type, Utility Type, locate instruction text,
    comment text, excavation type description
    Rule Operation IF Utility Type equals Gas AND High Profile
    equals True
    Example  THEN Add Resource Requirement for Gas
    Add Resource Requirement for Expert
    Add Resource Requirement for High Profile
    Implementation Examples of skill levels include novice locator,
    experienced locator, and expert locator. Examples of
    skill areas include gas qualification, military
    base eligibility, high profile qualified, and
    downtown qualified.
  • While various inventive embodiments have been described and illustrated herein, those of ordinary skill in the art will readily envision a variety of other means and/or structures for performing the function and/or obtaining the results and/or one or more of the advantages described herein, and each of such variations and/or modifications is deemed to be within the scope of the inventive embodiments described herein. More generally, those skilled in the art will readily appreciate that all parameters, dimensions, materials, and configurations described herein are meant to be exemplary and that the actual parameters, dimensions, materials, and/or configurations will depend upon the specific application or applications for which the inventive teachings is/are used. Those skilled in the art will recognize, or be able to ascertain using no more than routine experimentation, many equivalents to the specific inventive embodiments described herein. It is, therefore, to be understood that the foregoing embodiments are presented by way of example only and that, within the scope of the appended claims and equivalents thereto, inventive embodiments may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described and claimed. Inventive embodiments of the present disclosure are directed to each individual feature, system, article, material, kit, and/or method described herein. In addition, any combination of two or more such features, systems, articles, materials, kits, and/or methods, if such features, systems, articles, materials, kits, and/or methods are not mutually inconsistent, is included within the inventive scope of the present disclosure.
  • The above-described embodiments can be implemented in any of numerous ways. For example, the embodiments may be implemented using hardware, software or a combination thereof. When implemented in software, the software code can be executed on any suitable processor or collection of processors, whether provided in a single computer or distributed among multiple computers.
  • FIG. 19 shows an illustrative computer 1900 that may be used for improving information management, dissemination, and utilization in the locate industry and other field service industries, in accordance with some embodiments. For example, the computer 1900 comprises a memory 1910, a processing unit 1912 (which may include one or more processors), one or more communication interfaces 1914, one or more display units 1916, and one or more user input devices 1918. The memory 1910 may comprise any tangible computer-readable media, and may store computer instructions for implementing various components of a ticket management system, such as the ticket parser 210 and the ticket assessment engine 230 shown in FIG. 2 and the geographic information system 610 shown in FIG. 6. The processing unit 1912 may be used to execute the instructions implementing these software components. The communication interface(s) 1914 may be coupled to a wired or wireless network, bus, or other communication means and may therefore allow the computer 1900 to transmit communications to and/or receive communications from other devices. The display unit(s) 1916 may be provided, for example, to allow a human user to view assessment outcomes produced by the ticket assessment engine 230. The user input device(s) 1918 may be provided, for example, to allow the human user to make any desired manual adjustments to the assessment outcomes.
  • The various methods or processes outlined herein may be coded as software that is executable on one or more processors that employ any one of a variety of operating systems or platforms. Additionally, such software may be written using any of a number of suitable programming languages and/or programming or scripting tools, and also may be compiled as executable machine language code or intermediate code that is executed on a framework or virtual machine.
  • In this respect, various inventive concepts may be embodied as a computer readable storage medium (or multiple computer readable storage media) (e.g., a computer memory, one or more floppy discs, compact discs, optical discs, magnetic tapes, flash memories, circuit configurations in Field Programmable Gate Arrays or other semiconductor devices, or other non-transitory medium or tangible computer storage medium) encoded with one or more programs that, when executed on one or more computers or other processors, perform methods that implement the various embodiments of the invention discussed above. The computer readable medium or media can be transportable, such that the program or programs stored thereon can be loaded onto one or more different computers or other processors to implement various aspects of the present invention as discussed above.
  • The terms “program” or “software” are used herein in a generic sense to refer to any type of computer code or set of computer-executable instructions that can be employed to program a computer or other processor to implement various aspects of embodiments as discussed above. Additionally, it should be appreciated that according to one aspect, one or more computer programs that when executed perform methods of the present invention need not reside on a single computer or processor, but may be distributed in a modular fashion amongst a number of different computers or processors to implement various aspects of the present invention.
  • Computer-executable instructions may be in many forms, such as program modules, executed by one or more computers or other devices. Generally, program modules include routines, programs, objects, components, data structures, etc. that perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types. Typically the functionality of the program modules may be combined or distributed as desired in various embodiments.
  • Also, data structures may be stored in computer-readable media in any suitable form. For simplicity of illustration, data structures may be shown to have fields that are related through location in the data structure. Such relationships may likewise be achieved by assigning storage for the fields with locations in a computer-readable medium that conveys relationship between the fields. However, any suitable mechanism may be used to establish a relationship between information in fields of a data structure, including through the use of pointers, tags or other mechanisms that establish relationship between data elements.
  • Also, various inventive concepts may be embodied as one or more methods, of which an example has been provided. The acts performed as part of the method may be ordered in any suitable way. Accordingly, embodiments may be constructed in which acts are performed in an order different than illustrated, which may include performing some acts simultaneously, even though shown as sequential acts in illustrative embodiments.
  • All definitions, as defined and used herein, should be understood to control over dictionary definitions, definitions in documents incorporated by reference, and/or ordinary meanings of the defined terms.
  • The indefinite articles “a” and “an,” as used herein in the specification and in the claims, unless clearly indicated to the contrary, should be understood to mean “at least one.”
  • The phrase “and/or,” as used herein in the specification and in the claims, should be understood to mean “either or both” of the elements so conjoined, i.e., elements that are conjunctively present in some cases and disjunctively present in other cases. Multiple elements listed with “and/or” should be construed in the same fashion, i.e., “one or more” of the elements so conjoined. Other elements may optionally be present other than the elements specifically identified by the “and/or” clause, whether related or unrelated to those elements specifically identified. Thus, as a non-limiting example, a reference to “A and/or B”, when used in conjunction with open-ended language such as “comprising” can refer, in one embodiment, to A only (optionally including elements other than B); in another embodiment, to B only (optionally including elements other than A); in yet another embodiment, to both A and B (optionally including other elements); etc.
  • As used herein in the specification and in the claims, “or” should be understood to have the same meaning as “and/or” as defined above. For example, when separating items in a list, “or” or “and/or” shall be interpreted as being inclusive, i.e., the inclusion of at least one, but also including more than one, of a number or list of elements, and, optionally, additional unlisted items. Only terms clearly indicated to the contrary, such as “only one of” or “exactly one of,” or, when used in the claims, “consisting of,” will refer to the inclusion of exactly one element of a number or list of elements. In general, the term “or” as used herein shall only be interpreted as indicating exclusive alternatives (i.e. “one or the other but not both”) when preceded by terms of exclusivity, such as “either,” “one of,” “only one of,” or “exactly one of.” “Consisting essentially of,” when used in the claims, shall have its ordinary meaning as used in the field of patent law.
  • As used herein in the specification and in the claims, the phrase “at least one,” in reference to a list of one or more elements, should be understood to mean at least one element selected from any one or more of the elements in the list of elements, but not necessarily including at least one of each and every element specifically listed within the list of elements and not excluding any combinations of elements in the list of elements. This definition also allows that elements may optionally be present other than the elements specifically identified within the list of elements to which the phrase “at least one” refers, whether related or unrelated to those elements specifically identified. Thus, as a non-limiting example, “at least one of A and B” (or, equivalently, “at least one of A or B,” or, equivalently “at least one of A and/or B”) can refer, in one embodiment, to at least one, optionally including more than one, A, with no B present (and optionally including elements other than B); in another embodiment, to at least one, optionally including more than one, B, with no A present (and optionally including elements other than A); in yet another embodiment, to at least one, optionally including more than one, A, and at least one, optionally including more than one, B (and optionally including other elements); etc.
  • In the claims, as well as in the specification above, all transitional phrases such as “comprising,” “including,” “carrying,” “having,” “containing,” “involving,” “holding,” “composed of,” and the like are to be understood to be open-ended, i.e., to mean including but not limited to. Only the transitional phrases “consisting of” and “consisting essentially of” shall be closed or semi-closed transitional phrases, respectively, as set forth in the United States Patent Office Manual of Patent Examining Procedures, Section 2111.03.

Claims (93)

