In the following list, the Inventive Principles that allow for developing solutions are described, along with examples of their application. TRIZ has identified 40 inventive principles derived from inventions in engineering. Nature's L.I. promotes a universal description for their application in any area of human development and also explains natural phenomena. These inventive principles offer solutions for resolving contradictions between innovation parameters (a total of 39), grouped in sets of 1, 2, 3, or 4 principles per contradiction. These contradictions are tabulated in the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, which consists of 39 x 39 parameters. TRIZ has identified 1248 contradictions (84.2% of possible combinations) for which it proposes solutions based on inventive principles.
The inventive principles presented here apply to an OBJECT S1 that exhibits innovation parameters in contradiction when interacting with an Object S2, and this requires finding a solution to achieve a desired goal.
Each description of an inventive principle mentions OBJECT S1, which can be understood in its original, modified, or completely new state, depending on the challenge being analyzed. Knowledge of the current situation and the desired goal will help determine the option that applies in each case.
It's important to note that these principles are composed of different generic innovation concepts that can be applied independently or in combination, depending on the case under evaluation, the current situation, and the contradiction being analyzed.

The selection of the innovation concepts from an inventive principle to apply in a solution to a specific contradiction is an interactive process. Often, this choice will be influenced by other inventive principles contained in the same contradiction and in other contradictions identified for the challenge under evaluation. This interaction is evident in some of the provided examples, supporting Nature's L.I.'s assertion that innovation challenges are multi-variable, like a conceptual puzzle. Formulating a solution based on the inventive principles recommended by the Aatrizinventor algorithm is a guided exercise in relational thinking, where you make decisions, test, accept, or modify.

The description of the mentioned innovation concepts is written in a specific direction; However, the current situation of the problem or challenge will determine whether it is applied in the direction described or in the reverse direction. This is explained because the TRIZ contradiction matrix describes only one of the possible states of two parameters in contradiction: example (+) Weight and (+) speed, but there are 3 other states that can also occur: (+) and (-) ); (-) and (+); (-) and (-). Examples:
Contradiction of some athletes: if they have (+) weight, they have difficulty having (+) speed
Contradiction of a spaceship: if it has (+) weight, it has difficulty having (-) speed to return to earth.
Contradiction of a balloon: if it has (-) weight, it has difficulty having (+) speed to descend to the ground.
Contradiction of a fired bullet: if it has (-) weight, it has difficulty having (-) speed that does not cause damage
Consequently, the application of the description of an inventive principle is determined by the objects S1 and S2 that interact and the real context in which they do so.
The interpretation of the innovation concepts of an inventive principle must be placed in the real state that it evaluates to determine what direction it should give it. If you have doubts, choose a certain direction, select the innovation concepts that seem most suitable to resolve the contradiction and apply them to develop a solution. If you can develop a coherent solution to address the current situation, then that is the right direction (e.g. adding new parts to the evaluated object). If you cannot find a suitable solution, try the reverse direction (for example, removing parts of the evaluated object). If no proposed solution satisfies you, then review the formulation: the space and time to evaluate and the undesirable effects identified.
When reading the examples provided for each inventive principle, keep in mind that the interpretation depends on a deep understanding of the current situation and the integration of all factors being evaluated, which provides context to the challenge mentioned in each example. Obtaining a solution from a specific contradiction that involves one, two, three, or four inventive principles is similar to assembling a puzzle, where all selected innovation concepts must fit perfectly to provide an answer to the presented challenge. The thread of the solution is commonly drawn from tactical or operative inventive principles, within the framework set by strategic principles.

Since the inventive principles are composed of various innovation concepts, numerous solution combinations are generated. Therefore, it's important to consider that the solution examples provided here are just one of the possible alternatives for addressing different challenges involving the inventive principles contained in the analyzed contradictions. Do not attempt to tie solutions to specific contradictions, as historical errors have been made for this reason, by overlooking that challenges are multivariable; the contribution of a contradiction depends on its relative relevance with other contradictions deduced for a specific innovation challenge. If you do not apply the required breadth of analysis, you might think that the examples given here for the inventive principles appear to be pulled out of a magician's hat. This would be a fatal mistake.

When evaluating your own case and obtaining a set of inventive principles to form a solution, it will be necessary to select the applicable innovation concepts to achieve the goal that surpasses the current state of the evaluated object and projects it towards a higher state of evolution. As shown in the presented examples, it is necessary to logically combine the innovation concepts deduced from different inventive principles involved in the solution. These concepts must complement each other to achieve a solution that minimizes costs and maximizes the benefit-to-cost ratio for the evaluated challenge.

Finally, as in everything in life, practice makes perfect.

UNIVERSAL INVENTIVE PRINCIPLES

1. Segmenting/ Integrating - Strategic 2. Taking out/ Adding - Strategic 3. Local Quality - Strategic 4. Asymmetry/ Symmetry - Operative 5. Merging/ Separating - Operative 6. Universality - Tactical 7. Nesting/ Dispersing - Tactical 8. Anti-Weight/ Compensation - Tactical 9. Preliminary Anti-action - Operative 10. Preliminary Action - Strategic 11. Beforehand Cushioning - Tactical 12. Equipotentiality - Tactical 13. Inverse or Indirect Action - Strategic 14. Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle - Tactical 15. Dynamics - Strategic 16. Partial or Excessive Actions - Operative 17. Another Dimension or Field - Tactical 18. Mechanical Vibrations/ Energy Variations - Tactical 19. Time-Varying Action/
Periodic or Pulsating 20. Continuity of Useful Action - Operative 21. Skipping/ Avoiding - Tactical 22. Convert harm to benefit - Strategic 23. Feedback - Operative 24. Intermediary - Tactical 25. Self-service - Operative 26. Copying/ Replicating - Strategic 27. Cheap Short-Living Objects - Strategic 28. Mechanics Substitution - Strategic 29. Controllable Soft Variables - Tactical 30. Simple Shapes/ Ways to Interact - Tactical 31. Using/ Removing Unused Parts - Operative 32. Perception/ Appearance/ Color Changes - Strategic 33. Homogeneity / Compatibility - Operative 34. Discarding and Recovering - Tactical 35. Transformation / Parameter Changes - Strategic 36. Phase, State or Condition Transitions - Operative 37. Useful Perceptible Change - Operative 38. Strong and/or Fast Reactions - Operative 39. Inert Atmosphere / Environment - Operative 40. Composite Materials/ Conditions - Operative

TYPES OF INVENTIVE PRINCIPLES

Practical experience using the Aatrizinventor algorithm has led to the establishment of the categorization of inventive principles into three groups: Strategic, Tactical, and Operative. This abductive definition was initiated by dividing the inventive principles based on their participation in the 1248 contradictions defined by TRIZ. Three groups were established, one for each type as shown below, with each group having 6 rows:
The first row displays the number assigned to the inventive principle.
The second row shows how many times each inventive principle participates in a contradiction.
The third row indicates how many times each inventive principle occupies Position 1 in a contradiction.
The fourth row reveals how many times each inventive principle occupies Position 2 in a contradiction.
The fifth row demonstrates how many times each inventive principle occupies Position 3 in a contradiction.
The sixth row presents how many times each inventive principle occupies Position 4 in a contradiction.
The third row is highlighted, which determines the type of inventive principle: Strategic, Tactical, or Operative.
This established order has facilitated the analysis of multivariable innovation challenges, accelerating the process of identifying optimal solutions with minimal implementation costs and maximum benefit-to-cost ratio.

In the definitions of inventive principles presented below, the following abbreviations are used:
Par. : Innovation Parameter
IP. : Inventive Principle

a. Divide OBJECT S1 into existing and/or new parts, shapes, phases, states, conditions or functions.
b. Integrate different existing or new parts, forms, phases, states, conditions or functions of OBJECT S1 in a single entity.
c. Make OBJECT S1 easy to disassemble or assemble.
d. Increase or reduce the degree of fragmentation or segmentation of OBJECT S1.
Separation principle: Separation in space / Separation in subsystem,
Solution strategy: Improve attributes ; Improve performance; Improve the 7 quality factors(**); Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection.
Type: Strategic inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle assumes that the configuration of OBJECT S1 in the current situation is not appropriate and recommends segmenting or dividing it into existing and new parts, each with different functions, or potentially integrating existing parts to achieve the innovation.
For example, let's consider a contradiction in the case of serving hot coffee in a plastic cup to a customer, OBJECT S1, moving: Plastic Cup, and OBJECT S2, moving: Customers. You can find more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 1. To improve service stability (Par.13 Stability) and preserve the necessary autonomy (Par.38 Extent of automation/ autonomy), we apply contradiction Par.[+13,+38], which considers the following inventive principles IP.[1,8,35,0]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
- The Plastic Cup* is divided into two parts.
IP.8. Anti-Weight/ Compensation
- flexible sheet is added to the Plastic Cup*(1), allowing it to compensate for the temperature perceived by the Customer and prevent burns.
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
- The Plastic Cup* is transformed to make it more manageable.

(1) The specific technical solution for using a flexible sheet is deduced from the contradiction to improve service stability (Par.13 Stability) and preserve adaptability to the Customer (Par. 35), which is also shown in Case No. 1. Contradiction Par.[+13,+35] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[35,30,34,2]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
- The Plastic Cup* must transform its physical state to adapt to the Customer.
IP.30 Simple Shapes/ Ways to Interact
- By adding a flexible sheet to the Plastic Cup*.
IP.34 Discarding and Recovering
- The Plastic Cup* must use the flexible sheet and then discard it.
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- The flexible sheet is added to the Plastic Cup* as a temporary new feature.

Another example, the integration solution is less common but can occur. We will now examine a contradiction in the case of the Sea Squirt´s Larva, which has difficulty feeding from seawater while attached headfirst to a rock with a tail and a nerve cord. OBJECT S1, stationary: Larva, and OBJECT S2, moving: Seawater. You can find more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 2. To improve its ability to change its feeding form (Par.34 Ease of change, repair or maintain) and attenuate its less appropriate form (Par.12 Shape / composition / configuration) due to being stuck upside down in the rock, we apply the contradiction Par.[+34,-12], considering the following inventive principles IP.[1,13,2,4]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
- The Larva* integrates its initial parts and then divides some new ones to facilitate food acquisition.
IP.13 Inverse or Indirect Action
- The Larva* indirectly interacts with seawater, achieving this by forming siphons.(2)
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- The Larva* adds siphons, transforming itself to achieve the necessary functions for survival and safety.
IP.4 Asymmetry/ Symmetry
- The Larva* transforms itself by acting asymmetrically: one siphon draws in water with food, and the other expels the remaining water.