1. An apparatus for assessing at least one attribute of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the apparatus comprising:
at least one communication interface;
at least one memory to store processor-executable instructions; and
at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable instructions, the at least one processor:
A) obtains ticket information from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing the locate request ticket;
B) applies one or more business rules to at least some of the ticket information to generate at least one ticket assessment outcome for the at least one attribute; and
C) controls the at least one communication interface to transmit, and/or controls the at least one memory to store, the at least one ticket assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one ticket assessment outcome.
2. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein in A), in parsing the locate request ticket, the at least one processor:
A1) identifies an origin of the locate request ticket;
A2) identifies one or more parsing rules based at least in part on the identified origin of the locate request ticket; and
A3) applies the identified one or more parsing rules to the locate request ticket.
3. The apparatus of claim 2, wherein the origin of the locate request ticket is a one-call center that generated the locate request ticket.
4. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor further:
D) creates a parsed ticket having a standard format comprising a plurality of fields for storing at least some of the obtained ticket information.
5. The apparatus of claim 4, wherein in D), the at least one processor further:
D1) identifies at least one information element in the locate request ticket;
D2) transforms the at least one information element into at least one transformed information element in conformance with at least one standard representation;
D3) identifies at least one field in the parsed ticket corresponding to the at least one information element; and
D4) populates the at least one field with the at least one transformed information element.
6. The apparatus of claim 5, wherein the at least one information element is at least one alphanumeric character string, and wherein the at least one transformed information element is at least one transformed alphanumeric character string.
7. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one attribute is selected from a group consisting of: scope, location, complexity, time, risk, resource, and value.
8. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one location attribute, and wherein the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one work site location at which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed.
9. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the obtained ticket information in A) comprises first and second location information that are inconsistent with each other, and wherein, in B), the at least one processor further:
B1) identifies a first confidence level associated with the first location information;
B2) identifies a second confidence level associated with the second location information; and
B3) selects one of the first and second location information based at least in part on the first and second confidence levels.
10. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the obtained ticket information in A) comprises first and second location information, the first location information being ambiguous, and wherein, in B), the at least one processor further uses the second location information to refine the first location information.
11. The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the first location information comprises at least one incomplete street address and the second location information comprises a plurality of geospatial coordinates, and wherein, in B), the at least one processor refines the first location information at least in part by determining one or more candidate house numbers for the incomplete street address based on the plurality of geospatial coordinates.
12. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein:
the at least one attribute comprises at least one scope attribute;
in B), the at least one assessment outcome comprises a number and/or type of at least one facility to be located during the locate and/or marking operation; and
the number and/or type of the at least one facility facilitates clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching the at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation.
13. The apparatus of claim 12, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) identifies, based at least in part on the ticket information obtained in A), at least one work site location at which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed;
B2) retrieves at least one facilities map based at least in part on the work site location;
B3) identifies, based at least in part on the ticket information obtained in A), one or more boundaries of the dig area; and
B4) compares the one or more boundaries of the dig area to the at least one facilities map to identify the at least one underground facilities type to be located and/or marked during the locate and/or marking operation.
14. The apparatus of claim 13, wherein the ticket information in A) comprises a plurality of coordinates specifying at least one polygon corresponding to the dig area, and wherein, in B3), the one or more boundaries of the dig area are identified using at least some of the coordinates specifying the at least one polygon.
15. The apparatus of claim 13, wherein the ticket information in A) comprises at least one virtual white lines (VWL) image comprising at least one dig area indicator delimiting the dig area, and wherein in B3), the one or more boundaries of the dig area are identified based at least in part on the at least one dig area indicator.
16. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one scope attribute, and wherein the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one characteristic of the dig area.
17. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the at least one characteristic of the dig area is selected from a group consisting of: size, shape, depth, and boundaries.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the ticket information in A) comprises at least one virtual white lines (VWL) image comprising at least one dig area indicator delimiting the dig area, and wherein, in B), the at least one processor generates the at least one characteristic of the dig area based at least in part on the at least one dig area indicator and geospatial metadata associated with the at least one VWL image.
19. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the ticket information in A) comprises a description of the dig area, and wherein, in B), the at least one processor further:
B1) recognizes at least one keyword in the description of the dig area associated with at least one landmark;
B2) identifies a location of the at least one landmark; and
B2) generates the at least one characteristic of the dig area based at least in part on the location of the at least one landmark.
20. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the ticket information in A) comprises excavation information regarding the excavation activities, and wherein, in B), the at least one processor generates the at least one characteristic of the dig area based at least in part on the excavation information.
21. The apparatus of claim 20, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) identifies at least one reason for the excavation activities based at least in part on the excavation information; and
B2) generates the at least one characteristic of the dig area based at least in part on the at least one reason for the excavation activities.
22. The apparatus of claim 20, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) identifies at least one method of excavation based at least in part of the excavation information; and
B2) generates the at least one characteristic of the dig area based at least in part on the at least one method of excavation.
23. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one value attribute and the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one value estimate, and wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) retrieves contractual information pertaining to at least one contract between a locate service provider and at least one other entity, under which contract the locate service provider is to perform at least part of the locate and/or marking operation;
B2) identifies at least one billing method based at least in part on the ticket information in A) and the contractual information; and
B3) applies the at least one billing method to generate the at least one value estimate.
24. The apparatus of claim 23, wherein the locate request ticket is a first locate request ticket, and wherein, in B2), the at least one processor:
B4) identifies a service type associated with the locate and/or marking operation based at least in part on the ticket information;
B5) determines, based at least in part on the service type, whether the first locate request ticket is a duplicate ticket of a second locate request ticket; and
B6) if it is determined that the first locate request ticket is a duplicate ticket, uses the contractual information to identify a corresponding billing method.
25. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one value attribute and the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one value estimate that is a function of at least one environmental condition, wherein the at least one environmental condition is selected from a group consisting of: weather and traffic.
26. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one value attribute and the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one value estimate, and wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) generates, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one of a scope assessment outcome, a complexity assessment outcome, a time assessment outcome, a risk assessment outcome and a resource assessment outcome; and
B2) generates the at least one value estimate based at least in part on at least one of the scope assessment outcome, the complexity assessment outcome, the time assessment outcome, the risk assessment outcome and the resource assessment outcome.
27. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one time attribute, and wherein the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one deadline by which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed.
28. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one time attribute, and wherein the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one duration estimate for at least a portion of the locate and/or marking operation.
29. The apparatus of claim 28, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) determines an average duration for a plurality of previously completed tickets having a same characteristic as the locate request ticket; and
B2) generates the at least one duration estimate based at least in part on the average duration for the plurality of previously completed tickets.
30. The apparatus of claim 29, wherein the same characteristic comprises a number of different underground facilities types indicated in the plurality of previously completed tickets and the locate request ticket.
31. The apparatus of claim 29, wherein the same characteristic comprises a selected type of underground facility indicated in the plurality of previously completed tickets and the locate request ticket.
32. The apparatus of claim 28, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) identifies, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one underground facilities type to be located during the locate and/or marking operation;
B2) identifies at least one adjustment associated with the at least one underground facilities type; and
B3) applies the at least one adjustment to the at least one duration estimate.
33. The apparatus of claim 28, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) identifies, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one complexity designation for the locate and/or marking operation;
B2) identifies at least one scaling factor associated with the at least one complexity designation; and
B3) scales the at least one duration estimate using the at least one scaling factor.
34. The apparatus of claim 28, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) determines, based at least in part on the ticket information in A) and contractual information pertaining to at least one contract between a locate service provider and at least one other entity, under which contract the locate service provider is to perform at least part of the locate and/or marking operation, whether billing for the locate and/or marking operation is based on units of work performed;
B2) if it is determined that billing for the locate and/or marking operation is based on units of work performed, estimates a number of units of work to be performed during the locate and/or marking operation; and
B3) scales the at least one duration estimate based at least in part on the estimated number of units of work to the performed.
35. The apparatus of claim 28, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) identifies, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one service type associated with the locate and/or marking operation;
B2) identifies at least one scaling factor associated with the at least one service type; and
B3) scales the at least one duration estimate using the at least one scaling factor.
36. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one resource attribute, and wherein the at least one assessment outcome comprises identification of at least one piece of equipment for use in performing the locate and/or marking operation.
37. The apparatus of claim 36, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) identifies, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one work site location at which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed;
B2) retrieves at least one facilities map based at least in part on the work site location; and
B3) identifies the at least one piece of equipment based at least in part on the at least one facilities map.
38. The apparatus of claim 36, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) identifies, based at least in part on the ticket information in A) at least one work site location at which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed;
B2) retrieves historical ticket information regarding at least one previously completed ticket within a threshold distance of the at least one work site location; and
B3) identifies the at least one piece of equipment based at least in part on the historical ticket information.
39. The apparatus of claim 38, wherein, in B3), the at least one processor:
B4) determines, based at least in part on the historical ticket information, whether defective trace wires are likely present at the at least one work site location; and
B5) if it is determined that defective tracer wires are likely present, identifies at least one piece of locating equipment capable of detecting underground objects notwithstanding the defective tracer wires.
40. The apparatus of claim 36, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) identifies, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one work site location at which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed;
B2) determines, based at least in part on the at least one work site location, whether a manhole is likely present at the work site; and
B3) if it is determined that a manhole is likely present, identifies at least one device for facilitating manhole cover removal for use during the locate and/or marking operation.
41. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one resource attribute, and wherein the at least one assessment outcome comprises identification of at least one technician skill requirement for performing the locate and/or marking operation.
42. The apparatus of claim 41, wherein the at least one technician skill requirement is selected from a group consisting of: experience level, short term performance level, long term performance level, certification, and security clearance.
43. The apparatus of claim 41, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) identifies, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one complexity designation for the locate and/or marking operation; and
B2) identifies the at least one technician skill requirement based at least in part on the at least one complexity designation.
44. The apparatus of claim 41, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) identifies, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one risk designation for the locate and/or marking operation; and
B2) identifies the at least one technician skill requirement based at least in part on the at least one risk designation.
45. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein, in C), the at least one processor:
C1) creates at least one work order having a standard format comprising at least one first field and at least one second field, the at least one first field for storing at least some of the ticket information in A) and the at least one second field for storing the at least one ticket assessment outcome.
46. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein, in B), the at least one processor:
B1) determines, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), whether the locate request ticket is a project ticket;
B2) if it is determined that the locate request ticket is a project ticket, identifies a plurality of locate and/or marking operations requested in the locate request ticket;
B3) generates, for each locate and/or marking operations, a corresponding assessment outcome for the at least one attribute; and
B4) creates, for each locate and/or marking operation, a corresponding work order having at least one field for storing the corresponding assessment outcome for the at least one attribute.
47. In a system comprising at least one processor, at least one memory, and at least one communication interface, a method for assessing at least one attribute of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising:
A) obtaining ticket information from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing, via the at least one processor, the locate request ticket;
B) applying one or more business rules to at least some of the ticket information, via the at least one processor, to generate at least one ticket assessment outcome for the at least one attribute; and
C) transmitting via the at least one communication interface, and/or storing in the at least one memory, the at least one ticket assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one ticket assessment outcome.
48. The method of claim 47, wherein, in A), parsing the locate request ticket further comprises:
A1) identifying an origin of the locate request ticket;
A2) identifying one or more parsing rules based at least in part on the identified origin of the locate request ticket; and
A3) applying the identified one or more parsing rules to the locate request ticket.
49. The method of claim 48, wherein the origin of the locate request ticket is a one-call center that generated the locate request ticket.
50. The method of claim 47, further comprising:
D) creates a parsed ticket having a standard format comprising a plurality of fields for storing at least some of the obtained ticket information.
51. The method of claim 50, wherein D) further comprises:
D1) identifying at least one information element in the locate request ticket;
D2) transforming the at least one information element into at least one transformed information element in conformance with at least one standard representation;
D3) identifying at least one field in the parsed ticket corresponding to the at least one information element; and
D4) populating the at least one field with the at least one transformed information element.
52. The method of claim 51, wherein the at least one information element is at least one alphanumeric character string, and wherein the at least one transformed information element is at least one transformed alphanumeric character string.
53. The method of claim 47, wherein the at least one attribute is selected from a group consisting of: scope, location, complexity, time, risk, resource, and value.
54. The method of claim 47, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one location attribute, and wherein the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one work site location at which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed.
55. The method of claim 54, wherein the obtained ticket information in A) comprises first and second location information that are inconsistent with each other, and wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying a first confidence level associated with the first location information;
B2) identifying a second confidence level associated with the second location information; and
B3) selecting one of the first and second location information based at least in part on the first and second confidence levels.
56. The method of claim 54, wherein the obtained ticket information in A) comprises first and second location information, the first location information being ambiguous, and wherein B) comprises:
B1) using the second location information to refine the first location information.
57. The method of claim 56, wherein the first location information comprises at least one incomplete street address and the second location information comprises a plurality of geospatial coordinates, and wherein B1) comprises:
B2) determining one or more candidate house numbers for the incomplete street address.
58. The method of claim 47, wherein:
the at least one attribute comprises at least one scope attribute;
in B), the at least one assessment outcome comprises a number and/or type of at least one facility to be located during the locate and/or marking operation; and
the number and/or type of the at least one facility facilitates clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching the at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation.
59. The method of claim 58, wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one work site location at which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed;
B2) retrieving at least one facilities map based at least in part on the work site location;
B3) identifying one or more boundaries of the dig area; and
B4) comparing the one or more boundaries of the dig area to the at least one facilities map to identify the at least one underground facilities type to be located during the locate and/or marking operation.
60. The method of claim 59, wherein the ticket information in A) comprises a plurality of coordinates specifying at least one polygon corresponding to the dig area, and wherein, in B3), the one or more boundaries of the dig area are identified using at least some of the plurality of coordinates specifying the at least one polygon.
61. The method of claim 59, wherein the ticket information in A) comprises at least one virtual white lines (VWL) image comprising at least one dig area indicator delimiting the dig area, and wherein in B3), the one or more boundaries of the dig area are identified based at least in part on the at least one dig area indicator.
62. The method of claim 47, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one scope attribute, and wherein the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one characteristic of the dig area.
63. The method of claim 62, wherein the at least one characteristic of the dig area is selected from a group consisting of: size, shape, depth, and boundaries.
64. The method of claim 62, wherein the ticket information in A) comprises at least one virtual white lines (VWL) image comprising at least one dig area indicator delimiting the dig area, and wherein B) comprises generating the at least one ticket assessment outcome based at least in part on the at least one dig area indicator and geospatial metadata associated therewith the at least one VWL image.
65. The method of claim 62, wherein the ticket information in A) comprises a description of the dig area, and wherein B) comprises:
B1) recognizing at least one keyword in the description of the dig area associated with at least one landmark;
B2) identifying a location of the at least one landmark; and
B2) generating the at least one characteristic of the dig area based at least in part on the location of the at least one landmark.
66. The method of claim 62, wherein the ticket information in A) comprises excavation information regarding the excavation activities, and wherein B) comprises generating the at least one characteristic of the dig area based at least in part on the excavation information.
67. The method of claim 66, wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying at least one reason for the excavation activities based at least in part on the excavation information; and
B2) generating the at least one characteristic of the dig area based at least in part on the at least one reason for the excavation activities.
68. The method of claim 66, wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying at least one method of excavation based at least in part of the excavation information; and
B2) generating the at least one characteristic of the dig area based at least in part on the at least one method of excavation.
69. The method of claim 47, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one value attribute and the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one value estimate, and wherein B) comprises:
B1) retrieving contractual information pertaining to at least one contract between a locate service provider and at least one other entity, under which contract the locate service provider is to perform at least part of the locate and/or marking operation;
B2) identifying at least one billing method based at least in part on the ticket information in A) and the contractual information; and
B3) applying the at least one billing method to generate the at least one value estimate.
70. The method of claim 69, wherein the locate request ticket is a first locate request ticket, and wherein B2) comprises:
B4) identifying a service type associated with the locate and/or marking operation based at least in part on the ticket information;
B5) determining, based at least in part on the service type, whether the first locate request ticket is a duplicate ticket of a second locate request ticket; and
B6) if it is determined that the first locate request ticket is a duplicate ticket, using the contractual information to identify a corresponding billing method.
71. The method of claim 47, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one value attribute and the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one value estimate that is a function of at least one environmental condition, wherein the at least one environmental condition is selected from a group consisting of: weather and traffic.
72. The apparatus of claim 47, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one value attribute and the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one value estimate, and wherein B) comprises:
B1) generating, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one of a scope assessment outcome, a complexity assessment outcome, a time assessment outcome, a risk assessment outcome and a resource assessment outcome; and
B2) generating the at least one value estimate based at least in part on at least one of the scope assessment outcome, the complexity assessment outcome, the time assessment outcome, the risk assessment outcome and the resource assessment outcome.
73. The method of claim 47, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one time attribute, and wherein the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one deadline by which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed.
74. The method of claim 47, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one time attribute, and wherein the at least one ticket assessment outcome comprises at least one duration estimate for at least a portion of the locate and/or marking operation.
75. The method of claim 74, wherein B) comprises:
B1) determining an average duration for a plurality of previously completed tickets having a same characteristic as the locate request ticket; and
B2) generating the at least one duration estimate based at least in part on the average duration for the plurality of previously completed tickets.
76. The method of claim 75, wherein the same characteristic comprises a number of different underground facilities types indicated in the plurality of previously completed tickets and the locate request ticket.
77. The method of claim 75, wherein the same characteristic comprises a selected type of underground facility indicated in the plurality of previously completed tickets and the locate request ticket.
78. The method of claim 74, wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one facilities type to be located during the locate and/or marking operation;
B2) identifying at least one adjustment associated with the at least one facilities type; and
B3) applying the at least one adjustment to the at least one duration estimate.
79. The method of claim 74, wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one complexity designation for the locate and/or marking operation;
B2) identifying at least one scaling factor associated with the at least one complexity designation; and
B3) scaling the at least one duration estimate using the at least one scaling factor.
80. The method of claim 74, wherein B) comprises:
B1) determining, based at least in part on the ticket information in A) and contractual information pertaining to at least one contract between a locate service provider and at least one other entity, under which contract the locate service provider is to perform at least part of the locate and/or marking operation, whether billing for the locate and/or marking operation is based on units of work performed;
B2) if it is determined that billing for the locate and/or marking operation is based on units of work performed, estimating a number of units of work to be performed during the locate and/or marking operation; and
B3) scaling the at least one duration estimate based at least in part on the estimated number of units of work to the performed.
81. The method of claim 74, wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one service type associated with the locate and/or marking operation;
B2) identifying at least one scaling factor associated with the at least one service type; and
B3) scaling the at least one duration estimate using the at least one scaling factor.
82. The method of claim 47, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one resource attribute, and wherein the at least one assessment outcome comprises identification of at least one piece of equipment for use in performing the locate and/or marking operation.
83. The method of claim 82, wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying at least one work site location at which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed;
B2) retrieving at least one facilities map based at least in part on the work site location; and
B3) identifying the at least one piece of equipment based at least in part on the at least one facilities map.
84. The method of claim 82, wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying at least one work site location at which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed;
B2) retrieving historical ticket information regarding at least one previously completed ticket within a threshold distance of the at least one work site location; and
B3) identifying the at least one piece of equipment based at least in part on the historical ticket information.
85. The method of claim 84, wherein B3) comprises:
B4) determining, based at least in part on the historical ticket information, whether defective trace wires are likely present at the at least one work site location; and
B5) if it is determined that defective tracer wires are likely present, identifying at least one piece of locating equipment capable of detecting underground objects notwithstanding the defective tracer wires.
86. The method of claim 82, wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying at least one work site location at which the locate and/or marking operation is to be performed;
B2) determining, based at least in part on the at least one work site location, whether a manhole is likely present at the work site; and
B3) if it is determined that a manhole is likely present, identifying at least one device for facilitating manhole cover removal for use during the locate and/or marking operation.
87. The method of claim 47, wherein the at least one attribute comprises at least one resource attribute, and wherein the at least one assessment outcome comprises identification of at least one technician skill requirement for performing the locate and/or marking operation.
88. The method of claim 87, wherein the at least one technician skill requirement is selected from a group consisting of: experience level, short term performance level, long term performance level, certification, and security clearance.
89. The method of claim 87, wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one complexity designation for the locate and/or marking operation; and
B2) identifying the at least one technician skill requirement based at least in part on the at least one complexity designation.
90. The method of claim 87, wherein B) comprises:
B1) identifying, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), at least one risk designation for the locate and/or marking operation; and
B2) identifying the at least one technician skill requirement based at least in part on the at least one risk designation.
91. The method of claim 47, wherein C) comprises:
C1) creating at least one work order having a standard format comprising at least one first field and at least one second field, the at least one first field for storing at least some of the ticket information in A) and the at least one second field for storing the at least one ticket assessment outcome.
92. The method of claim 47, wherein B) comprises:
B1) determining, based at least in part on the ticket information in A), whether the locate request ticket is a project ticket;
B2) if it is determined that the locate request ticket is a project ticket, identifying a plurality of locate and/or marking operations requested in the locate request ticket;
B3) generating, for each locate and/or marking operation, a corresponding assessment outcome for the at least one attribute; and
B4) creating, for each locate and/or marking operation, a corresponding work order having at least one field for storing the corresponding assessment outcome for the at least one attribute.
93. At least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with at least one program including processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform a method for assessing at least one attribute of a locate and/or marking operation requested in a locate request ticket, the locate and/or marking operation comprising detecting and/or marking a presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within a dig area, wherein at least a portion of the dig area is planned to be excavated or disturbed during excavation activities, the method comprising:
A) obtaining ticket information from the locate request ticket at least in part by parsing the locate request ticket;
B) applying one or more business rules to at least some of the ticket information to generate at least one ticket assessment outcome for the at least one attribute; and
C) transmitting and/or storing the at least one ticket assessment outcome so as to facilitate clearing the locate request ticket and/or dispatching at least one locate technician to perform the locate and/or marking operation, based at least in part on the at least one ticket assessment outcome.
US12/823,028 2009-06-25 2010-06-24 Methods and apparatus for assessing locate request tickets Abandoned US20110022433A1 (en)

Priority Applications (7)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US12/823,028 US20110022433A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-06-24 Methods and apparatus for assessing locate request tickets
US12/840,481 US20110040590A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for improving a ticket assessment system
US12/840,461 US20110040589A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for assessing complexity of locate request tickets
US12/840,476 US20110046994A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for multi-stage assessment of locate request tickets
US12/840,467 US20110046993A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for assessing risks associated with locate request tickets
US14/259,843 US9646275B2 (en) 2009-06-25 2014-04-23 Methods and apparatus for assessing risks associated with locate request tickets based on historical information
US15/589,432 US20170243144A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2017-05-08 Methods and apparatus for protecting underground utilities from excavation damage by assessing risks associated with locate request tickets

Applications Claiming Priority (4)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US22049109P 2009-06-25 2009-06-25
CA2706195 2010-06-23
CA 2706195 CA2706195A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-06-23 Methods and apparatus for assessing locate request tickets
US12/823,028 US20110022433A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-06-24 Methods and apparatus for assessing locate request tickets

Related Child Applications (4)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US12/840,481 Continuation US20110040590A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for improving a ticket assessment system
US12/840,461 Continuation US20110040589A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for assessing complexity of locate request tickets
US12/840,476 Continuation US20110046994A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for multi-stage assessment of locate request tickets
US12/840,467 Continuation US20110046993A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for assessing risks associated with locate request tickets

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
US20110022433A1 true US20110022433A1 (en) 2011-01-27

Family

ID=42710283

Family Applications (7)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US12/823,028 Abandoned US20110022433A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-06-24 Methods and apparatus for assessing locate request tickets
US12/840,461 Abandoned US20110040589A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for assessing complexity of locate request tickets
US12/840,476 Abandoned US20110046994A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for multi-stage assessment of locate request tickets
US12/840,467 Abandoned US20110046993A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for assessing risks associated with locate request tickets
US12/840,481 Abandoned US20110040590A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for improving a ticket assessment system
US14/259,843 Expired - Fee Related US9646275B2 (en) 2009-06-25 2014-04-23 Methods and apparatus for assessing risks associated with locate request tickets based on historical information
US15/589,432 Abandoned US20170243144A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2017-05-08 Methods and apparatus for protecting underground utilities from excavation damage by assessing risks associated with locate request tickets

Family Applications After (6)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US12/840,461 Abandoned US20110040589A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for assessing complexity of locate request tickets
US12/840,476 Abandoned US20110046994A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for multi-stage assessment of locate request tickets
US12/840,467 Abandoned US20110046993A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for assessing risks associated with locate request tickets
US12/840,481 Abandoned US20110040590A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2010-07-21 Methods and apparatus for improving a ticket assessment system
US14/259,843 Expired - Fee Related US9646275B2 (en) 2009-06-25 2014-04-23 Methods and apparatus for assessing risks associated with locate request tickets based on historical information
US15/589,432 Abandoned US20170243144A1 (en) 2009-06-25 2017-05-08 Methods and apparatus for protecting underground utilities from excavation damage by assessing risks associated with locate request tickets

Country Status (4)

Country Link
US (7) US20110022433A1 (en)
AU (2) AU2010263261B2 (en)
CA (2) CA2885962A1 (en)
WO (1) WO2010151330A1 (en)

Cited By (85)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20090013928A1 (en) * 2007-04-04 2009-01-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking system and method
US20090204466A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2009-08-13 Nielsen Steven E Ticket approval system for and method of performing quality control in field service applications
US20090202101A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2009-08-13 Dycom Technology, Llc Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US20090204238A1 (en) * 2007-03-13 2009-08-13 Nielsen Steven E Electronically controlled marking apparatus and methods
US20090201178A1 (en) * 2007-03-13 2009-08-13 Nielsen Steven E Methods for evaluating operation of marking apparatus
US20090238415A1 (en) * 2008-03-18 2009-09-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US20090327024A1 (en) * 2008-06-27 2009-12-31 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation
US20100085694A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device docking stations and methods of using same
US20100088164A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to facilities maps
US20100088135A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to environmental landmarks
US20100088134A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to historical information
US20100086677A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating an electronic record of a marking operation based on marking device actuations
US20100085185A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating electronic records of locate operations
US20100088032A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for generating electronic records of locate and marking operations, and combined locate and marking apparatus for same
US20100189312A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for overlaying electronic locate information on facilities map information and/or other image information displayed on a locate device
US20100189887A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus having enhanced features for underground facility marking operations, and associated methods and systems
US20100188245A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locate apparatus having enhanced features for underground facility locate operations, and associated methods and systems
US20100188407A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying and processing facilities map information and/or other image information on a marking device
US20100188216A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating alerts on a locate device, based on comparing electronic locate information to facilities map information and/or other image information
US20100188088A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying and processing facilities map information and/or other image information on a locate device
US20100188215A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating alerts on a marking device, based on comparing electronic marking information to facilities map information and/or other image information
US20100198663A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-08-05 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for overlaying electronic marking information on facilities map information and/or other image information displayed on a marking device
US20100205536A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2010-08-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for controlling access to a virtual white line (vwl) image for an excavation project
US20100205031A1 (en) * 2009-02-10 2010-08-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for exchanging information between excavators and other entities associated with underground facility locate and marking operations
US20100228588A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2010-09-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Management system, and associated methods and apparatus, for providing improved visibility, quality control and audit capability for underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20100256981A1 (en) * 2009-04-03 2010-10-07 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for documenting and reporting events via time-elapsed geo-referenced electronic drawings
US20110007076A1 (en) * 2009-07-07 2011-01-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20110020776A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-01-27 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locating equipment for and methods of simulating locate operations for training and/or skills evaluation
US20110035245A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for processing technician workflows for locate and/or marking operations
US20110040590A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-02-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for improving a ticket assessment system
US20110046999A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2011-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations by comparing locate information and marking information
US20110060549A1 (en) * 2009-08-20 2011-03-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for assessing marking operations based on acceleration information
US20110060496A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-03-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for complex event processing of vehicle information and image information relating to a vehicle
US20110117272A1 (en) * 2009-08-20 2011-05-19 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device with transmitter for triangulating location during locate operations
US20110131081A1 (en) * 2009-02-10 2011-06-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for providing an enhanced positive response in underground facility locate and marking operations
US20110137769A1 (en) * 2009-11-05 2011-06-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for ensuring wage and hour compliance in locate operations
US20110191058A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-08-04 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locating equipment communicatively coupled to or equipped with a mobile/portable device
US20110236588A1 (en) * 2009-12-07 2011-09-29 CertusView Techonologies, LLC Methods, apparatus, and systems for facilitating compliance with marking specifications for dispensing marking material
US20120173296A1 (en) * 2011-01-03 2012-07-05 Mcmullin Dale Robert Method and system for outage restoration
US8270666B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2012-09-18 Certusview Technologies, Llc Searchable electronic records of underground facility locate marking operations
US8280117B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2012-10-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for indicating planned excavation sites on electronic images
US20120257785A1 (en) * 2011-04-07 2012-10-11 Infosys Technologies Limited Methods and systems for managing underground assets
US8301380B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2012-10-30 Certusview Technologies, Llp Systems and methods for generating electronic records of locate and marking operations
US8424486B2 (en) 2008-07-10 2013-04-23 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marker detection mechanisms for use in marking devices and methods of using same
USD684067S1 (en) 2012-02-15 2013-06-11 Certusview Technologies, Llc Modular marking device
US8473209B2 (en) 2007-03-13 2013-06-25 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus and marking methods using marking dispenser with machine-readable ID mechanism
US20130191471A1 (en) * 2011-05-04 2013-07-25 Celeritasworks, Llc Notification delivery system
US8566737B2 (en) 2009-02-11 2013-10-22 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines (VWL) application for indicating an area of planned excavation
US8585410B2 (en) 2009-06-25 2013-11-19 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems for and methods of simulating facilities for use in locate operations training exercises
US8612276B1 (en) 2009-02-11 2013-12-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for dispatching service technicians
US20140039793A1 (en) * 2012-07-31 2014-02-06 Landmark Graphics Corporation Monitoring, diagnosing and optimizing gas lift operations
US20140115071A1 (en) * 2012-10-23 2014-04-24 International Business Machines Corporation Tag management of information technology services improvement
US20140156339A1 (en) * 2012-12-03 2014-06-05 Bank Of America Corporation Operational risk and control analysis of an organization
US8805640B2 (en) 2010-01-29 2014-08-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locating equipment docking station communicatively coupled to or equipped with a mobile/portable device
US20140277622A1 (en) * 2013-03-15 2014-09-18 First Principles, Inc. System and method for bio-signal control of an electronic device
US8902251B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2014-12-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating limited access files for searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US8918898B2 (en) 2010-07-30 2014-12-23 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for onsite linking to location-specific electronic records of locate operations
US20140380181A1 (en) * 2013-06-25 2014-12-25 Sap Ag Presenting information on a mobile communication device
US20150006226A1 (en) * 2013-06-28 2015-01-01 Verizon Patent And Licensing Inc. Method and apparatus for scheduling media processing jobs on multiple processors to maximize processor utilization
US20150006578A1 (en) * 2013-06-27 2015-01-01 International Business Machines Corporation Dynamic search system
US8965700B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2015-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating an electronic record of environmental landmarks based on marking device actuations
US8977558B2 (en) 2010-08-11 2015-03-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for facilitating generation and assessment of engineering plans
US9046413B2 (en) 2010-08-13 2015-06-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for surface type detection in connection with locate and marking operations
US9097522B2 (en) 2009-08-20 2015-08-04 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and marking devices with mechanisms for indicating and/or detecting marking material color
US9098747B1 (en) * 2013-04-16 2015-08-04 Google Inc. Systems and methods for identifying locations of infrastructure assets using aerial imagery
US9124780B2 (en) 2010-09-17 2015-09-01 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for tracking motion and/or orientation of a marking device
US9261097B2 (en) 2012-07-31 2016-02-16 Landmark Graphics Corporation Monitoring, diagnosing and optimizing electric submersible pump operations
US20160048783A1 (en) * 2014-06-17 2016-02-18 One Call Concepts, Inc. System and Method for Locate Request Entry Configured for Defining Multiple Excavation Sites as Part of a Single Locate Request
US9280269B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2016-03-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US20160239788A1 (en) * 2015-02-13 2016-08-18 One Stop Mailing LLC Parcel Processing System and Method
US9465129B1 (en) * 2009-03-06 2016-10-11 See Scan, Inc. Image-based mapping locating system
US9471900B1 (en) * 2015-08-18 2016-10-18 Genesys Impact, LLC System and method for workforce data management
US9473626B2 (en) 2008-06-27 2016-10-18 Certusview Technologies, Llc Apparatus and methods for evaluating a quality of a locate operation for underground utility
US20170228903A1 (en) * 2012-07-12 2017-08-10 The Government Of The United States, As Represented By The Secretary Of The Army Stitched image
US20170364840A1 (en) * 2016-06-16 2017-12-21 International Business Machines Corporation Ticket event modification for a problem tracking system ticket
US20180349823A1 (en) * 2017-06-06 2018-12-06 Salesforce.Com, Inc. Systems and methods for generating and managing service appointments
US10346780B2 (en) * 2015-01-30 2019-07-09 International Business Machines Corporation Extraction of system administrator actions to a workflow providing a resolution to a system issue
US10417264B2 (en) 2004-10-15 2019-09-17 Celerit Asworks, Llc Ticket entry systems and methods
CN110659415A (en) * 2019-09-04 2020-01-07 北京三快在线科技有限公司 Method, device and system for generating business execution certificate
US20210158295A1 (en) * 2019-11-22 2021-05-27 Leavitt Partners Insight, LLC Identification of employment relationships between healthcare practitioners and healthcare facilities
EP3889859A1 (en) * 2020-03-31 2021-10-06 Topcon Corporation Information processing device, information processing system, and information processing method
US11354610B2 (en) 2018-12-27 2022-06-07 Clicksoftware, Inc. Methods and systems for scheduling location-based tasks and location-agnostic tasks
US11532311B2 (en) * 2018-09-27 2022-12-20 Yokogawa Electric Corporation System, method, program, and recording medium for improving accuracy of call data analysis
US11593538B2 (en) * 2019-04-02 2023-02-28 Accenture Global Solutions Limited Verification, modification, and/or validation of an infrastructure design document via improved collaboration between on site devices and remote devices
US20230103433A1 (en) * 2021-09-23 2023-04-06 Verizon Patent And Licensing Inc. Systems and methods for assigning non-overlapping base stations to technicians for service