(2) The need for an indirect action, by adding siphons as mentioned in the previous solution, is derived from the contradiction that aims to improve the difficulty of detecting food (Par.37 Difficulty of detecting and measuring) and attenuate the low adaptability to seawater (Par.35 Adaptability or versatility), which is also shown in Case No. 2. Contradiction Par.[+37,-35] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[1,15,0,0]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
- The Larva* integrates its initial parts and then divides some new ones to facilitate food acquisition.
IP.15 Dynamics
- The Larva* generates relative movement between its parts, achieving this by transforming its shape to create two siphons, one for drawing in water with food and the other for expelling water and waste.

The case of the Sea Squirt's Larva is a good example of how different contradictions interrelate to form a complex solution. It also illustrates the need for applying relational thinking to innovate.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 18.67% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No. 1.

a. Separate an interfering part or a property from OBJECT S1, or single out the only necessary part (or property) of OBJECT S1.
b. Add new parts or properties to OBJECT S1.
Separation principle: Separation in space.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes.
Preferably: Strategic inventive principle
Type: Strategic inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle commonly suggests adding new functions and components in the initial stages of development, while in later optimization stages, it may be necessary to eliminate parts to achieve the innovation.
For example, let's examine a contradiction in the case of a person carrying a heavy and bulky suitcase, OBJECT S1, moving: Suitcase, and OBJECT 2, moving: Person. You can find more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 3. To improve the transportation of a suitcase due to its increased volume (Par.7 Volume of moving object) and reduce the time lost caused by the difficulty of carrying it (Par.25 Loss of Time), we apply contradiction Par.[+7,+25], considering the following inventive principles IP.[2,6,34,10]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- A mechanism must be added to the Suitcase* to facilitate its movement.
IP.6 Universality
- Make a part of the Suitcase* perform useful functions.
IP.34 Discarding and Recovering
- An action should be applied to the Suitcase* to facilitate movement, and once it is accomplished, it should be applied again (this is the principle of the wheel: it turns and turns again).
IP.10. Preliminary Action
- Whatever is necessary must be added in advance to the Suitcase*

Another example is the imagined case of a primitive man who wants to travel to Mars using a wooden platform and spring found in the forest to propel himself. OBJECT S1, moving: Marsnaut, and Object S2, stationary: Earth and its gravity, see more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 4.
To improve the Marsnaut's susceptibility to harmful factors such as falls and impacts (Par.22 Loss of Energy) and maintain the required ease of change (Par.34 Ease of change, repair or maintain), we apply the contradiction Par.[+22,+34], considering the following inventive principles IP.[2,19,0,0]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- A new propeller should be added to the Marsnaut* to improve its lifting speed.
IP.19 Time-Varying Action/ Periodic or Pulsating
- An action that acts in stages should be applied to Marsnaut*, for example, a propulsion system (4) with fuel.

(4) The need for propulsion mentioned in the previous solution arises from the contradiction (wt4/TOP5) to improve the Marsnaut's greater weight (Par.1 Heaviness of moving object) and attenuate the lower flight speed in the current situation (Par.9 Speed), also shown in Case No. 4. We apply the contradiction Par.[+1,-9], considering the following inventive principles IP.[2,8,15,38]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
A new propeller should be added to the Marsnaut* to improve its lifting speed.
IP.8 Anti-Weight/ Compensation
Compensate for the Marsnaut's lower thrust to achieve greater speed.
IP.15 Dynamics
Allow the dynamic characteristics of the Marsnaut's propulsion system to change to find an optimal operating condition.
IP.38 Strong and/or Fast Reactions
The new propeller must consider strong and fast reactions, such as a combustion rocket thruster.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 17.79% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No. 2.

a. Improve quality in a localized way, for parts, components, or conditions of OBJECT S1.
b. Change the structure, action, or procedure of OBJECT S1 from uniform to non-uniform, or vice versa.
c. Change the external environment (or external influence) of OBJECT S1 from uniform to non-uniform, or vice versa.
d. Make each part of OBJECT S1 function in the conditions that are most suitable for its operation. e. Make each part of OBJECT S1 fulfill a different and useful function.
Separation principle: Separation in space.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes ; Improve performance; Improve the 7 quality factors(**); Improving if a solution has not yet emerged,
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection.
Type: Strategic inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests the use of localized or non-uniform solutions to achieve the innovation.
For example, let's consider a contradiction in the case of moving an animal that refuses to walk, pulled by OBJECT S1: Farmer, moving, and OBJECT S2: Animal, moving. See more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 5.
To improve the farmer's low strength in moving the animal (Par.14 Strength / Resistance) and maintain the required reliability (Par.27 Reliability), we apply the contradiction Par.[-14,+27], considering the following inventive principles IP.[11,3,0,0]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.11 Beforehand Cushioning
- Emergency means must be prepared in advance to compensate for the relatively low reliability in moving the animal (5).
IP.3 Local Quality
- A localized, non-uniform solution should be provided.

(5) The previous solution is reinforced with the contradiction to improve the farmer's lower strength to pull the animal (Par.14 Strength / Resistance) and attenuate the less appropriate form (Par.12 Shape / composition / configuration) the farmer has for making the animal walk, which is also shown in Case No. 5. We apply the contradiction Par.[-14,-12], considering the following inventive principles IP.[30,28,35,40]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.30 Simple Shapes/ Ways to Interact
- The Farmer* must use a rod to interact with the animal.
IP.28 Mechanics Substitution
- The Farmer* must attach food to the end of the rod to improve the animal's movement dynamics (IP.28b).
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
- The Farmer* must transform to be more flexible in their interaction with the animal (IP.35c).
IP.40 Composite Materials/ Conditions
- Use a composite action, which is the rod with food and the Farmer* walking in front of the animal. The animal walks following the food but never reaches it.

A subsequent evaluation of the new condition recommends that the Farmer* rides on the animal.

Another example can be found in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 6, which addresses the challenge of an OBJECT S1, stationary: Stripping Robot, which, when stripping off OBJECT S2, moving: copper sheets deposited on a titanium plate, damages them because they are rigidly attached. To improve the robot's weaker stripping strength (Par.14 Strength / Resistance) and attenuate the lower stripping force (Par.10 Force/ Intensity), we apply the contradiction Par.[-14,-10], considering the following inventive principles IP.[10,18,3,14]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.10. Preliminary Action
- To improve the efficiency of the stripping robot's operation, a preliminary stripping action is required.
IP.18 Mechanical Vibrations/ Energy Variations
- Vibrations must be applied during preliminary stripping action to facilitate the Stripping Robot*'s operation.
IP.3 Local Quality
- During the preliminary stripping action, the vibration should be applied in a localized manner to facilitate the stripping Robot*'s operation, making the application of vibrations non-uniform.
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- During the preliminary stripping action, the vibration should be applied in a localized manner, just below the upper edge of the sheet. This will create a slight angled separation from the plate to facilitate the stripping Robot*'s operation.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 10.18% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No. 3.

a. Change the shape of OBJECT S1 from symmetrical to asymmetrical, permanent, or variable in time, or vice versa.
b. If OBJECT S1 is asymmetrical, increase its degree of asymmetry, or vice versa.
Separation principle: Separation in space.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes ; Improve performance; Improve the 7 quality factors(**); Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection.
Type: Operative inventive principle.
Example of Application:
This inventive principle suggests that it is easier to find a solution by transitioning from a symmetrical form, behavior, state, or condition to an asymmetrical one. The reverse may also hold true, and both transitions can lead to achieve the innovation.
For example, let's consider a contradiction in the case of extracting the locking pin from the inspection hatch door of the Estonia ferry's cargo space. Object S1, moving: Pin, and Object S2, moving: The male-female components of the inspection hatch door's locking mechanism. You can find more details in the Solved Cases link, Case No. 7.
To improve the ease of changing the current situation, preventing the pin from getting stuck with the male-female parts of the locking mechanism (Parameter 34), and attenuate the pin's poor adaptability to the male-female parts (Parameter 35), we apply the contradiction Parameter [+34, +35]. This involves considering the following inventive principles: IP.[7,4,1,16]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.7 Nesting/ Dispersing
- Improve Pin* nesting in the male-female parts to avoid wear due to current clearance.
IP.4 Asymmetry/ Symmetry
- Give the Pin* an asymmetrical shape, for example, like a cone. (6)
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
- Divide the Pin into various dimensions compared to the original uniform dimension.
IP.16 Partial or Excessive Actions
- Adjust the length and angle of the Pin* during the design tests, either a little more or a little less.

(6) The specific recommendation to use a conical shape is derived from the contradiction to improve the lower relative speed with the male-female parts due to jamming, causing wear (Par.9 Speed) and to attenuate the longer interaction with the male-female parts that causes damage (Par.3 Length of moving object), as also presented in Case N°7. We apply the contradiction Parameter [-9, +3], which considers the following inventive principles: IP.[13,14,8,0]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.13 Inverse or Indirect Action
- Reverse the Pin*: place it upside down, change its position, or alter its condition.
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- For the interaction between the Pin* and male-female parts, instead of using rectilinear shapes, use angled forms, such as a cone.
IP.8. Anti-Weight/ Compensation
- To counteract the forces applied to the Pin*, make it interact with the male-female parts of the closing mechanism with a narrow fit, minimizing relative movement during operation and quick detachment during extraction. A conical pin satisfies these requirements.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 6.01% of the identified contradictions contain the operative inventive principle No. 4.

a. Bring OBJECT S1 closer or merge with other objects with similar or identical operations or functions.
b. Bring OBJECT S1 closer or merge with other objects with similar operations or functions for them to act together at the same time.
c. Merge different shapes or actions into OBJECT S1.
d. If objects are merged, and if necessary, apply a separation action.
Separation principle: Integration in supersystem.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes.
Type: Operative inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests merging the evaluated object with another object to achieve the innovation.
For example, in a case of innovation through imposition, the challenge is to manufacture the Best Car in the World without design compromises. Object S1: the Car Manufacturing System with a large number of workers, and Object S2: the New Car Model. For more details, please refer to the Solved cases link, Case N°8.
To improve ease of operation (Par.33 Ease of operation) and preserve the ease of achieving the desired outcome (Par.32 Ease of achieving the desired outcome), we apply the contradiction Par.[+33,+32], considering the following inventive principles IP.[2,5,12,0]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- Add new parts or properties to the Car Manufacturing System*
IP.5 Merging/ Separating
- Bring useful parts of the existing Car Manufacturing System* closer and merge it with robotic systems (7), so they work together simultaneously.
IP.12 Equipotentiality
- Limit position changes or energy variations in the Car Manufacturing System* with the incorporated robotic system.