Families Citing this family (21)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US9026586B2 (en) 2012-04-12 2015-05-05 Netflix, Inc. Method and system for reclaiming unused resources in a networked application environment
US9104463B2 (en) 2012-11-07 2015-08-11 International Business Machines Corporation Automated and optimal deactivation of service to enable effective resource reusability
US10902522B1 (en) 2013-12-06 2021-01-26 Guidewire Software, Inc. Inter-frame communication
US10417588B1 (en) * 2013-12-06 2019-09-17 Guidewire Software, Inc. Processing insurance related address information
US9736653B2 (en) * 2015-04-21 2017-08-15 Mediatek Inc. Method and system of indoor positioning of a user and delivery of information thereto
US9779627B1 (en) 2016-03-31 2017-10-03 Cae Inc. Method, device and system for calculating weighted deployment rules in an emergency-vehicle-units deployment system for a geographical area
US9959044B2 (en) * 2016-05-03 2018-05-01 Macronix International Co., Ltd. Memory device including risky mapping table and controlling method thereof
US10484429B1 (en) * 2016-10-26 2019-11-19 Amazon Technologies, Inc. Automated sensitive information and data storage compliance verification
US20180307221A1 (en) * 2017-04-25 2018-10-25 General Electric Company Apparatus and method for failure identification
BR112020004550A2 (en) 2017-09-29 2020-09-08 Basf Se computer implemented method, computer program product to optimize agricultural protection and computer system
US11074532B1 (en) * 2017-11-06 2021-07-27 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Monitoring and analyzing risk data and risk dispositions
CN109412884A (en) * 2018-08-21 2019-03-01 平安科技(深圳)有限公司 Performance data acquisition method, device and storage medium, the server of component
CN109784622B (en) * 2018-12-10 2023-08-04 国网湖北省电力有限公司 Power grid project progress monitoring method and system based on geographic wiring diagram
CN111461474A (en) * 2019-01-22 2020-07-28 北京国双科技有限公司 Risk level determination method and related equipment
US11755970B2 (en) * 2020-04-30 2023-09-12 Bfs Operations Llc Systems and methods for generating construction assignment schedules having multi-task construction projects
CN111815175B (en) * 2020-07-08 2021-01-29 睿智合创(北京)科技有限公司 Five-layer structure XML language interactive application method in nested list form
CN112182196A (en) * 2020-11-03 2021-01-05 海信视像科技股份有限公司 Service equipment applied to multi-turn conversation and multi-turn conversation method
US11271829B1 (en) 2020-11-19 2022-03-08 Kyndryl, Inc. SLA-aware task dispatching with a task resolution control
US11287061B1 (en) 2021-02-23 2022-03-29 Ryan Rodriguez Underground gas line protection and method to use
CN113487192B (en) * 2021-07-09 2022-07-19 国网北京市电力公司 Work order processing system, work order processing method, electronic device and computer-readable storage medium
CN113902396A (en) * 2021-09-23 2022-01-07 北京碧水源净水工程技术股份有限公司 Huimin-benefitting intelligent cloud management system

Citations (73)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4251813A (en) * 1979-03-05 1981-02-17 Carre Franklin E Electronic checklist using solid state readouts
US5399844A (en) * 1993-01-12 1995-03-21 Facility Management Systems, Inc. Inspection prompting and reading recording system
US5490089A (en) * 1993-06-15 1996-02-06 Xerox Corporation Interactive user support system and method using sensors and machine knowledge
US5612090A (en) * 1992-11-20 1997-03-18 Nisshin Steel Co., Ltd. Iron-based material having excellent oxidation resistance at elevated temperatures and process for the production thereof
US6169517B1 (en) * 1999-01-29 2001-01-02 At&T Corp. Technique for screening work requests
US20020029161A1 (en) * 1998-11-30 2002-03-07 Brodersen Robert A. Assignment manager
US20020032693A1 (en) * 2000-09-13 2002-03-14 Jen-Diann Chiou Method and system of establishing electronic documents for storing, retrieving, categorizing and quickly linking via a network
US20020055870A1 (en) * 2000-06-08 2002-05-09 Thomas Roland R. System for human capital management
US20030004776A1 (en) * 2001-06-27 2003-01-02 Ronald Perrella Location and time sensitive wireless calendaring
US20030065805A1 (en) * 2000-06-29 2003-04-03 Barnes Melvin L. System, method, and computer program product for providing location based services and mobile e-commerce
US20030110184A1 (en) * 2001-12-10 2003-06-12 Gibson John W. Methods and systems for managing and distributing geophysical data
US20040059588A1 (en) * 2002-09-19 2004-03-25 Burritt David B. Method of managing a project
US6751554B1 (en) * 2003-03-06 2004-06-15 At&T Corp. Locating dig alerts on the map by choosing an area on the map
US6751553B2 (en) * 2000-06-14 2004-06-15 Vermeer Manufacturing Company Utility mapping and data distribution system and method
US6753891B1 (en) * 2000-10-25 2004-06-22 Honeywell International Inc. Aircraft electronic checklist system with hyperlinks
US6845148B1 (en) * 2000-06-16 2005-01-18 Bellsouth Intellectual Property Corporation Utilities module for proactive maintenance application
US20050027733A1 (en) * 2003-07-31 2005-02-03 J. J. Donahue & Company Creating and customizing a workflow process from a document
US20050033620A1 (en) * 1999-11-12 2005-02-10 Gloor Russell Frederick Business method for quality assurance of services
US20050055233A1 (en) * 2003-07-24 2005-03-10 Robert Wenzlau Method and apparatus for monitoring and responding to land use activities
US20050102173A1 (en) * 2003-07-18 2005-05-12 Barker Lauren N. Method and system for managing regulatory information
US6958690B1 (en) * 2003-06-10 2005-10-25 At&T Corp. Method and apparatus for managing dig alerts in a network system
US20060015475A1 (en) * 2000-10-25 2006-01-19 Birkner Charles C Integrated construction project management system with handheld computer and checklist
US20060026020A1 (en) * 2004-07-29 2006-02-02 Waite James W Ticket and data management
US7003443B2 (en) * 1996-09-16 2006-02-21 Datria Systems, Inc. Spatial asset management system and method
US7003475B1 (en) * 1999-05-07 2006-02-21 Medcohealth Solutions, Inc. Computer implemented resource allocation model and process to dynamically and optimally schedule an arbitrary number of resources subject to an arbitrary number of constraints in the managed care, health care and/or pharmacy industry
US7016855B2 (en) * 2002-05-31 2006-03-21 Motorola, Inc. Method and apparatus for managing a task list using location based filtering
US20060085396A1 (en) * 2004-10-15 2006-04-20 Evans Scott A Ticket entry systems and methods
US20060087402A1 (en) * 2004-10-22 2006-04-27 Manning Anthony J Quality control system and method for construction, commissioning, and other initiation of a process plant
US20060245572A1 (en) * 2005-02-02 2006-11-02 Michael Asher Geocoding method using multidimensional vector spaces
US20070083517A1 (en) * 2005-10-12 2007-04-12 Mecklenburg County Network system and a method for managing building inspections
US20070116185A1 (en) * 2005-10-21 2007-05-24 Sbc Knowledge Ventures L.P. Real time web-based system to manage trouble tickets for efficient handling
US7340037B1 (en) * 2001-09-04 2008-03-04 At&T Intellectual Property, Inc. Processes and systems for correlating work orders
US20080096610A1 (en) * 2006-10-20 2008-04-24 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Text input method and mobile terminal therefor
US7372247B1 (en) * 2003-04-03 2008-05-13 Tri-Site, Inc. Apparatus and method for locating and marking an underground utility
US20090013928A1 (en) * 2007-04-04 2009-01-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking system and method
US20090132269A1 (en) * 2007-11-21 2009-05-21 James Perrill Permit application and issuance system
US20100010863A1 (en) * 2008-06-27 2010-01-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation based on multiple scoring categories
US20100006667A1 (en) * 2008-07-10 2010-01-14 Nielsen Steven E Marker detection mechanisms for use in marking devices and methods of using same
US20100086671A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating an electronic record of a marking operation including service-related information and/or ticket information
US20100084532A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device docking stations having mechanical docking and methods of using same
US20100088135A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to environmental landmarks
US20100088164A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to facilities maps
US20100088134A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to historical information
US20100088032A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for generating electronic records of locate and marking operations, and combined locate and marking apparatus for same
US20100088031A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating an electronic record of environmental landmarks based on marking device actuations
US20100085054A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for generating electronic records of locate and marking operations
US20100094553A1 (en) * 2007-03-13 2010-04-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for using location data and/or time data to electronically display dispensing of markers by a marking system or marking tool
US20100090700A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying an electronic rendering of a locate operation based on an electronic record of locate information
US7773095B1 (en) * 2003-04-08 2010-08-10 At&T Intellectual Property Ii, L.P. Method and system for provisioning facility-based maps and related information to field personnel
US20110007076A1 (en) * 2009-07-07 2011-01-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20110020776A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-01-27 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locating equipment for and methods of simulating locate operations for training and/or skills evaluation
US20110035252A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for processing technician checklists for locate and/or marking operations
US20110040589A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-02-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for assessing complexity of locate request tickets
US20110045175A1 (en) * 2009-08-20 2011-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and marking devices with mechanisms for indicating and/or detecting marking material color
US20110046999A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2011-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations by comparing locate information and marking information
US20110060496A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-03-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for complex event processing of vehicle information and image information relating to a vehicle
US20110060549A1 (en) * 2009-08-20 2011-03-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for assessing marking operations based on acceleration information
US20110117272A1 (en) * 2009-08-20 2011-05-19 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device with transmitter for triangulating location during locate operations
US20120036140A1 (en) * 2010-08-05 2012-02-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations by comparing filtered locate and/or marking information
US20120066273A1 (en) * 2010-07-30 2012-03-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc System for and methods of automatically inserting symbols into electronic records of locate operations
US20120066137A1 (en) * 2010-07-30 2012-03-15 CertusView Technolgies, LLC System for and methods of confirming locate operation work orders with respect to municipal permits
US20120065944A1 (en) * 2010-08-11 2012-03-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for facilitating generation and assessment of engineering plans
US20120066506A1 (en) * 2010-07-30 2012-03-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for onsite linking to location-specific electronic records of locate operations
US20120065924A1 (en) * 2010-08-13 2012-03-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for surface type detection in connection with locate and marking operations
US20120069178A1 (en) * 2010-09-17 2012-03-22 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for tracking motion and/or orientation of a marking device
US20120072035A1 (en) * 2010-09-17 2012-03-22 Steven Nielsen Methods and apparatus for dispensing material and electronically tracking same
US20120110019A1 (en) * 2009-02-10 2012-05-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating limited access files for searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20120113244A1 (en) * 2010-08-13 2012-05-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for marking material color detection in connection with locate and marking operations
US20130006718A1 (en) * 2011-07-01 2013-01-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for chronicling the activities of field technicians
US20130002854A1 (en) * 2010-09-17 2013-01-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking methods, apparatus and systems including optical flow-based dead reckoning features
US20130044918A1 (en) * 2008-03-18 2013-02-21 CertusView Technologies, LLC. Virtual white lines for indicating planned excavation sites on electronic images
US8630463B2 (en) * 2008-02-12 2014-01-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Searchable electronic records of underground facility locate marking operations
US20140122149A1 (en) * 2009-02-10 2014-05-01 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for providing an enhanced positive response in underground facility locate and marking operations