(7) The specific recommendation to use robots is derived from the contradiction to improve the current production cost (Par.1 Heaviness of moving object) and attenuate the increased complexity of the manufacturing system (Par.36 Complexity of Device/Action), which is also illustrated in Case N°8. We apply the contradiction Par.[+1,+36], considering the following inventive principles IP.[26,30,36,34]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.26 Copying/ Replicating
- Instead of using the Car Manufacturing System* or any of its parts or properties, which may not be available, expensive, and/or fragile, it is recommended to use simpler and more cost-effective copies or replicas to fulfill the desired function, and if possible, with improved features and properties for the Car Manufacturing System*. Harmful, unwanted, or unnecessary features should be discarded. For example, a robotic system can be used.
IP.30 Simple Shapes/ Ways to Interact
- For the Car Manufacturing System*, instead of employing complex three-dimensional structures that involve a higher number of components, shapes, and workers, it is recommended to use new resources such as predominantly one-dimensional and flexible objects, like robotic arms.
IP.36 Phase, State or Condition Transitions
- Deriving an advantage from the phenomena that occur during changes in the state, dimension, or condition of the Car Manufacturing System* to influence the interaction and control of car manufacturing through a robotic system.
IP.34 Discarding and Recovering
- The above recommendations should be applied to facilitate the operation of a Car Manufacturing System* cycle and, once completed, apply it again. For example, manufacturing circuits should be used.

Another example can be found in the link to Solved Cases, Case N°1, addressing the challenge of an Object S1, moving: Plastic Cup*, that has difficulty serving hot coffee to Object S2, moving: Customers. To improve the increased thermal heaviness of the Plastic cup* due to the hot coffee (Par.1 Heaviness of moving object) and attenuate the higher loss of sales due to customer rejection from burning their hand (Par.23 Loss of substance), a contradiction is applied, Par.[+1,+23], considering the following inventive principles IP.[5,35,3,31]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.5 Merging/ Separating
- Merge the Plastic Cup* with another object, in this case, a circular curved sheet, see IP.1
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
- This fusion transforms the Plastic cup*.
IP.3 Local Quality
- Apply a localized solution to the Plastic Cup*.
IP.31 Using/ Removing Unused Parts
- Utilize the external part of the plastic Cup* that is available.

Depending on the case, Inventive Principle N°5 could also be used to separate objects to satisfy the desired objective.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 2,81% of the identified contradictions contain the operative inventive principle No. 5.

a. Make a part or the whole of OBJECT S1 perform multiple functions.
b. Eliminate the need of OBJECT S1 for other parts.
Separation principle: Separation alternative.
Solution strategy: Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests providing operational independence to the evaluated object to achieve the innovation.

For example, we can examine a contradiction in the case of a person carrying a heavy and bulky suitcase, Object S1, moving: Suitcase, and Object S2, moving: Person. Please see further details in the link to Solved Cases, Case N°3.
To improve the transportation of the Suitcase due to its greater of movement (Par.7 Volume of moving object) and attenuate the increased time loss caused by the difficulty in transporting it (Par.25 Loss of Time), a contradiction is applied, Par.[+7,+25], considering the following inventive principles IP.[2,6,34,10]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- A new part or mechanism must be added to the Suitcase* to facilitate its movement.
IP.6 Universality
- Make one part of the Suitcase* perform useful functions without the need for anything else
IP.34 Discarding and Recovering
- Apply an action to the Suitcase* that facilitates its movement and, once it's fulfilled, apply it again (this is the principle of the wheel: it turns and turns again).
IP.10. Preliminary Action
- Anticipate the addition of a wheel system to the suitcase.

Another example can be found in the link to Solved Cases, Case N°2, which deals with the challenge of Object S1, stationary: Sea Squirt's Larva, having difficulty in obtaining food from Object S2, moving: Seawater. The contradiction being examined here is to improve the greater difficulty in detecting food in seawater (Par.37 Difficulty of detecting and measuring) while preserving the greater stationary heaviness due to being attached headfirst to the rock (Par.2 Heaviness of the stationary object).
The contradiction Par.[+37,+2] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[6,13,28,1]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.6 Universality
- The entire Larva* must perform multiple functions.
IP.13 Inverse or Indirect Action
- Larva* must detect food through an indirect action.
IP.28 Mechanics Substitution
- Larva* must replace a natural action to obtain food with a mechanical action or tool. Develops siphons.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
- Larva* integrates its initial parts and then divides some of the new ones to facilitate food acquisition.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 6,81% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No. 6.

a. Place OBJECT S1 fully or partially inside another object; place each object, in turn, fully or partially inside the other.
b. Make one part of OBJECT S1 pass through a cavity in the other, or vice versa.
c. If OBJECT S1 is nested with another object, and if necessary, apply a dispersing action.
Separation principle: Separation in space / Separation in subsystem.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests leveraging the effects that occur with volumetric interactions between objects, whether physical or figurative, to achieve the innovation.
For example, we examine a contradiction in the case of extracting the locking pin from the cargo door of the Estonia ferry, Object S1, moving: Pin, and Object S2, moving: Male-Female parts of the locking mechanism, see details in the link to Solved Cases, Case N°7. To improve the ease of changing the current situation of pin wear, preventing it from getting stuck with the male-female parts of the locking mechanism (Par.34 Ease of change, repair, or maintain) and to attenuate the low adaptability of the pin to the male-female parts (Par.35 Adaptability or versatility), the contradiction Par.[+34,+35] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[7,4,1,16]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.7 Nesting/ Dispersing
- Nest the Pin* in the male-female parts to avoid the current clearance that causes damage.
IP.4 Asymmetry/ Symmetry
- Give the Pin* an asymmetric shape, such as a cone (8)
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
- Divide the Pin* into various dimensions compared to the original uniform dimension.
IP.16 Partial or Excessive Actions
- Adjust the length and angle of the Pin* during the design tests, either slightly more or slightly less.

(8) The specific recommendation to use a conical shape is derived from the contradiction to improve the lower relative speed of the Pin concerning the male-female parts, where it gets stuck and experiences wear (Par.9 Speed), and to attenuate the longer interaction with the male-female parts that causes damage (Par.3 Length of moving object), which is also evident in Case N°7. The contradiction Par.[-9,+3] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[13,14,8,0]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.13 Inverse or Indirect Action
- Reverse the Pin*: place it upside down, change its position, or alter its condition.
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- For the interaction between the Pin* and the male-female parts, use angular shapes, such as a cone, instead of straight-line shapes.
IP.8. Anti-Weight/ Compensation
- To compensate for the stresses the Pin* undergoes, make it interact with the male-female parts of the locking mechanism with a tight fit and minimal relative movement during operation, and quick detachment during extraction. A conical Pin* meets these requirements.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 2,89% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No. 7.

a. To compensate for the heaviness/ lightness or incidence of OBJECT S1, merge it with other objects or independent own parts that provide an effect to improve the current situation.
b. To compensate for the heaviness/ lightness or incidence of OBJECT S1, make it interact with the environment.
For example, compensate for the heaviness of OBJECT S1 subject to a gravitational field, or exposed to a magnetic field, or subject to an economic value or price, or subject to a chemical bond, or subject to intellectual rigidity, a paradigm, or prejudices.
Separation principle: Separation alternative.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests compensating for the heaviness or lightness (understood in the broadest sense) of the evaluated object to achieve the innovation.
For example, let's consider a contradiction in the case of improving the Car Manufacturing System without design compromises, OBJECT S1, moving: Car Manufacturing System, and OBJECT S2, moving: New Car Model. See details in the link to Solved Cases, Case N°8.
To improve the current car manufacturing system's inappropriate shape or configuration (Par.12 Shape / composition / configuration) and attenuate the higher labor cost in manufacturing (Par.1 Heaviness of moving object), we apply the contradiction Par.[-12,+1], considering the following inventive principles IP.[8,10,29,40]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.8. Anti-Weight/ Compensation
- To compensate the increased costs, we should decrease the labor cost of the current manufacturing system with other objects, such as robots, that can provide an effect to achieve the desired goal.
IP.10. Preliminary Action
- The required change to use robots should be implemented in advance.
IP.29 Controllable Soft Variables
- The robots should be controlled using soft variables, such as digital programs.
IP.40 Composite Materials/ Conditions
- Composite actions should be performed, involving both robots and human workers.

Another example can be found in the link to Solved Cases, Case N°7, which deals with the challenge of OBJECT S1, moving: Locking Pin operating in the inspection hatch door of the ferry Estonia, suffering damage during its interaction with OBJECT S2, moving: Male-female parts of the mechanism. To improve or preserve the lower operational strength of the Locking Pin (Par.14 Strength/Resistance) and attenuate the slower relative speed between the locking pin* and male-female parts due to jamming, causing wear (Par.9 Speed), we apply the contradiction Par.[-14,-9], considering the following inventive principles IP.[8,13,26,14]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.8 Anti-Weight/ Compensation
- Interaction between the Locking Pin* and the male-female parts should be compensated to make it as non-damaging as possible.
IP.13 Inverse or Indirect Action
- The condition of interaction between the Locking Pin* and the male-female parts should be inverted (changed).
IP.26 Copying/ Replicating
- A functional replica of the original Locking Pin* should be designed to minimize harmful effects. It is deduced below that it changes from cylindrical to conical.
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- Angular shapes, like a cone, should be used on the Locking Pin* to minimize relative movement between the pin and the male-female parts during operation and enable quick detachment during extraction.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 3,53% of the identified contradictions tactical the tactical inventive principle No. 8.

a. If OBJECT S1 needs to perform an action with harmful and useful effects, this action should be replaced with anti-actions to control harmful effect.
b. Create beforehand actions in OBJECT S1 that will oppose known undesirable working stresses later.
Separation principle: Separation in time.
Solution strategy: Improve performance.
Type: Operative inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests taking advance precautions to mitigate damages or stresses, known to occur during action, to achieve the innovation.

For example, it is applied in the case of designing the best toy for children, affected by designer paradigms, OBJECT S1, moving: Designer, and OBJECT S2, moving: Children. You can find more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case N°9. To improve the ease of achieving the desired outcome for the designer that satisfies the children (Par.32 Ease of achieving the desired outcome) and preserve the ease of change for the designer (Par.34 Ease of change, repair, or maintain), we apply the contradiction Par.[+32,+34], considering the following inventive principles IP.[35,1,11,9]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
- The Designer* must undergo a transformation to open communication with the children.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
- The Designer* should divide themselves, adding new parts with a more playful character: clown, mime, interacting through video games, to truly understand what the children desire.
IP.11 Beforehand Cushioning
- The Designer* must prepare emergency means in advance to compensate for the relatively low reliability in getting children to express their desires. Prepare alternative communication plans.
IP.9 Preliminary Anti-action
- The Designer* must anticipate actions that will oppose undesirable communication difficulties that are known to occur at some point. Distraction, tiredness, boredom, and apathy from the children.