Family Cites Families (97)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE2812896C2 (en) 1977-03-28 1983-10-27 Ricoh Co., Ltd., Tokyo Data acquisition device
US4455509A (en) 1983-05-16 1984-06-19 Crum Stephen T Intrinsically safe lighting system
US4970683A (en) 1986-08-26 1990-11-13 Heads Up Technologies, Inc. Computerized checklist with predetermined sequences of sublists which automatically returns to skipped checklists
US5267147A (en) 1990-10-19 1993-11-30 Heads Up Technologies, Inc. Portable checklist system
US5454074A (en) 1991-09-18 1995-09-26 The Boeing Company Electronic checklist system
US5546445A (en) * 1991-12-26 1996-08-13 Dennison; Everett Cellular telephone system that uses position of a mobile unit to make call management decisions
US5576973A (en) 1994-04-18 1996-11-19 Radiodetection Limited Apparatus and method for obtaining geographical positional data for an object located underground
US5920846A (en) * 1996-02-27 1999-07-06 Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. Method and system for processing a service request relating to installation, maintenance or repair of telecommunications services provided to a customer premises
US5920312A (en) * 1996-10-31 1999-07-06 Ncr Corporation System and method for building testing and integrating a graphical dynakey user interface
US5918565A (en) * 1997-09-17 1999-07-06 Casas; Jose G. Flag and paint marking device
US6505176B2 (en) 1998-06-12 2003-01-07 First American Credit Management Solutions, Inc. Workflow management system for an automated credit application system
US6262720B1 (en) * 1998-07-24 2001-07-17 The Boeing Company Electronic checklist system with checklist inhibiting
AU1517000A (en) 1998-10-26 2000-05-15 Visionary Medical, Inc. Portable data collection device
US6430562B1 (en) 1999-03-01 2002-08-06 Electronic Data Systems Corporation Integrated resource management system and method
PL191697B1 (en) 1999-07-09 2006-06-30 Dbt Gmbh Method of and system for controlling roof support sections in a manner taking into account presence of a screw in a relevant mine working
US6286763B1 (en) 1999-09-21 2001-09-11 Intermac Ip Corp. Method and apparatus to automatically search data carriers, such as RFID tags and machine-readable symbols
MXPA02004203A (en) 1999-10-28 2002-10-17 Gen Electric Diagnosis and repair system and method.
US6526526B1 (en) 1999-11-09 2003-02-25 International Business Machines Corporation Method, system and program for performing remote usability testing
US7447509B2 (en) 1999-12-22 2008-11-04 Celeritasworks, Llc Geographic management system
US6587851B1 (en) * 1999-12-22 2003-07-01 Bellsouth Intellectual Property Corporation Notification system and method
US6684250B2 (en) * 2000-04-03 2004-01-27 Quova, Inc. Method and apparatus for estimating a geographic location of a networked entity
US6421725B1 (en) * 2000-05-04 2002-07-16 Worldcom, Inc. Method and apparatus for providing automatic notification
US7111318B2 (en) 2000-06-02 2006-09-19 Vitale Michael J Communication system work order performance method and system
US20020032028A1 (en) 2000-07-06 2002-03-14 Arthur Kaupe Method and apparatus for automatic collection and loading of configuration data into equipment by installers using wireless technology
US7392486B1 (en) * 2000-09-19 2008-06-24 Honeywell International Inc. Method and apparatus for automatic display and removal of required synoptic pages in a checklist context
US7233905B1 (en) * 2000-11-06 2007-06-19 Golden Hour Data Systems, Inc. Billing modifier module for integrated emergency medical transportation database system
US7937655B2 (en) * 2000-12-22 2011-05-03 Oracle International Corporation Workflows with associated processes
US20020143596A1 (en) 2001-03-29 2002-10-03 Carmody Charles Scott System and method for monitoring, recording and reporting the servicing of private onsite wastewater treatment systems
US6980929B2 (en) 2001-04-18 2005-12-27 Baker Hughes Incorporated Well data collection system and method
US20020153134A1 (en) 2001-04-23 2002-10-24 Newman Frederic M. Method of managing work orders at a well site
US6941514B2 (en) 2001-04-30 2005-09-06 Bellsouth Intellectual Property Corporation System and method for priority-based work order scheduling
US20020184068A1 (en) 2001-06-04 2002-12-05 Krishnan Krish R. Communications network-enabled system and method for determining and providing solutions to meet compliance and operational risk management standards and requirements
JP4009136B2 (en) * 2001-06-07 2007-11-14 富士通株式会社 Billing system
US7185290B2 (en) * 2001-06-08 2007-02-27 Microsoft Corporation User interface for a system and process for providing dynamic communication access and information awareness in an interactive peripheral display
US6981001B1 (en) 2001-09-21 2005-12-27 Bellsouth Intellectual Property Corporation Method and systems for default mapping mechanization
US6938048B1 (en) 2001-11-14 2005-08-30 Qgenisys, Inc. Universal task management system, method and product for automatically managing remote workers, including automatically training the workers
US20030130820A1 (en) * 2002-01-07 2003-07-10 Lane George H. Work order system
US20030149608A1 (en) 2002-02-06 2003-08-07 Kall Jonathan J. Suite of configurable supply chain infrastructure modules for deploying collaborative e-manufacturing solutions
US7189890B2 (en) * 2002-04-02 2007-03-13 National Institute Of Agrobiological Sciences Gene related to regeneration ability of plants and uses thereof
US6915211B2 (en) 2002-04-05 2005-07-05 Groundswell Technologies, Inc. GIS based real-time monitoring and reporting system
US7433830B2 (en) 2002-06-19 2008-10-07 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. Method and system for assigning and dispatching a telecommunications systems work order based on global positioning information
US6898435B2 (en) * 2002-07-16 2005-05-24 David A Milman Method of processing and billing work orders
US7313759B2 (en) * 2002-10-21 2007-12-25 Sinisi John P System and method for mobile data collection
EP1573598A4 (en) 2002-12-16 2006-07-26 Questerra Corp Real-time insurance policy underwriting and risk management
US20030177051A1 (en) 2003-03-13 2003-09-18 Robin Driscoll Method and system for managing worker resources
US7739138B2 (en) * 2003-05-19 2010-06-15 Trimble Navigation Limited Automated utility supply management system integrating data sources including geographic information systems (GIS) data
US7421546B2 (en) 2004-02-12 2008-09-02 Relaystar Sa/Nv Intelligent state engine system
US7739418B2 (en) 2004-04-12 2010-06-15 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. Resource management system
US7460872B2 (en) * 2004-07-06 2008-12-02 International Business Machines Corporation Method and application for automatic tracking of mobile devices for computer network processor systems
US7133802B2 (en) * 2004-07-20 2006-11-07 Caterpillar Inc. Apparatus and method for locating electronic job site plan features at a job site
US20060282280A1 (en) * 2004-07-29 2006-12-14 Christian Stotz Ticket and data management
US7532127B2 (en) 2004-10-20 2009-05-12 L-3 Communications Cyterra Corporation Motion and position measuring for buried object detection
US7289890B2 (en) 2004-11-24 2007-10-30 The Boeing Company Checklist system
US20060235741A1 (en) 2005-04-18 2006-10-19 Dataforensics, Llc Systems and methods for monitoring and reporting
CA2875184C (en) * 2006-03-14 2019-04-23 Global Precision Solutions, Llp System and method for collecting and updating geographical data
CA2583057A1 (en) 2006-03-31 2007-09-30 Itron, Inc. Integrated data collection, anomaly detection and investigation, such as integrated mobile utility meter reading, theft detection and investigation system
US7818195B2 (en) * 2006-07-06 2010-10-19 International Business Machines Corporation Method, system and program product for reporting a call level view of a customer interaction with a contact center
CA2579081A1 (en) 2006-10-24 2008-04-24 Andrew W. Kaboff Home health point-of-care and administration system
US7626496B1 (en) 2007-01-16 2009-12-01 At&T Corp. Negative feedback loop for defect management of plant protection ticket screening
US7889124B2 (en) * 2007-01-26 2011-02-15 Mohammad Mojahedul Islam Handheld wireless utility asset mapping device
US8473209B2 (en) 2007-03-13 2013-06-25 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus and marking methods using marking dispenser with machine-readable ID mechanism
US8478523B2 (en) 2007-03-13 2013-07-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus and methods for creating an electronic record of marking apparatus operations
US20080228529A1 (en) 2007-03-16 2008-09-18 Siemens Medical Solutions Usa, Inc. Context Adaptive Patient Medical Data Access and Viewing System
CA2623761C (en) 2007-04-04 2012-02-07 Dycom Identity, Llc Marking system and method
US20080288267A1 (en) * 2007-05-14 2008-11-20 Michael Asher Method and apparatus for automatically managing work tickets
US20080294988A1 (en) 2007-05-22 2008-11-27 Paul Daniel Nicholas Portable electronic checklist system
US8407712B2 (en) 2007-08-31 2013-03-26 International Business Machines Corporation Updating workflow nodes in a workflow
US20090157746A1 (en) * 2007-12-13 2009-06-18 Osmose Utilities Services, Inc. Method For Capturing Utility Equipment Data
US8532342B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2013-09-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US8249306B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2012-08-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US9659268B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2017-05-23 CertusVies Technologies, LLC Ticket approval system for and method of performing quality control in field service applications
JP5385388B2 (en) 2008-08-04 2014-01-08 エフ.ホフマン−ラ ロシュ アーゲー Encoding method for encoding medical articles
US20100188088A1 (en) 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying and processing facilities map information and/or other image information on a locate device
US8527308B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-09-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for overlaying electronic locate information on facilities map information and/or other image information displayed on a locate device
US20100198663A1 (en) 2008-10-02 2010-08-05 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for overlaying electronic marking information on facilities map information and/or other image information displayed on a marking device
US8510141B2 (en) * 2008-10-02 2013-08-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating alerts on a marking device, based on comparing electronic marking information to facilities map information and/or other image information
US8478617B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-07-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating alerts on a locate device, based on comparing electronic locate information to facilities map information and/or other image information
US8749239B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2014-06-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locate apparatus having enhanced features for underground facility locate operations, and associated methods and systems
US8442766B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-05-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus having enhanced features for underground facility marking operations, and associated methods and systems
US20100188407A1 (en) 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying and processing facilities map information and/or other image information on a marking device
US20100153151A1 (en) * 2008-12-16 2010-06-17 Leonard Peter Toenjes Method and Apparatus for Determining Applicable Permits and Permitting Agencies for a Construction Project
US7898940B2 (en) * 2008-12-16 2011-03-01 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. System and method to mitigate physical cable damage
US20100161359A1 (en) * 2008-12-18 2010-06-24 At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. Risk Management for Cable Protection Via Dynamic Buffering
CA2759932C (en) 2009-02-10 2015-08-11 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for generating limited access files for searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20100201690A1 (en) 2009-02-11 2010-08-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines (vwl) application for indicating a planned excavation or locate path
CA2897462A1 (en) 2009-02-11 2010-05-04 Certusview Technologies, Llc Management system, and associated methods and apparatus, for providing automatic assessment of a locate operation
US8832565B2 (en) 2009-02-11 2014-09-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for controlling access to a virtual white line (VWL) image for an excavation project
US8612276B1 (en) 2009-02-11 2013-12-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for dispatching service technicians
US20100257477A1 (en) 2009-04-03 2010-10-07 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for documenting and reporting events via geo-referenced electronic drawings
US20100285211A1 (en) 2009-05-08 2010-11-11 Certusview Technologies, Llc Method of using coded marking patterns in underground facilities locate operations
CA2771286C (en) 2009-08-11 2016-08-30 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locating equipment communicatively coupled to or equipped with a mobile/portable device
CA2774988C (en) 2009-09-23 2017-05-16 Quanta Associates, L.P. Laying and protecting cable into existing covering surfaces
US8600848B2 (en) * 2009-11-05 2013-12-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for ensuring wage and hour compliance in locate operations
US8583372B2 (en) 2009-12-07 2013-11-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for facilitating compliance with marking specifications for dispensing marking material
US8805640B2 (en) 2010-01-29 2014-08-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locating equipment docking station communicatively coupled to or equipped with a mobile/portable device
US20120328162A1 (en) 2011-06-22 2012-12-27 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for performing installations of engineered systems and generating site visit manifests for same
EP2972526A4 (en) 2013-03-14 2017-03-08 Certusview Technologies LLC Offset trenching methods and apparatus, and void restoration methods, apparatus and materials in connection with same