Another example can be found in the link to Solved Cases, Case N°10, which addresses the challenge of OBJECT S1: A stationary rectangular fuel tank that cannot contain the entire OBJECT S2: Stationary fuel volume required due to design dimension failures. To improve the smaller stationary volume that the tank can contain (Par.8 Volume of stationary object) and attenuate the lower strength to withstand a larger volume (Par.14 Strength / Resistance), we apply the contradiction Par.[-8,-14], considering the following inventive principles IP.[9,14,17,15]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.9 Preliminary Anti-action
- Anticipate designing the Tank*'s features that will counteract undesirable working stresses known to occur when the stored fuel volume increases.
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- Change the Tank*'s design from rectangular form to spherical one.
IP.17 Another Dimension or Field
- Design the Tank* with a multi-arrangement of thicknesses according to height; use greater thickness at lower heights, rather than a single thickness.
IP.15 Dynamics
- Design the fuel storage process features in the Tank* to change to an optimal condition for any stored volume. Divide the tank into parts with varying strength due to thickness changes.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 2,09% of the identified contradictions contain the operative inventive principle No. 9.

a. Perform the required change in, or for, OBJECT S1, before it is needed (either fully or partially).
b. Pre-arrange OBJECT S1 and other objects, if necessary, in such a way that they can come into action from the most convenient place and without losing time for their delivery.
Separation principle: Separation in time.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes ; Improve performance.
Type: Strategic inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests carrying out improvement activities in advance, since it is not possible to apply them in operation and they are required to achieve the innovation.
For example, let's examine a contradiction in the case of a person carrying a heavy and bulky suitcase, OBJECT S1, moving: Suitcase, and OBJECT 2, moving: Person. You can find more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 3. To improve the less appropriate shape (IP.12) of the Suitcase for transportation and attenuate the increased time loss associated with it (Par.25 Loss of Time), we apply contradiction Par.[-12,+25], considering the following inventive principles IP.[14,10,34,17]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- Use rollers or similar devices for the Suitcase* (IP.14d), for example, add a wheel system to the suitcase.
IP.10. Preliminary Action
- A moving system should be added to the Suitcase* in advance.
IP.34 Discarding and Recovering
- An action should be applied to the Suitcase* to facilitate movement, and once it is accomplished, it should be applied again (this is the principle of the wheel).
IP. 17 Another Dimension or Field
- Add a new dimension or arrangement to the Suitcase*.

Another example can be found in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 6, which addresses the challenge of an OBJECT S1, stationary: Stripping Robot, which, when stripping off OBJECT S2, moving: copper sheets deposited on a titanium plate, damages them because they are firmly attached. To improve the robot's weaker stripping strength (Par.14 Strength / Resistance) and attenuate the lower stripping force (Par.10 Force/ Intensity), we apply the contradiction Par.[-14,-10], considering the following inventive principles IP.[10,18,3,14]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.10. Preliminary Action
- To improve the efficiency of the stripping robot's operation, a preliminary stripping action is required.
IP.18 Mechanical Vibrations/ Energy Variations
- Vibrations must be applied during preliminary stripping action to facilitate the Stripping Robot*'s operation.
IP.3 Local Quality
- During the preliminary stripping action, the vibration should be applied in a localized manner to facilitate the stripping Robot*'s operation.
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- During the preliminary stripping action, the vibration should be applied in a localized manner, just below the upper edge of the sheet. This will create a slight angled separation from the plate to facilitate the stripping Robot*'s operation.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 21,88% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No. 10.

a. Prepare emergency means, beforehand, to compensate for the relatively low reliability of OBJECT S1.
Separation principle: Separation in time.
Solution strategy: Improve the 7 quality factors(**)
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests applying previous improvements to address low reliability actions that limit achieving innovation.
For example, it is applied in the case of designing the best toy for children, affected by designer paradigms, OBJECT S1, moving: Designer, and OBJECT S2, moving: Children. You can find more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case N° 9. To improve the ease of achieving the desired outcome for the designer that satisfies the children (Par.32 Ease of achieving the desired outcome) and preserve the ease of change for the designer (Par.34 Ease of change, repair, or maintain), we apply the contradiction Par.[+32,+34], considering the following inventive principles IP.[35,1,11,9]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
- The Designer* must undergo a transformation to open communication with the children.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
- The Designer* should divide themselves, adding new parts with a more playful character: clown, mime, interacting through video games, to truly understand what the children desire.
IP.11 Beforehand Cushioning
- The Designer* must prepare emergency means in advance to compensate for the relatively low reliability in getting children to express their desires. Prepare alternative communication plans.
IP.9 Preliminary Anti-action
- The Designer* must anticipate actions that will oppose undesirable communication difficulties that are known to occur at some point. Distraction, fatigue, boredom, and apathy from the children.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 3,93% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No. 11.

a. In a potential field, limit position changes or energy variations of OBJECT S1.
b. Change operating conditions to eliminate the need to change the position or energy quality of OBJECT S1 in a potential field.
Separation principle: Separation by condition to satisfy contradiction.
Solution strategy: Improving if a solution has not yet emerged,
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Example of Application:
This inventive principle suggests limiting the variability of the action or reaction energy fields and their impact, in order to reduce unwanted effects that limit achieving innovation.
For example, in a case of innovation through imposition, the challenge is to manufacture the Best Car in the World without design compromises. Object S1: the Car Manufacturing System with a large number of workers, and Object S2: the New Car Model. For more details, please refer to the solved cases link, Case N°8.
To improve ease of operation (Par.33 Ease of operation) and preserve the ease of achieving the desired outcome (Par.32 Ease of achieving the desired outcome), we apply the contradiction Par.[+33,+32], considering the following inventive principles IP.[2,5,12,0]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- Add new parts or properties to the Car Manufacturing System*
IP.5 Merging/ Separating
- Bring useful parts of the existing Car Manufacturing System* closer and merge it with robotic systems, so they work together simultaneously.
IP.12 Equipotentiality
- Limit position changes or energy variations in the Car Manufacturing System* with the incorporated robotic system.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 2,57% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No. 12.

a. Inverse the applied action or apply an indirect action to perform the current function of OBJECT S1 to interact with object S2 It should be identified how OBJECT S1 currently performs an action with Object S2 and from there evaluate an inverse or indirect action.
b. Make moving parts of OBJECT S1 (or the external environment) fixed, and fixed parts moving.
c. Turn OBJECT S1 (or process) “upside down”, “change the position”, “change the condition”.
Separation principle: Separation in space / Separation inverse.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes ; Improve performance; Improve the 7 quality factors(**); Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection.
Type: Strategic inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests applying inverse, indirect actions or reversing the action of the evaluated object to achieve the innovation.
We will now examine a contradiction in the case of the Sea Squirt´s Larva, which has difficulty feeding from seawater while attached headfirst to a rock with a tail and a nerve cord. OBJECT S1, stationary: Larva, and OBJECT S2, moving: Seawater. You can find more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 2. To improve its ability to change its feeding form (Par.34 Ease of change, repair or maintain) and attenuate its less appropriate form (Par.12 Shape / composition / configuration) due to being stuck upside down in the rock, we apply the contradiction Par.[+34,-12], considering the following inventive principles IP.[1,13,2,4]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
- The Larva* integrates its initial parts and then divides some new ones to facilitate food acquisition.
IP.13 Inverse or Indirect Action
- The Larva* indirectly interacts with seawater, achieving this by forming siphons.See IP.1
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- The Larva* adds siphons, transforming itself to achieve the necessary functions for survival and safety.
IP.4 Asymmetry/ Symmetry
- The Larva* transforms itself by acting asymmetrically: one siphon draws in water with food, and the other expels the remaining water.



Another example, improving the design of the locking pin of a gate closing mechanism affected by wear in male-female parts. OBJECT S1: Locking Pin*, OBJECT S2: Male-Female Parts. See details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 7. To improve the lower relative speed between the Locking Pin* and the male-female parts due to jamming (Par.9 Speed) and mitigate the longer interaction with the male-female parts that causes damage (Par.3 Length of moving object), the contradiction Par.[-9,+3] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[13,14,8,0]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.13 Inverse or Indirect Action
- Reverse the Locking Pin*: place it upside down, change its position, or alter its condition.
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- For the interaction between the Locking Pin* and male-female parts, instead of using rectilinear shapes, use angled forms, such as a cone.
IP.8. Anti-Weight/ Compensation
- To counteract the forces applied to the Locking Pin*, make it interact with the male-female parts of the closing mechanism with a narrow fit, minimizing relative movement during operation and quick detachment during extraction. A conical pin satisfies these requirements.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 11,30% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No. 13.

a. For the interaction between OBJECT S1 and Object S2, instead of using rectilinear parts, surfaces, or shapes, use curvilinear, enveloping, or angled parts.
b. For the interaction between OBJECT S1 and Object S2, instead of acting in a linear or direct way, interact in an indirect way or with curvilinear or parabolic, surrounding, or angled movements.
c. Move OBJECT S1 from flat to spherical surfaces; from parts shaped as a cube (parallelepiped) to ball-shaped structures.
d. Use rolls, balls, spirals, domes in, or for, OBJECT S1.
f. Go from linear to rotary motion, use centrifugal forces in, or for, OBJECT S1.
g. If there is Spheroidality , curvature or angle, increase or reduce, as applicable, in, or for, OBJECT S1.
Separation principle: Separation alternative.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes ; Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests the application of non-linear or non-direct actions in all their possible forms to achieve the innovation.
We will now examine a contradiction in the case of improving the service of hot coffee in a plastic cup to the customer. OBJECT S1: Plastic Cup, OBJECT S2: Customer. See more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 1.
To mitigate the temperature of the Plastic Cup, contradiction is applied to improve the stability of the service (Par.13 Stability) and mitigate the greatest loss of sales (Par. 23). Contradiction Par.[+13,+23] is applied, which considers the following inventive principles IP.[2,14,30,40]. The specific application is shown below
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- It is recommended to add an object to the Plastic Cup*
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- Apply a circular curved object (14c) on the Plastic Cup*.
IP.30 Simple Shapes/ Ways to Interact
- Apply a flexible sheet added to a Plastic Cup*.
IP.40 Composite Materials/ Conditions
- Form a Plastic Cup* of composite material.

Another example, according to an article from the University of Warwick (England), published in 2022 in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution, social interaction shapes and transforms the "vocabulary" of apes, just like with humans. The media headlines read: 'Orangutans develop their own slang, just like humans.' Below, to explain the results of this study using Nature's L.I., a contradiction is examined in the case of the Leader Orangutan who has difficulty communicating messages to the colony of orangutans due to a basic guttural language. OBJECT S1: Orangutan Leader, moving, OBJECT S2: Colony of Orangutans, moving. See more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 11. To improve the greater heaviness or limitation that the Orangutan Leader has in conveying his message (Par.1 Heaviness of moving object) and mitigate the lesser appropriate form of the message (Par.12 Shape / composition / configuration), being basic and invariable, the contradiction Par.[+1,-12] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[10,14,35,40]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.10 Preliminary Action
- The Orangutan Leader* must prepare the message in advance.
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- The Orangutan Leader* should convey a message using knowledge-based parables shared with the Orangutan Colony to achieve the innovation.
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
- The Orangutan Leader* must transform the message by adding new components.
IP.40 Composite Materials/ Conditions
- The Orangutan Leader* should send a message with distinguishable composite information.

You can also see in Case No. 11, which highlights other inventive principles: the message should be improved in how it is perceived (IP.32 Perception/ Appearance/ Color Changes - Strategic), it should communicate in a simple and one-dimensional manner (IP.30 Simple Shapes/ Ways to Interact - Tactical), it should be compatible with the Orangutan Colony, referring to a common story (IP.33 Homogeneity / Compatibility - Operative), and it should change the mechanics of communication from rough signals to sensitive signals (IP.28 Mechanics Substitution - Strategic), among others.
This case demonstrates that the use of language for communication can also be deduced from Nature's L.I.
In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 6,65% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No. 14.

a. Allow (or design) the characteristics of OBJECT S1, external environment, or process to change to an optimal, or to find an optimal, operating condition.
b. Divide OBJECT S1 into parts that are capable of relative movement between each other.
c. If OBJECT S1 (or process) is rigid or inflexible, make it flexible or adaptive.
d. To improve dynamics of OBJECT S1 or process use feature(s) or object(s) available in the nearby environment.
Separation principle: Separation in time.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes ; Improve performance; Improve the 7 quality factors(**); Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection. Type: Strategic inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests changing the movement dynamics of the evaluated object to achieve the innovation.
Challenge for Chimpanzee: Improve underground termite extraction, OBJECT S1: Chimpanzee's Hand, OBJECT S2: Termite Nest, see more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 12.
The specific technical solution that defines the strategy for termite extraction corresponds to the contradiction to improve the difficulty of shorter finger length (Par.3 Length of moving object) and to attenuate the lower adaptability to the variability of the underground termite nest's location (Par. 35). Contradiction Par.[-3,-35] is applied, which considers the following inventive principles IP.[14,15,1,16]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
Chimpanzee's Hand* should have a curved shape.
IP.15 Dynamics
Chimpanzee's Hand* should use an environmental object to improve the dynamics of termite extraction.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
Chimpanzee's Hand* should be divided into two parts: hand and extraction element.
IP.16 Partial or Excessive Actions
Chimpanzee's Hand* should apply an adjustable extraction method, a little less or a little more, to extract termites.

(9) The contradiction that determines the environmental object to be used for extraction is as follows: To improve the greater finger area (Par.5 Area of moving object) and attenuate the lower adaptability to the variability in the location of the termite nest, contradiction Par.[+5,-35] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP[15,30,0,0]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.15 Dynamics
Chimpanzee's Hand* should use an environmental object to improve the dynamics of termite extraction.
IP.30 Simple Shapes/ Ways to Interact
Chimpanzee's Hand* should use simple shapes of interaction, such as flexible rods.
In summary, the solution for the chimpanzee is to use a rod available in its surroundings, which it inserts through the termite exit hole to reach the nest and extract those termites that climb onto the rod.

Another example, improving the feeding of the Sea Squirt's Larva attached headfirst to the rock. OBJECT S1: LARVA, stationary, OBJECT S2: Seawater, moving, see more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 2.
To improve the greater difficulty in detecting food (Par.37 Difficulty of detecting and measuring) and attenuate the low adaptability to seawater (Par.35 Adaptability or versatility), contradiction Par.[+37,-35] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[1,15,0,0]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
- The Larva* integrates its initial parts and then divides some new ones to facilitate food acquisition.
IP.15 Dynamics
- The Larva* generates relative movement between its parts, achieving this by transforming its shape to create two siphons, one for drawing in water with food and the other for expelling water and waste.

The case of the Sea Squirt's Larva is a good example of how different contradictions interrelate to form a complex solution. It also illustrates the need for applying relational thinking to innovate.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 12.74% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No. 15.

a. If the goal of OBJECT S1 is hard to achieve fully, using a given solution’s method; then the problem may be considerably easier to solve, using 'slightly less' or 'slightly more' of the same method.
Separation principle: Separation in time,
Solution strategy: Improve performance,
Type: Operative inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle helps us understand that innovation is not an exact science; it requires adjusting a little more or a little less to achieve innovation.
Challenge to manufacture the Best Car in the World without design compromises, OBJECT S1: Car Manufacturing System, moving, OBJECT S2: New Car Model, moving, see details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 8.
To improve the less appropriate shape of industrial-scale car manufacturing with a large workforce (Par. 12 Shape/ composition/ configuration) and attenuate the impact of the greater complexity of the tasks performed (Par. 36 Complexity of Device/ Action), the contradiction Par.[-12,+36] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[16,29,1,28]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.16 Partial or Excessive Actions
The manufacturing system* should be adjustable, a little more, a little less.
IP.29 Controllable Soft Variables
The manufacturing system* should be managed with controllable soft variables: digital, electrical, pneumatic.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
The manufacturing system* should be divided into various parts, existing and new, with various controllable functionalities.
IP.28 Mechanics Substitution
The movement of the manufacturing system* should be automated and fully structured.

Another example, Challenge for Chimpanzee: Improve the extraction of termites underground, OBJECT S1: Chimpanzee's Hand, moving, OBJECT S2: Termite Nest, stationary, see more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 12.
The specific technical solution of using a flexible rod to insert into an underground termite nest for termite extraction is deduced from the contradiction to improve the shorter length of the finger (Par.3 Length of moving object) and attenuate the lower adaptability to the variability of the underground termite nest location (Par. 35). The contradiction Par.[-3,-35] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[14,15,1,16]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
Chimpanzee's Hand* should use a curved shape.
IP.15 Dynamics
Chimpanzee's Hand* should use a rod from the environment to improve the dynamics of termite extraction.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
Chimpanzee's Hand* should be divided into two parts: hand and extraction rod.
IP.16 Partial or Excessive Actions
Chimpanzee's Hand* should insert the rod a little more or a little less to extract termites.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix,7.93% of the identified contradictions contain the operative inventive principle No. 16.

a. Add or remove physical dimensions or fields of action of OBJECT S1.
b. Move OBJECT S1 to a new dimension in space or performance field.
c. Use for OBJECT S1 multi-story arrangement of objects instead of a single-story arrangement.
d. Tilt or re-orient OBJECT S1; lay it on its side.
e. Use another side of a given dimension or field of OBJECT S1.
Separation principle: Separation in space.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes ; Improve performance; Improve the 7 quality factors(**); Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests acting on the fields of dimension or energy to achieve innovation.
Creating the Telegraph Challenge: Improve long-distance oral message communication, OBJECT S1: Oral Message, moving, OBJECT S2: Receiver, stationary, see more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 13.
To improve productivity in long-distance oral message communication (Par. 39 Productivity) and reduce the lower message intensity reaching the receiver due to environmental interferences (Par. 18 Emission intensity), the contradiction Par. [+39, -18] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[26,17,19,1]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.26 Copying/ Replicating
Create a replica of the Oral Message*.
IP.17 Another Dimension or Field
Transfer the Oral Message* to another technological dimension for transmission.
IP.19 Time-Varying Action/ Periodic or Pulsating
Transform the Oral Message* using time-varying pulses.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
Divide the Oral Message* into various pulses of different functionality or meaning.

Another example with the same previous case, to avoid harmful environmental effects that limit the communication of oral messages (Par. 30 Object-affected harmful factors) and maintain a greater distance to the receiver of the oral message without interference (Par. 3 Length of moving object), the contradiction Par. [+30, +3] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP. [17,1,39,4]:
IP.17 Another Dimension or Field
- Transfer the Oral Message* to another technological dimension for transmission.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
- Divide the Oral Message* into various pulses of different functionality or meaning.
IP.39 Inert Atmosphere / Environment
- Change the message transmission to an environment inert to environmental variations.
IP.4 Asymmetry/ Symmetry
- Divide the Oral Message* into asymmetric pulses that allow distinguishing letters and words.
In this way, the telegraph was invented, creating Morse code and electrical signal transmission.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix,6.87% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No. 17.

a. Cyclically move OBJECT S1 with energies that activate it.
b. Cause OBJECT S1 to oscillate or vibrate. Increase its frequency (even up to the ultrasonic). Use the resonant frequency of OBJECT S1. If necessary, reduce the frequency.
c. Use vibration-generating fields in, or for, OBJECT S1 instead of mechanical vibration generators. Combine sources of oscillations (e.g., ultrasonic, and electromagnetic).
Separation principle: Separation in time.
Solution strategy: Improve the 7 quality factors(**).
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests applying vibrations or cyclic energetic variations to achieve innovation.
This example can be found in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 6, which addresses the challenge of an OBJECT S1, stationary: Stripping Robot, which, when stripping off OBJECT S2, moving: copper sheets deposited on a titanium plate, damages them because they are firmly attached. To improve the robot's weaker stripping strength (Par.14 Strength / Resistance) and attenuate the lower stripping force (Par.10 Force/ Intensity), we apply the contradiction Par.[-14,-10], considering the following inventive principles IP.[10,18,3,14]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.10. Preliminary Action
- To improve the efficiency of the stripping robot's operation, a preliminary stripping action is required.
IP.18 Mechanical Vibrations/ Energy Variations
- Vibrations must be applied during preliminary stripping action to facilitate the Stripping Robot*'s operation.
IP.3 Local Quality
- During the preliminary stripping action, the vibration should be applied in a localized manner to facilitate the stripping Robot*'s operation.
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- During the preliminary stripping action, the vibration should be applied in a localized manner, just below the upper edge of the sheet. This will create a slight angled separation from the plate to facilitate the stripping Robot*'s operation.