Patent Citations (101)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4251813A (en) * 1979-03-05 1981-02-17 Carre Franklin E Electronic checklist using solid state readouts
US5612090A (en) * 1992-11-20 1997-03-18 Nisshin Steel Co., Ltd. Iron-based material having excellent oxidation resistance at elevated temperatures and process for the production thereof
US5399844A (en) * 1993-01-12 1995-03-21 Facility Management Systems, Inc. Inspection prompting and reading recording system
US5490089A (en) * 1993-06-15 1996-02-06 Xerox Corporation Interactive user support system and method using sensors and machine knowledge
US7003443B2 (en) * 1996-09-16 2006-02-21 Datria Systems, Inc. Spatial asset management system and method
US20020029161A1 (en) * 1998-11-30 2002-03-07 Brodersen Robert A. Assignment manager
US6169517B1 (en) * 1999-01-29 2001-01-02 At&T Corp. Technique for screening work requests
US7003475B1 (en) * 1999-05-07 2006-02-21 Medcohealth Solutions, Inc. Computer implemented resource allocation model and process to dynamically and optimally schedule an arbitrary number of resources subject to an arbitrary number of constraints in the managed care, health care and/or pharmacy industry
US20050033620A1 (en) * 1999-11-12 2005-02-10 Gloor Russell Frederick Business method for quality assurance of services
US20020055870A1 (en) * 2000-06-08 2002-05-09 Thomas Roland R. System for human capital management
US6751553B2 (en) * 2000-06-14 2004-06-15 Vermeer Manufacturing Company Utility mapping and data distribution system and method
US20060085133A1 (en) * 2000-06-14 2006-04-20 Vermeer Manufacturing Company Utility mapping and data distribution system and method
US6845148B1 (en) * 2000-06-16 2005-01-18 Bellsouth Intellectual Property Corporation Utilities module for proactive maintenance application
US20030065805A1 (en) * 2000-06-29 2003-04-03 Barnes Melvin L. System, method, and computer program product for providing location based services and mobile e-commerce
US20020032693A1 (en) * 2000-09-13 2002-03-14 Jen-Diann Chiou Method and system of establishing electronic documents for storing, retrieving, categorizing and quickly linking via a network
US6753891B1 (en) * 2000-10-25 2004-06-22 Honeywell International Inc. Aircraft electronic checklist system with hyperlinks
US20060015475A1 (en) * 2000-10-25 2006-01-19 Birkner Charles C Integrated construction project management system with handheld computer and checklist
US20030004776A1 (en) * 2001-06-27 2003-01-02 Ronald Perrella Location and time sensitive wireless calendaring
US7340037B1 (en) * 2001-09-04 2008-03-04 At&T Intellectual Property, Inc. Processes and systems for correlating work orders
US20030110184A1 (en) * 2001-12-10 2003-06-12 Gibson John W. Methods and systems for managing and distributing geophysical data
US7016855B2 (en) * 2002-05-31 2006-03-21 Motorola, Inc. Method and apparatus for managing a task list using location based filtering
US20040059588A1 (en) * 2002-09-19 2004-03-25 Burritt David B. Method of managing a project
US6751554B1 (en) * 2003-03-06 2004-06-15 At&T Corp. Locating dig alerts on the map by choosing an area on the map
US7372247B1 (en) * 2003-04-03 2008-05-13 Tri-Site, Inc. Apparatus and method for locating and marking an underground utility
US7773095B1 (en) * 2003-04-08 2010-08-10 At&T Intellectual Property Ii, L.P. Method and system for provisioning facility-based maps and related information to field personnel
US6958690B1 (en) * 2003-06-10 2005-10-25 At&T Corp. Method and apparatus for managing dig alerts in a network system
US20050102173A1 (en) * 2003-07-18 2005-05-12 Barker Lauren N. Method and system for managing regulatory information
US20050055233A1 (en) * 2003-07-24 2005-03-10 Robert Wenzlau Method and apparatus for monitoring and responding to land use activities
US20050027733A1 (en) * 2003-07-31 2005-02-03 J. J. Donahue & Company Creating and customizing a workflow process from a document
US20060026020A1 (en) * 2004-07-29 2006-02-02 Waite James W Ticket and data management
US20060085396A1 (en) * 2004-10-15 2006-04-20 Evans Scott A Ticket entry systems and methods
US20060087402A1 (en) * 2004-10-22 2006-04-27 Manning Anthony J Quality control system and method for construction, commissioning, and other initiation of a process plant
US20060245572A1 (en) * 2005-02-02 2006-11-02 Michael Asher Geocoding method using multidimensional vector spaces
US20070083517A1 (en) * 2005-10-12 2007-04-12 Mecklenburg County Network system and a method for managing building inspections
US20070116185A1 (en) * 2005-10-21 2007-05-24 Sbc Knowledge Ventures L.P. Real time web-based system to manage trouble tickets for efficient handling
US20080096610A1 (en) * 2006-10-20 2008-04-24 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Text input method and mobile terminal therefor
US20130085670A1 (en) * 2007-03-13 2013-04-04 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for using location data to electronically display dispensing of markers by a marking system or marking tool
US20100094553A1 (en) * 2007-03-13 2010-04-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for using location data and/or time data to electronically display dispensing of markers by a marking system or marking tool
US20090013928A1 (en) * 2007-04-04 2009-01-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking system and method
US20100090858A1 (en) * 2007-04-04 2010-04-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for using marking information to electronically display dispensing of markers by a marking system or marking tool
US20090132269A1 (en) * 2007-11-21 2009-05-21 James Perrill Permit application and issuance system
US20140022272A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2014-01-23 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronically documenting locate operations for underground utilities
US8630463B2 (en) * 2008-02-12 2014-01-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Searchable electronic records of underground facility locate marking operations
US20130135343A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2013-05-30 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20130044918A1 (en) * 2008-03-18 2013-02-21 CertusView Technologies, LLC. Virtual white lines for indicating planned excavation sites on electronic images
US20100010882A1 (en) * 2008-06-27 2010-01-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation based on dynamic assessment parameters
US20100010862A1 (en) * 2008-06-27 2010-01-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation based on geographic information
US20100010883A1 (en) * 2008-06-27 2010-01-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for facilitating a quality assessment of a field service operation based on multiple quality assessment criteria
US20100010863A1 (en) * 2008-06-27 2010-01-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation based on multiple scoring categories
US20100006667A1 (en) * 2008-07-10 2010-01-14 Nielsen Steven E Marker detection mechanisms for use in marking devices and methods of using same
US20100086677A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating an electronic record of a marking operation based on marking device actuations
US20100085701A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device docking stations having security features and methods of using same
US20100085054A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for generating electronic records of locate and marking operations
US20100085376A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying an electronic rendering of a marking operation based on an electronic record of marking information
US20100088032A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for generating electronic records of locate and marking operations, and combined locate and marking apparatus for same
US20100088134A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to historical information
US20100090700A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying an electronic rendering of a locate operation based on an electronic record of locate information
US20100117654A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-05-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying an electronic rendering of a locate and/or marking operation using display layers
US20100088164A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to facilities maps
US20100088135A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to environmental landmarks
US20100085694A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device docking stations and methods of using same
US20100088031A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating an electronic record of environmental landmarks based on marking device actuations
US20100086671A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating an electronic record of a marking operation including service-related information and/or ticket information
US20140035587A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2014-02-06 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating electronic records of locate operations
US20140074970A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2014-03-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods And Apparatus For Generating Output Data Streams Relating To Underground Utility Marking Operations
US20110046999A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2011-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations by comparing locate information and marking information
US20130103318A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2013-04-25 CertusView Technologies, LLC. Systems and methods for generating electronic records of locate and marking operations
US20110095885A9 (en) * 2008-10-02 2011-04-28 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating electronic records of locate operations
US20100084532A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device docking stations having mechanical docking and methods of using same
US20140122149A1 (en) * 2009-02-10 2014-05-01 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for providing an enhanced positive response in underground facility locate and marking operations
US20120110019A1 (en) * 2009-02-10 2012-05-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating limited access files for searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20110035251A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for facilitating and/or verifying locate and/or marking operations
US20110035245A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for processing technician workflows for locate and/or marking operations
US20110035260A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for quality assessment of locate and/or marking operations based on process guides
US20110035328A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for generating technician checklists for locate and/or marking operations
US20110035252A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for processing technician checklists for locate and/or marking operations
US20110040590A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-02-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for improving a ticket assessment system
US20110046994A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for multi-stage assessment of locate request tickets
US20110046993A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for assessing risks associated with locate request tickets
US20110040589A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-02-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for assessing complexity of locate request tickets
US20110020776A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-01-27 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locating equipment for and methods of simulating locate operations for training and/or skills evaluation
US20120019380A1 (en) * 2009-07-07 2012-01-26 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating accuracy-annotated searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20110007076A1 (en) * 2009-07-07 2011-01-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20110093304A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-04-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for complex event processing based on a hierarchical arrangement of complex event processing engines
US20110060496A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-03-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for complex event processing of vehicle information and image information relating to a vehicle
US20110093162A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-04-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for complex event processing of vehicle-related information
US20110093306A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-04-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Fleet management systems and methods for complex event processing of vehicle-related information via local and remote complex event processing engines
US20110117272A1 (en) * 2009-08-20 2011-05-19 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device with transmitter for triangulating location during locate operations
US20110045175A1 (en) * 2009-08-20 2011-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and marking devices with mechanisms for indicating and/or detecting marking material color
US20110060549A1 (en) * 2009-08-20 2011-03-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for assessing marking operations based on acceleration information
US20120066137A1 (en) * 2010-07-30 2012-03-15 CertusView Technolgies, LLC System for and methods of confirming locate operation work orders with respect to municipal permits
US20120066506A1 (en) * 2010-07-30 2012-03-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for onsite linking to location-specific electronic records of locate operations
US20120066273A1 (en) * 2010-07-30 2012-03-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc System for and methods of automatically inserting symbols into electronic records of locate operations
US20120036140A1 (en) * 2010-08-05 2012-02-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations by comparing filtered locate and/or marking information
US20120065944A1 (en) * 2010-08-11 2012-03-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for facilitating generation and assessment of engineering plans
US20120113244A1 (en) * 2010-08-13 2012-05-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for marking material color detection in connection with locate and marking operations
US20120065924A1 (en) * 2010-08-13 2012-03-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for surface type detection in connection with locate and marking operations
US20130002854A1 (en) * 2010-09-17 2013-01-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking methods, apparatus and systems including optical flow-based dead reckoning features
US20120072035A1 (en) * 2010-09-17 2012-03-22 Steven Nielsen Methods and apparatus for dispensing material and electronically tracking same
US20120069178A1 (en) * 2010-09-17 2012-03-22 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for tracking motion and/or orientation of a marking device
US20130006718A1 (en) * 2011-07-01 2013-01-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for chronicling the activities of field technicians

Cited By (264)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US10417264B2 (en) 2004-10-15 2019-09-17 Celerit Asworks, Llc Ticket entry systems and methods
US8775077B2 (en) 2007-03-13 2014-07-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for using location data to electronically display dispensing of markers by a marking system or marking tool
US8407001B2 (en) 2007-03-13 2013-03-26 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for using location data to electronically display dispensing of markers by a marking system or marking tool
US20090204238A1 (en) * 2007-03-13 2009-08-13 Nielsen Steven E Electronically controlled marking apparatus and methods
US20090201178A1 (en) * 2007-03-13 2009-08-13 Nielsen Steven E Methods for evaluating operation of marking apparatus
US8903643B2 (en) 2007-03-13 2014-12-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Hand-held marking apparatus with location tracking system and methods for logging geographic location of same
US8473209B2 (en) 2007-03-13 2013-06-25 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus and marking methods using marking dispenser with machine-readable ID mechanism
US8700325B2 (en) 2007-03-13 2014-04-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus and methods for creating an electronic record of marking operations
US20090208642A1 (en) * 2007-03-13 2009-08-20 Nielsen Steven E Marking apparatus and methods for creating an electronic record of marking operations
US9086277B2 (en) 2007-03-13 2015-07-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronically controlled marking apparatus and methods
US8401791B2 (en) 2007-03-13 2013-03-19 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods for evaluating operation of marking apparatus
US8386178B2 (en) 2007-04-04 2013-02-26 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking system and method
US20100090858A1 (en) * 2007-04-04 2010-04-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for using marking information to electronically display dispensing of markers by a marking system or marking tool
US8374789B2 (en) 2007-04-04 2013-02-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for using marking information to electronically display dispensing of markers by a marking system or marking tool
US20090013928A1 (en) * 2007-04-04 2009-01-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking system and method
US8060304B2 (en) 2007-04-04 2011-11-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking system and method
US8543937B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2013-09-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus employing a reference grid for generating electronic manifests of underground facility marking operations
US20090201311A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2009-08-13 Steven Nielsen Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US9183646B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2015-11-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Apparatus, systems and methods to generate electronic records of underground facility marking operations performed with GPS-enabled marking devices
US8532341B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2013-09-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronically documenting locate operations for underground utilities
US8270666B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2012-09-18 Certusview Technologies, Llc Searchable electronic records of underground facility locate marking operations
US8478635B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2013-07-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Ticket approval methods of performing quality control in underground facility locate and marking operations
US8994749B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2015-03-31 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20090207019A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2009-08-20 Certusview Technologies, Llc Ticket approval system for and method of performing quality control in field service applications
US8416995B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2013-04-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US20090210284A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2009-08-20 Certusview Technologies, Llc Ticket approval system for and method of performing quality control in field service applications
US20090210297A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2009-08-20 Certusview Technologies, Llc Ticket approval system for and method of performing quality control in field service applications
US20090204625A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2009-08-13 Curtis Chambers Electronic manifest of underground facility locate operation
US20090202110A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2009-08-13 Steven Nielsen Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US8907978B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2014-12-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US9256964B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2016-02-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronically documenting locate operations for underground utilities
US8340359B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2012-12-25 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US8532342B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2013-09-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US20090202111A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2009-08-13 Steven Nielsen Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US8630463B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2014-01-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Searchable electronic records of underground facility locate marking operations
US8290204B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2012-10-16 Certusview Technologies, Llc Searchable electronic records of underground facility locate marking operations
US9280269B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2016-03-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US9471835B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2016-10-18 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US20090202101A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2009-08-13 Dycom Technology, Llc Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks
US20090204466A1 (en) * 2008-02-12 2009-08-13 Nielsen Steven E Ticket approval system for and method of performing quality control in field service applications
US8194932B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2012-06-05 Certusview Technologies, Llc Ticket approval system for and method of performing quality control in field service applications
US8265344B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2012-09-11 Certusview Technologies, Llc Electronic manifest of underground facility locate operation
US9659268B2 (en) 2008-02-12 2017-05-23 CertusVies Technologies, LLC Ticket approval system for and method of performing quality control in field service applications
US8218827B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2012-07-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US8280117B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2012-10-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for indicating planned excavation sites on electronic images
US9830338B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2017-11-28 Certusview Technologies, Inc. Virtual white lines for indicating planned excavation sites on electronic images
US8249306B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2012-08-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US20090238415A1 (en) * 2008-03-18 2009-09-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US8934678B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2015-01-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US20090238414A1 (en) * 2008-03-18 2009-09-24 Dycom Technology, Llc Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US8861795B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2014-10-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US8155390B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2012-04-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for providing unbuffered dig area indicators on aerial images to delimit planned excavation sites
US20090237408A1 (en) * 2008-03-18 2009-09-24 Nielsen Steven E Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US8290215B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2012-10-16 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US8300895B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2012-10-30 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US8861794B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2014-10-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for indicating planned excavation sites on electronic images
US8355542B2 (en) 2008-03-18 2013-01-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines for delimiting planned excavation sites
US9916588B2 (en) 2008-06-27 2018-03-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation based on dynamic assessment parameters
US20100010882A1 (en) * 2008-06-27 2010-01-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation based on dynamic assessment parameters
US20100010863A1 (en) * 2008-06-27 2010-01-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation based on multiple scoring categories
US9256849B2 (en) 2008-06-27 2016-02-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Apparatus and methods for evaluating a quality of a locate operation for underground utility
US20090327024A1 (en) * 2008-06-27 2009-12-31 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation
US9317830B2 (en) 2008-06-27 2016-04-19 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations
US9578678B2 (en) 2008-06-27 2017-02-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for facilitating locate and marking operations
US9473626B2 (en) 2008-06-27 2016-10-18 Certusview Technologies, Llc Apparatus and methods for evaluating a quality of a locate operation for underground utility
US8424486B2 (en) 2008-07-10 2013-04-23 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marker detection mechanisms for use in marking devices and methods of using same
US9004004B2 (en) 2008-07-10 2015-04-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Optical sensing methods and apparatus for detecting a color of a marking substance
US20100189887A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus having enhanced features for underground facility marking operations, and associated methods and systems
US8990100B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2015-03-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to environmental landmarks
US8965700B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2015-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating an electronic record of environmental landmarks based on marking device actuations
US20110046999A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2011-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations by comparing locate information and marking information
US8930836B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2015-01-06 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying an electronic rendering of a locate and/or marking operation using display layers
US9046621B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2015-06-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locate apparatus configured to detect out-of-tolerance conditions in connection with underground facility locate operations, and associated methods and systems
US9069094B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2015-06-30 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locate transmitter configured to detect out-of-tolerance conditions in connection with underground facility locate operations, and associated methods and systems
US9177403B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2015-11-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for overlaying electronic marking information on facilities map information and/or other image information displayed on a marking device
US20110095885A9 (en) * 2008-10-02 2011-04-28 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating electronic records of locate operations
US9208458B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2015-12-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to facilities maps
US8770140B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2014-07-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus having environmental sensors and operations sensors for underground facility marking operations, and associated methods and systems
US9208464B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2015-12-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to historical information
US8766638B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2014-07-01 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locate apparatus with location tracking system for receiving environmental information regarding underground facility marking operations, and associated methods and systems
US8749239B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2014-06-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locate apparatus having enhanced features for underground facility locate operations, and associated methods and systems
US20100263591A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-10-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus having environmental sensors and operations sensors for underground facility marking operations, and associated methods and systems
US20100262470A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-10-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for analyzing use of a marking device by a technician to perform an underground facility marking operation
US20100253511A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-10-07 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locate apparatus configured to detect out-of-tolerance conditions in connection with underground facility locate operations, and associated methods and systems
US8731830B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2014-05-20 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus for receiving environmental information regarding underground facility marking operations, and associated methods and systems
US20100257029A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-10-07 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for analyzing use of a locate device by a technician to perform an underground facility locate operation
US20100245086A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-09-30 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus configured to detect out-of-tolerance conditions in connection with underground facility marking operations, and associated methods and systems
US20100247754A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-09-30 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for dispensing marking material in connection with underground facility marking operations based on environmental information and/or operational information
US9542863B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2017-01-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating output data streams relating to underground utility marking operations
US20100198663A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-08-05 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for overlaying electronic marking information on facilities map information and/or other image information displayed on a marking device
US20100188215A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating alerts on a marking device, based on comparing electronic marking information to facilities map information and/or other image information
US8280631B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2012-10-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating an electronic record of a marking operation based on marking device actuations
US8644965B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2014-02-04 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device docking stations having security features and methods of using same
US20100188088A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying and processing facilities map information and/or other image information on a locate device
US20100188216A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating alerts on a locate device, based on comparing electronic locate information to facilities map information and/or other image information
US20100188407A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying and processing facilities map information and/or other image information on a marking device
US8301380B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2012-10-30 Certusview Technologies, Llp Systems and methods for generating electronic records of locate and marking operations
US20100188245A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locate apparatus having enhanced features for underground facility locate operations, and associated methods and systems
US8620726B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-12-31 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations by comparing locate information and marking information
US20100189312A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-07-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for overlaying electronic locate information on facilities map information and/or other image information displayed on a locate device
US8620587B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-12-31 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for generating electronic records of locate and marking operations, and combined locate and marking apparatus for same
US20100117654A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-05-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying an electronic rendering of a locate and/or marking operation using display layers
US8361543B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-01-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying an electronic rendering of a marking operation based on an electronic record of marking information
US20100090700A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying an electronic rendering of a locate operation based on an electronic record of locate information
US8612271B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-12-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to environmental landmarks
US20100088032A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for generating electronic records of locate and marking operations, and combined locate and marking apparatus for same
US8400155B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-03-19 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying an electronic rendering of a locate operation based on an electronic record of locate information
US20100085185A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating electronic records of locate operations
US20100085376A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying an electronic rendering of a marking operation based on an electronic record of marking information
US20100084532A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device docking stations having mechanical docking and methods of using same
US20100086677A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating an electronic record of a marking operation based on marking device actuations
US8442766B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-05-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus having enhanced features for underground facility marking operations, and associated methods and systems
US8457893B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-06-04 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating an electronic record of a marking operation including service-related information and/or ticket information
US8612148B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-12-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus configured to detect out-of-tolerance conditions in connection with underground facility marking operations, and associated methods and systems
US8600526B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-12-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device docking stations having mechanical docking and methods of using same
US8589201B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-11-19 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating alerts on a locate device, based on comparing electronic locate information to facilities map information and/or other image information
US8467969B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-06-18 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus having operational sensors for underground facility marking operations, and associated methods and systems
US8589202B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-11-19 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for displaying and processing facilities map information and/or other image information on a marking device
US20100088134A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to historical information
US8583264B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-11-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device docking stations and methods of using same
US8478525B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-07-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for analyzing use of a marking device by a technician to perform an underground facility marking operation
US8476906B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-07-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating electronic records of locate operations
US8478524B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-07-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for dispensing marking material in connection with underground facility marking operations based on environmental information and/or operational information
US20100088135A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to environmental landmarks
US8478617B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-07-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating alerts on a locate device, based on comparing electronic locate information to facilities map information and/or other image information
US8577707B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-11-05 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for overlaying electronic locate information on facilities map information and/or other image information displayed on a locate device
US20100088164A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to facilities maps
US8510141B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-08-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for generating alerts on a marking device, based on comparing electronic marking information to facilities map information and/or other image information
US8527308B2 (en) 2008-10-02 2013-09-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for overlaying electronic locate information on facilities map information and/or other image information displayed on a locate device
US20100085694A1 (en) * 2008-10-02 2010-04-08 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device docking stations and methods of using same
US9177280B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2015-11-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for acquiring an enhanced positive response for underground facility locate and marking operations based on an electronic manifest documenting physical locate marks on ground, pavement, or other surface
US20110131081A1 (en) * 2009-02-10 2011-06-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for providing an enhanced positive response in underground facility locate and marking operations
US8902251B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2014-12-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating limited access files for searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US8549084B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2013-10-01 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for exchanging information between excavators and other entities associated with underground facility locate and marking operations
US20100205031A1 (en) * 2009-02-10 2010-08-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for exchanging information between excavators and other entities associated with underground facility locate and marking operations
US8543651B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2013-09-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for submitting virtual white line drawings and managing notifications in connection with underground facility locate and marking operations
US8572193B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2013-10-29 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for providing an enhanced positive response in underground facility locate and marking operations
US8484300B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2013-07-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for communicating information relating to the performance of underground facility locate and marking operations to excavators and other entities
US9235821B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2016-01-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for providing an enhanced positive response for underground facility locate and marking operations based on an electronic manifest documenting physical locate marks on ground, pavement or other surface
US9773217B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2017-09-26 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for acquiring an enhanced positive response for underground facility locate and marking operations
US20100268786A1 (en) * 2009-02-10 2010-10-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for requesting underground facility locate and marking operations and managing associated notifications
US20100259381A1 (en) * 2009-02-10 2010-10-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for notifying excavators and other entities of the status of in-progress underground facility locate and marking operations
US8468206B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2013-06-18 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for notifying excavators and other entities of the status of in-progress underground facility locate and marking operations
US8280969B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2012-10-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for requesting underground facility locate and marking operations and managing associated notifications
US9646353B2 (en) 2009-02-10 2017-05-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for exchanging information between excavators and other entities associated with underground facility locate and marking operations
US20100259414A1 (en) * 2009-02-10 2010-10-14 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for submitting virtual white line drawings and managing notifications in connection with underground facility locate and marking operations
US20100205195A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2010-08-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for associating a virtual white line (vwl) image with corresponding ticket information for an excavation project
US20110035245A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for processing technician workflows for locate and/or marking operations
US9563863B2 (en) 2009-02-11 2017-02-07 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking apparatus equipped with ticket processing software for facilitating marking operations, and associated methods
US20100228588A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2010-09-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Management system, and associated methods and apparatus, for providing improved visibility, quality control and audit capability for underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US8356255B2 (en) 2009-02-11 2013-01-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines (VWL) for delimiting planned excavation sites of staged excavation projects
US20100318401A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2010-12-16 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for performing locate and/or marking operations with improved visibility, quality control and audit capability
US8612276B1 (en) 2009-02-11 2013-12-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for dispatching service technicians
US8296308B2 (en) 2009-02-11 2012-10-23 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for associating a virtual white line (VWL) image with corresponding ticket information for an excavation project
US20100201706A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2010-08-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines (vwl) for delimiting planned excavation sites of staged excavation projects
US20100318402A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2010-12-16 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for managing locate and/or marking operations
US20110035328A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for generating technician checklists for locate and/or marking operations
US20110035260A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for quality assessment of locate and/or marking operations based on process guides
US8731999B2 (en) 2009-02-11 2014-05-20 Certusview Technologies, Llc Management system, and associated methods and apparatus, for providing improved visibility, quality control and audit capability for underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20100205555A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2010-08-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines (vwl) for delimiting planned excavation sites of staged excavation projects
US20100205536A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2010-08-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for controlling access to a virtual white line (vwl) image for an excavation project
US20110035324A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 CertusView Technologies, LLC. Methods, apparatus, and systems for generating technician workflows for locate and/or marking operations
US8626571B2 (en) 2009-02-11 2014-01-07 Certusview Technologies, Llc Management system, and associated methods and apparatus, for dispatching tickets, receiving field information, and performing a quality assessment for underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20100318465A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2010-12-16 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for managing access to information relating to locate and/or marking operations
US8566737B2 (en) 2009-02-11 2013-10-22 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines (VWL) application for indicating an area of planned excavation
US9185176B2 (en) 2009-02-11 2015-11-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for managing locate and/or marking operations
US8832565B2 (en) 2009-02-11 2014-09-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for controlling access to a virtual white line (VWL) image for an excavation project
US20110035251A1 (en) * 2009-02-11 2011-02-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for facilitating and/or verifying locate and/or marking operations
US8384742B2 (en) 2009-02-11 2013-02-26 Certusview Technologies, Llc Virtual white lines (VWL) for delimiting planned excavation sites of staged excavation projects
US9465129B1 (en) * 2009-03-06 2016-10-11 See Scan, Inc. Image-based mapping locating system
US20100256981A1 (en) * 2009-04-03 2010-10-07 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for documenting and reporting events via time-elapsed geo-referenced electronic drawings
US20110020776A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-01-27 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locating equipment for and methods of simulating locate operations for training and/or skills evaluation
US20110046993A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for assessing risks associated with locate request tickets
US20110040590A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-02-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for improving a ticket assessment system
US20110046994A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-02-24 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for multi-stage assessment of locate request tickets
US8585410B2 (en) 2009-06-25 2013-11-19 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems for and methods of simulating facilities for use in locate operations training exercises
US9646275B2 (en) 2009-06-25 2017-05-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for assessing risks associated with locate request tickets based on historical information
US20110040589A1 (en) * 2009-06-25 2011-02-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for assessing complexity of locate request tickets
US9159107B2 (en) 2009-07-07 2015-10-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating location-corrected searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US8917288B2 (en) 2009-07-07 2014-12-23 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating accuracy-annotated searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US20110007076A1 (en) * 2009-07-07 2011-01-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US9189821B2 (en) 2009-07-07 2015-11-17 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating digital-media-enhanced searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US8928693B2 (en) 2009-07-07 2015-01-06 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating image-processed searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US8830265B2 (en) 2009-07-07 2014-09-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating searchable electronic records of underground facility marking operations and assessing aspects of same
US9165331B2 (en) 2009-07-07 2015-10-20 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for generating searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations and assessing aspects of same
US8907980B2 (en) 2009-07-07 2014-12-09 Certus View Technologies, LLC Methods, apparatus and systems for generating searchable electronic records of underground facility locate and/or marking operations
US8473148B2 (en) 2009-08-11 2013-06-25 Certusview Technologies, Llc Fleet management systems and methods for complex event processing of vehicle-related information via local and remote complex event processing engines
US20110060496A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-03-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for complex event processing of vehicle information and image information relating to a vehicle
US20110191058A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-08-04 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locating equipment communicatively coupled to or equipped with a mobile/portable device
US8463487B2 (en) 2009-08-11 2013-06-11 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for complex event processing based on a hierarchical arrangement of complex event processing engines
US20110093304A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-04-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for complex event processing based on a hierarchical arrangement of complex event processing engines
US8311765B2 (en) 2009-08-11 2012-11-13 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locating equipment communicatively coupled to or equipped with a mobile/portable device
US20110093306A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-04-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Fleet management systems and methods for complex event processing of vehicle-related information via local and remote complex event processing engines
US8560164B2 (en) 2009-08-11 2013-10-15 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for complex event processing of vehicle information and image information relating to a vehicle
US8467932B2 (en) 2009-08-11 2013-06-18 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for complex event processing of vehicle-related information
US20110093162A1 (en) * 2009-08-11 2011-04-21 Certusview Technologies, Llc Systems and methods for complex event processing of vehicle-related information
US20110117272A1 (en) * 2009-08-20 2011-05-19 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device with transmitter for triangulating location during locate operations
US20110060549A1 (en) * 2009-08-20 2011-03-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for assessing marking operations based on acceleration information
US8620616B2 (en) 2009-08-20 2013-12-31 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for assessing marking operations based on acceleration information
US9097522B2 (en) 2009-08-20 2015-08-04 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and marking devices with mechanisms for indicating and/or detecting marking material color
US8620572B2 (en) 2009-08-20 2013-12-31 Certusview Technologies, Llc Marking device with transmitter for triangulating location during locate operations
US8600848B2 (en) 2009-11-05 2013-12-03 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for ensuring wage and hour compliance in locate operations
US20110137769A1 (en) * 2009-11-05 2011-06-09 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for ensuring wage and hour compliance in locate operations
US8583372B2 (en) 2009-12-07 2013-11-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus, and systems for facilitating compliance with marking specifications for dispensing marking material
US20110236588A1 (en) * 2009-12-07 2011-09-29 CertusView Techonologies, LLC Methods, apparatus, and systems for facilitating compliance with marking specifications for dispensing marking material
US9696758B2 (en) 2010-01-29 2017-07-04 Certusview Technologies, Llp Locating equipment docking station communicatively coupled to or equipped with a mobile/portable device
US8805640B2 (en) 2010-01-29 2014-08-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Locating equipment docking station communicatively coupled to or equipped with a mobile/portable device
US8918898B2 (en) 2010-07-30 2014-12-23 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for onsite linking to location-specific electronic records of locate operations
US9311614B2 (en) 2010-07-30 2016-04-12 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for onsite linking to location-specific electronic records of locate operations
US8977558B2 (en) 2010-08-11 2015-03-10 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for facilitating generation and assessment of engineering plans
US9046413B2 (en) 2010-08-13 2015-06-02 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods, apparatus and systems for surface type detection in connection with locate and marking operations
US9124780B2 (en) 2010-09-17 2015-09-01 Certusview Technologies, Llc Methods and apparatus for tracking motion and/or orientation of a marking device
US20120173296A1 (en) * 2011-01-03 2012-07-05 Mcmullin Dale Robert Method and system for outage restoration
US20120257785A1 (en) * 2011-04-07 2012-10-11 Infosys Technologies Limited Methods and systems for managing underground assets
US9359880B2 (en) * 2011-04-07 2016-06-07 Infosys Limited Methods and systems for managing underground assets
US9769094B2 (en) * 2011-05-04 2017-09-19 Celeritasworks, Llc Notification delivery system
US20130191471A1 (en) * 2011-05-04 2013-07-25 Celeritasworks, Llc Notification delivery system
USD684067S1 (en) 2012-02-15 2013-06-11 Certusview Technologies, Llc Modular marking device
US11244160B2 (en) * 2012-07-12 2022-02-08 The Government Of The United States, As Represented By The Secretary Of The Army Stitched image
US11200418B2 (en) * 2012-07-12 2021-12-14 The Government Of The United States, As Represented By The Secretary Of The Army Stitched image
US20170228904A1 (en) * 2012-07-12 2017-08-10 The Government Of The United States, As Represented By The Secretary Of The Army Stitched image
US20170228903A1 (en) * 2012-07-12 2017-08-10 The Government Of The United States, As Represented By The Secretary Of The Army Stitched image
US10138724B2 (en) * 2012-07-31 2018-11-27 Landmark Graphics Corporation Monitoring, diagnosing and optimizing gas lift operations by presenting one or more actions recommended to achieve a GL system performance
US20140039793A1 (en) * 2012-07-31 2014-02-06 Landmark Graphics Corporation Monitoring, diagnosing and optimizing gas lift operations
US9261097B2 (en) 2012-07-31 2016-02-16 Landmark Graphics Corporation Monitoring, diagnosing and optimizing electric submersible pump operations
US9231895B2 (en) * 2012-10-23 2016-01-05 International Business Machines Corporation Tag management of information technology services improvement
US20140115071A1 (en) * 2012-10-23 2014-04-24 International Business Machines Corporation Tag management of information technology services improvement
US20140156339A1 (en) * 2012-12-03 2014-06-05 Bank Of America Corporation Operational risk and control analysis of an organization
US20140277622A1 (en) * 2013-03-15 2014-09-18 First Principles, Inc. System and method for bio-signal control of an electronic device
US9495596B2 (en) * 2013-04-16 2016-11-15 Google Inc. Systems and method for identifying locations of infrastructure assets using aerial imagery
US9098747B1 (en) * 2013-04-16 2015-08-04 Google Inc. Systems and methods for identifying locations of infrastructure assets using aerial imagery
US9600805B2 (en) * 2013-06-25 2017-03-21 Sap Se Presenting information on a mobile communication device
US20140380181A1 (en) * 2013-06-25 2014-12-25 Sap Ag Presenting information on a mobile communication device
US9286349B2 (en) * 2013-06-27 2016-03-15 International Business Machines Corporation Dynamic search system
US20150006578A1 (en) * 2013-06-27 2015-01-01 International Business Machines Corporation Dynamic search system
US20150006498A1 (en) * 2013-06-27 2015-01-01 International Business Machines Corporation Dynamic search system
US9286348B2 (en) * 2013-06-27 2016-03-15 International Business Machines Corporation Dynamic search system
US20150006226A1 (en) * 2013-06-28 2015-01-01 Verizon Patent And Licensing Inc. Method and apparatus for scheduling media processing jobs on multiple processors to maximize processor utilization
US9547836B2 (en) * 2013-06-28 2017-01-17 Verizon Patent And Licensing Inc. Method and apparatus for scheduling media processing jobs on multiple processors to maximize processor utilization
US20160048783A1 (en) * 2014-06-17 2016-02-18 One Call Concepts, Inc. System and Method for Locate Request Entry Configured for Defining Multiple Excavation Sites as Part of a Single Locate Request
US10824969B2 (en) * 2014-06-17 2020-11-03 One Call Concepts, Inc. System and method for locate request entry configured for defining multiple excavation sites as part of a single locate request
US10346780B2 (en) * 2015-01-30 2019-07-09 International Business Machines Corporation Extraction of system administrator actions to a workflow providing a resolution to a system issue
US11074541B2 (en) 2015-02-13 2021-07-27 One Stop Mailing LLC Parcel processing system and method
US11574279B2 (en) 2015-02-13 2023-02-07 One Stop Mailing LLC Parcel processing system and method
US10339489B2 (en) * 2015-02-13 2019-07-02 One Stop Mailing LLC Parcel processing system and method
US10346788B2 (en) * 2015-02-13 2019-07-09 One Stop Mailing LLC Parcel processing system and method
US20160239788A1 (en) * 2015-02-13 2016-08-18 One Stop Mailing LLC Parcel Processing System and Method
US20160239789A1 (en) * 2015-02-13 2016-08-18 One Stop Mailing LLC Parcel Processing System and Method
US9471900B1 (en) * 2015-08-18 2016-10-18 Genesys Impact, LLC System and method for workforce data management
US10726363B2 (en) * 2016-06-16 2020-07-28 International Business Machines Corporation Ticket event modification for a problem tracking system ticket
US20170364840A1 (en) * 2016-06-16 2017-12-21 International Business Machines Corporation Ticket event modification for a problem tracking system ticket
US20180349823A1 (en) * 2017-06-06 2018-12-06 Salesforce.Com, Inc. Systems and methods for generating and managing service appointments
US11532311B2 (en) * 2018-09-27 2022-12-20 Yokogawa Electric Corporation System, method, program, and recording medium for improving accuracy of call data analysis
US11354610B2 (en) 2018-12-27 2022-06-07 Clicksoftware, Inc. Methods and systems for scheduling location-based tasks and location-agnostic tasks
US11551167B2 (en) 2018-12-27 2023-01-10 Clicksoftware, Inc. Systems and methods for fixing schedule using a remote optimization engine
US11593728B2 (en) 2018-12-27 2023-02-28 Clicksoftware, Inc. Systems and methods for scheduling tasks
US11615353B2 (en) 2018-12-27 2023-03-28 Clicksoftware, Inc. Methods and systems for offerring service times based on system consideration
US11823104B2 (en) 2018-12-27 2023-11-21 Clicksoftware, Inc. Systems and methods for scheduling connected device
US11593538B2 (en) * 2019-04-02 2023-02-28 Accenture Global Solutions Limited Verification, modification, and/or validation of an infrastructure design document via improved collaboration between on site devices and remote devices
CN110659415A (en) * 2019-09-04 2020-01-07 北京三快在线科技有限公司 Method, device and system for generating business execution certificate
US11488109B2 (en) * 2019-11-22 2022-11-01 Milliman Solutions Llc Identification of employment relationships between healthcare practitioners and healthcare facilities
US20210158295A1 (en) * 2019-11-22 2021-05-27 Leavitt Partners Insight, LLC Identification of employment relationships between healthcare practitioners and healthcare facilities
EP3889859A1 (en) * 2020-03-31 2021-10-06 Topcon Corporation Information processing device, information processing system, and information processing method
US20230103433A1 (en) * 2021-09-23 2023-04-06 Verizon Patent And Licensing Inc. Systems and methods for assigning non-overlapping base stations to technicians for service