Another example, Improve the service of hot coffee in a plastic cup that burns the customers. OBJECT S1: Plastic cup, moving, OBJECT S2: Customers, moving, see more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 1.
To improve the higher loss of hot coffee sales due to serving in a Plastic Cup (Par. 23 Loss of substance) and reduce the longer time to make a sale (Par. 25 Loss of Time), the contradiction Par. [+23, +25] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP. [15,18,35,10]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.15 Dynamics
Improve the dynamics of relative movement between the plastic cup* and customers, using a flexible sheet available in the environment to cover the hot cup.
IP.18 Mechanical Vibrations/Energy Variations Move the Plastic Cup* cyclically between the delivery point and the customer to minimize the requirement for thermal protection of the flexible sheet covering the cup.
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
Transform the plastic cup* to make it more flexible to handle.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix,13.06% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No. 18.

a. Instead of using continuous action in, or for, OBJECT S1, use time-varying, periodic, or pulsating actions.
b. If the action of OBJECT S1 is already periodic, change the periodic magnitude or frequency.
c. Use pauses between impulses to perform a different action of OBJECT S1.
d. If the current action of OBJECT S1 is time-varying, and if necessary, change to an action higher or lesser time-varying.
Separation principle: Separation in time.
Solution strategy: Improve performance.
Type: Strategic inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests applying actions that vary over time to achieve innovation.
Challenge for the imagined case of a primitive man who wants to travel to Mars using a wooden platform and spring found in the forest to propel himself. OBJECT S1, moving: Marsnaut, and Object S2, stationary: Earth and its gravity, see more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 4.
To improve the Marsnaut's susceptibility to harmful factors such as falls and impacts (Par.22 Loss of Energy) and maintain the required ease of change (Par.34 Ease of change, repair or maintain), we apply the contradiction Par.[+22,+34], considering the following inventive principles IP.[2,19,0,0]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- A new propeller should be added to the Marsnaut* to improve its lifting speed.
IP.19 Time-Varying Action/ Periodic or Pulsating
- An action that acts in stages should be applied to Marsnaut*, for example, a propulsion system with fuel, see example (See ref.10),

(ref.10) The need for propulsion indicated in the previous solution is obtained with the contradiction to improve the heaviness of the Marsnaut (Par.1) and attenuate the lower flight speed in the current situation (Par.9). Contradiction Par.[1,9] is applied, which considers the following inventive principles PI.[2,8,15,38]. The specific application is shown below:
PI.2 Remove / Add
- An object must be added to the Mars-naut* to improve its lift rate.
PI.8 Counterweight / Compensation
- The Mars-naut*'s lower thrust must be compensated for to achieve a higher speed.
PI.15 Dynamics
- The dynamic characteristics of the Mars-naut*'s propulsion system must be allowed to change to find an optimal operating condition.
PI.38 Strong or Fast Reactions
Strong reactions must be applied to boost flight, for example, a fuel-oxygen reaction.

Another example, creating the Telegraph Challenge: Improve long-distance oral message communication, OBJECT S1: Oral Message, moving, OBJECT S2: Receiver, stationary, see more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 13.
To improve productivity in long-distance oral message communication (Par. 39 Productivity) and reduce the lower message intensity reaching the receiver due to environmental interferences (Par. 18 Emission intensity), the contradiction Par. [+39, -18] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[26,17,19,1]. The specific application is shown below:
Improve long-distance oral message communication, OBJECT S1: Oral message, mobile, OBJECT S2: Receiver, stationary, see more details in the link Resolved Cases, Case No. 13.
To improve productivity in oral message communication (Par. 39) and mitigate the lower intensity of the message reaching the receiver due to environmental interference (Par. 18), contradiction Par.[+39,-18] is applied, which considers the following inventive principles PI.[26,17,19,1]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.26 Copying/ Replicating
Create a replica of the Oral Message*.
IP.17 Another Dimension or Field
Transfer the Oral Message* to another technological dimension for transmission.
IP.19 Time-Varying Action/ Periodic or Pulsating
Transform the Oral Message* using time-varying pulses.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
Divide the Oral Message* into various pulses of different functionality or meaning.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 12.66% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No. 19.

a. Make sure work is carried on continuously with OBJECT S1.
b. Make all parts of OBJECT S1 work at full load, all the time.
c. Eliminate all idle or intermittent actions or work of OBJECT S1.
Separation principle: Separation in time.
Solution strategy: Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
Type: Operative inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests ensuring the useful continuity of action to achieve innovation.
Improving the service of hot coffee in a plastic cup to customers. OBJECT S1: Plastic Cup, OBJECT S2: Customer, see more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 1.
To improve the heaviness of the plastic cup due to hot coffee (Par. 1 Heaviness of moving object) and reduce the time loss for selling (Par. 25), the contradiction Par. [1, 25] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP. [10, 35, 20, 28]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.10. Preliminary Action
Anticipate changes to the Plastic Cup*.
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
Transform the plastic cup* to make it more adaptable to the customer.
IP.20 Continuity of Useful Action
Ensure that the mobility conditions of the plastic cup* are continuous.
IP.28 Mechanics Substitution
Change the mechanical action of the plastic cup, moving from manual to one that uses a tool: a flexible sheet.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 1.52% of the identified contradictions contain the operative inventive principle No. 20.

a. Make sure that with OBJECT S1, the process, or certain stages (e.g., destructible, harmful, or hazardous operations), are conducted at high speed or for a minimum time or magnitude of risk exposure for OBJECT S1.
b. Eventually, skip certain process stages OBJECT S1.
Separation principle: Separation in time.
Solution strategy: Improve performance.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests minimizing exposure to risk or avoiding it to achieve innovation.
Example, Challenge to unground a cargo ship in the Suez Canal: Improve conditions for ungrounding a grounded cargo ship due to low tide and poor visibility. OBJECT S1: Cargo ship, moving, OBJECT S2: Bottom of the Suez Canal, stationary, see more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 14.
The Cargo Ship has difficulty being ungrounded due to its enormous size and weight. To improve the heaviness of the Cargo Ship (Par. 1 Heaviness of moving object) and attenuate the harmful factors affecting it from being ungrounded (Par. 30 Object-affected harmful factors), the contradiction Par. [1, 30] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP. [22, 21, 18, 27]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.22 Convert harm to benefit
Use harmful factors to achieve a positive effect on the grounded cargo ship, in this case, taking advantage of the rising tide.
IP.21 Skipping/ Avoiding
Ensure that the process of ungrounding the cargo ship is carried out at high speed or for a minimal time or magnitude of exposure to risk.
IP.18 Mechanical Vibrations/ Energy Variations
Support the process of ungrounding the cargo ship by cyclically pushing it with tugboats.
IP.27 Cheap Short-Living Objects.
Divide the cargo ship into low-cost parts to be unloaded, reducing the weight to be ungrounded.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 2.97% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No. 21.

a. Use harmful factors, or external effects related to harmful factors, for OBJECT S1 (particularly, effects of the environment or surroundings) to achieve a positive effect with OBJECT S1.
b. Attenuate a harmful primary action by adding another action to OBJECT S1, which counteracts the harmful action to minimize its impact.
c. Amplify a harmful factor or a part of OBJECT S1, to such a degree that it is no longer harmful.
Separation principle: Integration in supersystem.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes ; Improve performance; Improve the 7 quality factors(**); Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection.
Type: Strategic inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests relying on the same source or action that causes harm to achieve innovation.
Example, Challenge: Unblocking a Cargo Ship in the Suez Canal. Improve conditions to unblock a Cargo Ship stranded due to low tide and poor visibility. OBJECT S1: Cargo Ship, OBJECT S2: Bottom of the Suez Canal, see more details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 14.
The cargo ship faces difficulty in getting unblocked from bottom due to its large size and weight. To improve the heaviness of the Cargo Ship (Par.1 Heaviness of moving object) and attenuate the harmful factors affecting it in the unblocking process (Par.30 Object-affected harmful factors), the contradiction Par. [1, 30] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP. [22, 21, 18, 27]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.22 Convert harm to benefit
Use harmful factors to achieve a positive effect on the stranded Cargo Ship*, in this case, by taking advantage of the rising tide.
IP.21 Skipping/ Avoiding
Ensure that the process to unblock the Cargo Ship* is carried out at high speed or for a minimal time or level of risk exposure.
IP.18 Mechanical Vibrations/ Energy Variations
Support the process to unblock the Cargo Ship* by cyclically pushing it with tugboats.
IP.27 Cheap Short-Living Objects
Divide the Cargo Ship* into low-cost parts that can be unloaded, thus reducing the weight to be unblocked.

In March 2021, the Ever Given cargo ship blocked the Suez Canal for six days. The inventive principles mentioned above succinctly describe how the cargo ship was unblocked.
Another example, Challenge: Estonia Ferry Stability. Improve the stability conditions of the Estonia Ferry affected by the entry of water into the cargo space. OBJECT S1: Cargo Space, stationary concerning the Ferry, OBJECT S2: Ferry, stationary concerning the Cargo Space. For more details, see the solved cases link, Case No. 15.
The Cargo Space has difficulty controlling the impact of the water entering it, due to the failure of the inspection door, which destabilizes it, causing the Ferry to overturn. To improve the greater weight of the Cargo Space due to water ingress (Par.1) and attenuate the harmful factors affecting it (Par.30), we apply the contradiction Par.[+1,+30], considering the following inventive principles IP.[35,22,1,39]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.35 Segmenting/ Integrating
The composition or condition of the Cargo Space* must be changed by adding or removing parts or components.
IP.22 Convert harm to benefit
It is necessary to incorporate elements that counteract the harmful action caused by water entering to the Cargo Space*. In this situation, it is recommended to fill the empty spaces with airbags or foam to prevent water from destabilizing the Cargo Space*, thereby avoiding instability in the Ferry that leads to capsizing.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
The Cargo Space* should be divided into distint functions: spaces for cargo and empty spaces for filling, so that water does not accumulate.
IP.39 Inert Atmosphere / Environment
A protected inert environment must be created to manage water ingress.

Note: This solution is feasible but not the least costly when compared to the redesign of the locking pin, as seen in IP.4 and others. Case N°7 presents a more efficient solution that improves the inspection door locking mechanism of the cargo space on the Ferry.


The Estonia Ferry case serves as a prime illustration that an innovation challenge can yield various solutions contingent on the object pair and the context in which they are evaluated. It is worthwhile to invest the effort in evaluating diverse object pairings, even considering the possibility of reversing the objects, with either of them potentially being designated as Object S1. Pondering and evaluating are efficient processes. Nature's L.I. offers speed and focus to achieve solutions with minimal cost and maximum benefit-to-cost ratio.
In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 6.73% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No. 22.

a. To interact with OBJECT S1, introduce feedback (referring to cross-checking) to improve a process or action.
b. If feedback with OBJECT S1, is already being used, change its magnitude or influence.
Separation principle: Integration in supersystem.
Solution strategy: Improve performance.
Type: Operative inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests taking action based on measurements or perceptions associated with the evaluated object to achieve innovation.
For example, when inventing the mobile phone, the challenge was to improve communication with a distant person from a landline phone. Object S1: Landline Phone, stationary. Object S2: Receiver, stationary. For more details, refer to the link for solved cases, Case No. 16.
To prevent the loss of information due to a distant Receiver (Par. 24 Loss of Information) and maintain communication productivity with the Receiver (Par. 39 Productivity), we apply the contradiction Par. [+24, +39], considering the following inventive principles: IP.[13, 23, 15, 0]. IP.13 Inverse or Indirect Action:
Apply an indirect action to perform the current function of the Landline Phone*: First, communication to an antenna, then to a mobile phone, and finally to the person receiving the call.
IP.23 Feedback:
For reliable landline phone communication, introduce feedback, in this case, by applying continuous contact between the antenna and the mobile phone.
IP.15 Dynamics: Divide the communication system of the landline phone* into parts capable of having relative movement between them, in this case, a fixed antenna and a mobile phone.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 2.81% of the identified contradictions contain the operative inventive principle No. 23.

a. for OBJECT S1, use an intermediary carrier article or intermediary process.
b. Merge OBJECT S1 temporarily with another object (which can be easily removed or removed by itself).
Separation principle: Separation in space.
Solution strategy: Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests supporting the evaluated object with additional intermediary objects or functions to achieve innovation.
For example, in the Trojan Horse challenge: Improving the Greeks' entry into Troy, hindered by the defensive barrier, Object S1: Greeks, moving, Object S2: Troy's defensive barrier, stationary. For more details, refer to the link for solved cases, Case No. 17.
To improve the Greeks' reliability (Par. 27) in entering Troy and preserve their adaptability (Par. 35) to Troy's defensive barrier, the contradiction Par.[+27,+35] is applied, we apply the contradiction IP.[13,35,8,24]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.13. Inverse or Indirect Action
The Greeks* must enter Troy indirectly, under different conditions, for example, hidden.
IP.35. Transformation / Parameter Change
The Greeks* will achieve this by altering their physical state (IP.35) changing its composition using new components.
IP.8 Counterbalance / Compensation
The horse, revered by the Trojans, will compensate for the Greeks'* weakness in entering Troy.
IP.24 Intermediary
The Trojans must use an intermediary carrier, such as a large horse, to conceal the Greek warriors and that they can easily get out of.

Another example, the Brain Medicine Challenge: Improving the entry of medicine into the brain hindered by the blood-brain barrier. Object S1: Medicine, moving. Object S2: Brain's blood-brain barrier, stationary. For more details, refer to the link for solved cases, Case No. 18.
To improve the reliability of Medicine (Par. 27) in entering the brain and preserve its adaptability (Par. 35) to the brain's blood-brain barrier, the contradiction Par. [+27, +35] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP. [13, 35, 8, 24]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.13 Inverse or Indirect Action
Medicine* must enter the brain indirectly, under different conditions, hidden.
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
Medicine* will achieve this by altering its physical state (IP.35), changing its composition using new components.
IP.8 Anti-Weight/ Compensation
Sugar, the brain's nourishment, will compensate for the medicine's* weakness in entering the brain.
IP.24 Intermediary
Medicine* must use a intermediary carrier, such as a sugar coating, to cover the components of the medicine* and be easily absorbed.

These two cases demonstrate that nature 'knows': for the same problem, the same solution. The story of the Trojan Horse is part of Greek mythology and has not been conclusively proven to be a historical fact. However, the Language of Nature's Innovation demonstrates that it was the best solution for conquering Troy, and surprisingly, it's the same generic solution applied centuries later to deliver medicine to the brain affected by the blood-brain barrier. Remember, solutions repeat, they repeat.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 7.38% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No. 24.

a. Make OBJECT S1 serve itself by performing helpful auxiliary functions.
b. Use resources, energy or substances that are wasted or unused by OBJECT S1.
c. Incorporate resources and/or functions into OBJECT S1 for self-service during operation.
Separation principle: Separation in subsystem / Separation alternative.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes ; Improve performance; Improve the 7 quality factors(**); Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection.
Type: Operative inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests that the evaluated object provides itself with functions or services through self-service using its own resources or other aggregates to achieve innovation.
For example, improving the nutrition of a Sea Squirt's larva attached headfirst to a rock. Object S1: Larva, stationary. Object S2: Seawater, moving. For more details, refer to the link for solved cases, Case No. 2.
To improve the larva's heaviness due to being headfirst attached to the rock (Par. 2 Heaviness of stationary object) and attenuate the difficulty of finding food in seawater (Par. 37 Difficulty of detecting and measuring), the contradiction Par.[+2,+37] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[25,28,17,15]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.25 Self-service
The Larva* provides itself self-service, which involves the use of siphons, see IP.15.
IP.28 Mechanics Substitution
The larva* should use siphons as a tool to capture seawater with food and then expel water with waste.
IP.17 Another Dimension or Field
The larva* should use a multi-array of siphons.
IP.15 Dynamics The larva* should generate relative movement among the siphons themselves.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 3.93% of the identified contradictions contain the operative inventive principle No. 25.

This contradiction is not among the up to 8 contradictions selected by the Aatrizinventor algorithm as part of the recommended solution. However, the algorithm suggests its evaluation because inventive principle No. 25 ranks among the top three in terms of incidence or relevance (Table VIII) and is not included in the recommended solution.

a. Instead of using OBJECT S1, or any of its unavailable, expensive, fragile parts or properties, use simpler and inexpensive copies or replicates to perform the desired function and, if possible, do so with improved characteristics and properties, while disregarding the harmful, undesirable, or unnecessary ones.
b. Imitate OBJECT S1, or any of its parts or properties, leveraging the relevant available environment.
c. If simple copies, or replicates are already being used, apply copies, or replicates of a higher level or technical complexity.
d. Imitate or replicate OBJECT S1, taking advantage of the relevant available environment.
Separation principle: Separation in space.
Solution strategy: Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
Type: Strategic inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests copying or replicating the evaluated object, adding new functions and parts or completely replacing it with new functions to achieve innovation.
For example, in a case of innovation by imposition, the challenge is set to manufacture the Best Car in the World without design compromises. Object S1: Car Manufacturing System, moving, Object S2: New Model of Car, moving. For details, refer to the link for solved cases, Case No. 8.:
To improve the current high production cost (Par. 1 Heaviness of moving object), with a large workforce, and reduce the complexity of the manufacturing system (Par. 36 Complexity of Device/Action), the contradiction Par. [+1,+36] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP. [26,30,36,34]. The specific application is shown below: IP.26 Copying/ Replicating
- Instead of using the Car Manufacturing System* or any of its parts or properties, which may not be available, expensive, and/or fragile, it is recommended to use simpler and more cost-effective copies or replicas to fulfill the desired function, and if possible, with improved features and properties for the Car Manufacturing System*. Harmful, unwanted, or unnecessary features should be discarded. For example, a robotic system can be used.
IP.30 Simple Shapes/ Ways to Interact
- For the Car Manufacturing System*, instead of employing complex three-dimensional structures that involve a higher number of components, shapes, and workers, it is recommended to use new resources such as predominantly one-dimensional and flexible objects, like robotic arms.
IP.36 Phase, State or Condition Transitions
- Deriving an advantage from the phenomena that occur during changes in the state, dimension, or condition of the Car Manufacturing System* to influence the interaction and control of car manufacturing through a robotic system.
IP.34 Discarding and Recovering
- The above recommendations should be applied to facilitate the operation of a Car Manufacturing System* cycle and, once completed, apply it again. For example, manufacturing circuits should be used.

Another example can be found in the link to Solved Cases, Case N°7, which deals with the challenge of OBJECT S1, moving: Locking Pin operating in the inspection hatch door of the ferry Estonia, suffering damage during its interaction with OBJECT S2, moving: Male-female parts of the mechanism. To improve or preserve the lower operational strength of the Locking Pin (Par.14 Strength/Resistance) and attenuate the slower relative speed between the locking pin* and male-female parts due to jamming, causing wear (Par.9 Speed), we apply the contradiction Par.[-14,-9], considering the following inventive principles IP.[8,13,26,14]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.8 Anti-Weight/ Compensation
- Interaction between the Locking Pin* and the male-female parts should be compensated to make it as non-damaging as possible.
IP.13 Inverse or Indirect Action
- The condition of interaction between the Locking Pin* and the male-female parts should be inverted (changed).
IP.26 Copying/ Replicating
- A functional replica of the original Locking Pin* should be designed to minimize harmful effects. It is deduced below that it changes from cylindrical to conical.
IP.14 Spheroidality - Curvature - Angle
- Angular shapes, like a cone, should be used on the Locking Pin* to minimize relative movement between the pin and the male-female parts during operation and enable quick detachment during extraction.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 11.22% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No. 26.

a. Replace or divide (either fully or partially) OBJECT S1 or its action with multiple inexpensive or short-living objects, actions, or sub-parts, which compress or simplify its characteristics and properties, and/or are limited but sufficient to achieve the desired objective.
b. Compress certain qualities of OBJECT S1 (e.g., the degree of participation, complexity, or lifetime), with no loss of functionality, to achieve the desired objective.
Separation principle: Separation in subsystem.
Solution strategy: Improve the 7 quality factors(**).
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection.
Type: Strategic inventive principle.

Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests dividing the evaluated object or its action into multiple low-cost, short-living objects to achieve innovation.
For example, these days, it explains major developments, such as digital computing, nanotechnology, and the use of particles that appear in transient phenomena.
It particularly highlights one with significant relevance today, which is artificial intelligence. The Language of Nature's Innovation deduces it from the need for learning from vast amounts of information, which entails a significant workload. This is resolved by using three of the 1248 TRIZ contradictions that address innovation challenges.
These three contradictions are the only ones where the following innovation parameters coincide to replace human action with digital activity for the analysis of vast and variable information:
Par. 26 Copy or replicate, which imitates the human action of analysis through a digital machine.
Par. 27 Inexpensive Short-living Objects, which divides the large volume of information for analysis by a person into many data bits.
Par. 28 Substitution of mechanics, which replaces human analytical mechanics with digital algorithms.

The referenced contradictions for analyzing vast amounts of information are as follows:

a) Contradiction:
Improve More workload or heaviness to identify information accurately and mitigate the lower precision or accuracy of current measurements for critical precision services. Examples: facial recognition, voice language, etc.
Evaluated Object S1: Person who must detect information accurately
Evaluated Object S2: Source of voluminous information to analyze
Solution to improve (+) 1. Heaviness of mobile object and attenuate (-) 28. Measurement accuracy, considers the following inventive principles IP. [28, 27, 35, 26].

b) Contradiction:
Improve the difficulty of detecting or measuring behavior or patterns and mitigate the heaviness or workload. Examples: customer behavior, consumption, processes, etc.
Evaluated Object S1: Person who must detect relevant information
Evaluated Object S2: Source of voluminous information to analyze
Solution to improve (+) 37. Difficulty of detecting or measuring and mitigate (+) 1. Heaviness of mobile object: Inventive principles [27,26,28,13].

c) Contradiction: Improve the ease of achieving the desired outcome and preserve the efficient use of energy. Examples: industrial process productivity, labor force performance, etc.
Evaluated Object S1: Person managing productivity
Evaluated Object S2: Source of voluminous information to manage
Solution to improve (+) 32. Ease of achieving the desired outcome and preserve (+) 1. Energy use of mobile object: Inventive principles [28,26,27,1].

The interpretation of a contradiction depends on the context in which it is analyzed; therefore, the previous contradictions will correspond to an application of artificial intelligence, as long as they are combined with a larger volume of information to be analyzed by a person, which involves using the innovation parameters Par.7. Volume of mobile object or Par.8. Volume of stationary object. Additionally, in each specific case, there may be other undesirable effects that need to be considered to obtain a comprehensive solution.

Considering the above, the following is a challenge formulation for facial recognition, which leads to the application of artificial intelligence.

Facial Recognition Case
To improve facial recognition, where Object S1: Facial identification inspector interacts with Object S2: Multi-dimensional-faced individual. For more details, refer to the link for solved cases, Case No. 19.
Object S1 has the following undesirable effects:
Par.1 Heaviness of moving object: Increased weight due to the workload of facial identification for many individuals throughout the day.
Par.7 More volume of moving object: Increased volume of visual information to process for precise facial identification throughout the day.
Par.11 Stress/pressure: Elevated work-related stress due to the workload of facial identification for many individuals throughout the day.
Par.12 Shape/Composition/Configuration: Less suitable shape for facial identification of many individuals throughout the day.
Par.24 Loss of information: More information loss due to details that go unobserved in the facial identification of many individuals throughout the day.
Par.28 Measurement accuracy: Reduced precision in facial identification of many individuals throughout the day.
Par.35 Adaptability or variability: Diminished adaptability to the variability of the individuals to be identified throughout the day.
To improve facial recognition, the following desirable effect has been selected for the facial identification inspector:
Par.19 Energy use of moving object: More efficient use of energy by the facial identification inspector.

The application of the Aatrizinventor algorithm allows for the selection, based on the sensitivity analysis it provides, of an optimal combination of innovation parameters and their corresponding contradictions to provide a solution to the analyzed challenge.
The selected undesirable effects are as follows:
Par.1 Heaviness of moving object
Par.11 Pressure/ Tension
Par.28 Measurement accuracy
Par.35 Adaptability or Versatility

The selected desirable effect is: Par.19 Use of energy by moving object
This selection ranks second among the 10 recommendations provided by the sensitivity analysis.

The algorithm selects a solution that considers 8 contradictions. For more details, refer to the link for solved cases, Case No. 19. The essential contradiction of the evaluated case is IP.[35,5,1,10], which states:
The physical state of Evaluated Object S1, the Facial Identification Inspector (IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes), must be transformed
by merging it with another object that facilitates the achievement of the desired goal (IP.5 Merging/Separating), in this case, a facial identification system based on artificial intelligence that is mentioned in the recommended complementary contradiction No. 3.
Object S1 must be segmented into two parts, Inspector and indicated AI, adding new functions (IP.1 Segmenting/Integrating),
and finally, the required changes must be made in advance (IP.10 Preliminary Action)

Complementary contradiction No. 3 allows for the recommendation of artificial intelligence, where the contradiction Par. [+1, -28] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP. [26, 30, 36, 34], which state:
IP.28 Mechanics Substitution
Replace the current identification mechanics that use the natural visual field of the Facial Identification Inspector* with a digital optical field for a high-resolution image sensor, with the capability to process and validate the captured information.
27. Cheap Short-Living Objects
Replace the identification mode of the Facial Identification Inspector* with multiple low-cost and easy-to process and validate digital vision objects that simplify the action of the Facial Identification Inspector*, sufficient to achieve the desired outcome.
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
Replace the identification mode of the Facial Identification Inspector* with multiple low-cost and easy-to process and validate digital vision objects that simplify the action of the Facial Identification Inspector*, sufficient to achieve the desired outcome.
IP.26 Copying/ Replicating
- Instead of using the Facial Identification Inspector or any of its parts or properties, which may not be available, be expensive and/or fragile, it is recommended to use simpler and more economical copies or replicas to fulfill the desired function, and if possible, with improved features and properties for accurate information detection. Harmful, unwanted, or unnecessary characteristics should be discarded. In this case, facial identification with imprecise natural vision is replaced by a digital application of artificial intelligence.

Another example of inventive principle No. 27 can be found in the link for solved cases, Case No. 7, which addresses the challenge of Object S1: Locking pin operating in the locking mechanism of the inspection hatch of the loading door of the Estonia ferry, which experiences damage in its interaction with Object S2: Male-female parts of the mechanism.
To improve the lower operating strength of the Locking Pin* (Par.14 Strength/Resistance) and preserve the ease of changing the Locking Pin* (Par.34 Ease of change, repair, or maintain), the contradiction Par.[14,9] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[27,11,3,0]. The specific application is shown below:
27. Inexpensive or Short-lived Objects
The Locking Pin* should be replaced with multiple low-cost objects or subparts. Supported by other contradictions associated with this case, the pin* is changed from a cylindrical shape to a conical shape. Here, a cone is understood as a piece composed of multiple conical parts of different diameters that together form a cone (this is a good example of relational thinking, which has no limits except for your paradigms).
IP.11 Beforehand Cushioning
The conical shape of the Locking Pin* allows for beforehand compensation of the undesirable effects that are anticipated to occur if the damaged pin is replaced again with a cylindrical one.
IP.3 Local Quality
The pin* must be modified in a localized manner by changing its shape from uniform to non-uniform, from cylindrical to conical.

a. Replace a direct or manual action in or for OBJECT S1 with a mechanical action or a tool.
b. Replace a mechanical means in or for OBJECT S1 with sensory (optical, acoustic, vibration, taste, smell, feelings, or other sensory fields) means.
c. Use mechanical, pneumatic, hydraulic, electric, magnetic, electromagnetic, chemical, biological, psychological, or other fields to improve the action of OBJECT S1.
d. Change from static fields in or for OBJECT S1 to moving fields, from unstructured fields to those with structure, or vice versa.
e. Use fields in conjunction with field-activated parts, components, or particles (e.g., a magnetic field and ferromagnetic particles) in or for OBJECT S1.
Separation principle: Separation by condition.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes.
Type: Strategic inventive principle.

Applications:
This principle presents the stages of evolution of mechanics to generate action or movement of an object evaluated to achieve innovation. This ranges from using a tool or mechanism—Archimedes' "Give me a lever and I'll move the world"—to all forms of generating movement or propulsion that humans have applied. It also includes the use of sensory activators and the application of soft actions, such as the use of digital fields that analyze voluminous information, such as artificial intelligence.

Example, Challenge: manufacture the Best Car in the World without design compromises, OBJECT S1: Automobile Manufacturing System, OBJECT S2: New Car Model see details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 8.
To improve the least appropriate form of industrial-scale automobile manufacturing with a large number of workers (Par. 12) and mitigate the impact of the complexity of the tasks being performed (Par. 36), contradiction Par. [12, 36] is applied, which considers the following inventive principles PI. [16, 29, 1, 28]. The specific application is shown below:
PI.16 Partial or Excessive Actions
- The manufacturing system* must be adjustable, a little more, a little less.
PI.29 Controllable Soft Variables
- The manufacturing system* must be managed with controllable soft variables: digital, electrical, pneumatic.
PI.1 Segment / Integrate
- The manufacturing system* must be divided into various existing and moving parts, with different controllable functionalities.
PI.28 Mechanical Replacement
- The manufacturing system* movement must be automated and fully structured.

Another example, Children's Toy Challenge: Design the best toy for children affected by the designer's paradigms, OBJECT S1: Designer, OBJECT S2: Children. See more details at the link. From Resolved Cases, Case No. 9.
To improve the Designer's burden due to his paradigms (Par. 1) and to mitigate the Designer's difficulty in detecting what the Children want (Par. 37), contradiction Par.[1,37] is applied, which considers the following inventive principles PI.[28,29,26,32]. The specific application is shown below:
PI.28 Replacing Mechanics
- The mechanics of the Designer*'s interaction with children should be improved, using sensory media, psychological approaches, and digital tools (software and computer applications) to capture children's desires.
PI.29 Controllable Soft Variables
- The Designer*'s interaction with children should be controlled with soft variables, such as social, psychological, and digital variables.
PI.26 Copy/Replicate
- A replica or copy of the Designer* should be used to interact with children, such as a costume, acting out games, images, and videos, etc.
PI.32 Changing Perception/Appearance/Color
- The Designer should be perceived in a more user-friendly way.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 18.35% of the identified contradictions contain strategic inventive principle No. 28.

IP.29 Controllable Soft Variables
The Designer's interaction with Children* should be controlled using soft variables, such as social, psychological, and digital elements.
IP.26 Copying/ Replicating
A replica or copy of the Designer* should be used to interact with Children, like a costume, acting through games, images, and videos, etc.
IP.32 Perception/ Appearance/ Color Changes
The Designer should be perceived in a more friendly manner.
In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 18.35% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No. 28.

a. Use external, controllable soft variables (manual, physical, mechanical, pneumatic, hydraulic, electrical, magnetic, electromagnetic, digital, chemical, biological, social, psychological, etc.) to interact with OBJECT S1, facilitating the goal fulfillment of the function performed with Object S2.
b. Make it easier for OBJECT S1 to interact with Object S2 using internal, controllable soft variables (manual, physical, mechanical, pneumatic, hydraulic, electrical, magnetic, electromagnetic, digital, chemical, biological, social, psychological, etc.) available in S1 and/or S2, facilitating goal fulfillment.
Separation principle: Separation in time.
Solution strategy: Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.

Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests the use of low-energy fields that are manipulable or controllable to facilitate interactions for innovation.
Example, Challenge: Get the Farmer to move a reluctant Animal, OBJECT S1: Farmer, OBJECT S2: Animal, see more details in the link for solved cases, Case No. 5.
To improve the reliability of the Farmer* (Par.27 Reliability) and preserve productivity (Par.39 Productivity) to move an animal, the contradiction Par. [+27,+39] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[1,35,29,38]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
The Farmer* must be divided into existing and new parts with different functions.
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
The Farmer* must transform to interact with the Animal.
IP.29 Controllable Soft Variables
The Farmer* must motivate the Animal to walk using soft variables, such as the incentive to eat.
IP.38 Strong and/or Fast Reactions
The food will generate a strong reaction in the Animal to start walking.

Another example, Challenge to manufacture the Best Car in the World without design compromises, OBJECT S1: Car Manufacturing System, moving, OBJECT S2: New Car Model, moving, see details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 9.
To improve the less appropriate shape of industrial-scale car manufacturing with a large workforce (Par. 12 Shape/ composition/ configuration) and attenuate the impact of the greater complexity of the tasks performed (Par. 36 Complexity of Device/ Action), the contradiction Par.[-12,+36] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