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
AU2014224139A1 (en) 2014-10-02
US9646275B2 (en) 2017-05-09
US20170243144A1 (en) 2017-08-24
CA2706195A1 (en) 2010-09-01
US20140236656A1 (en) 2014-08-21
US20110040589A1 (en) 2011-02-17
WO2010151330A1 (en) 2010-12-29
US20110046994A1 (en) 2011-02-24
CA2885962A1 (en) 2010-09-01
US20110040590A1 (en) 2011-02-17
AU2010263261B2 (en) 2014-06-12
US20110046993A1 (en) 2011-02-24
AU2010263261A1 (en) 2012-02-09

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US9646275B2 (en) Methods and apparatus for assessing risks associated with locate request tickets based on historical information
US9578678B2 (en) Methods and apparatus for facilitating locate and marking operations
US9185176B2 (en) Methods and apparatus for managing locate and/or marking operations
US8977558B2 (en) Methods, apparatus and systems for facilitating generation and assessment of engineering plans
US9208464B2 (en) Methods and apparatus for analyzing locate and marking operations with respect to historical information
US20100010883A1 (en) Methods and apparatus for facilitating a quality assessment of a field service operation based on multiple quality assessment criteria
AU2009262952B2 (en) Methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation
US20170140321A1 (en) Apparatus and methods for evaluating a quality of a locate operation for underground utilities
AU2015201957B2 (en) Methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation
Meis et al. An Impact and Value Analysis of Requiring Geospatial Locations for Utility Installation As-Builts

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AS Assignment

Owner name: CERTUSVIEW TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, FLORIDA

Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:NIELSEN, STEVEN;CHAMBERS, CURTIS;FARR, JEFFREY;AND OTHERS;SIGNING DATES FROM 20100901 TO 20100903;REEL/FRAME:025860/0762

STCB Information on status: application discontinuation

Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION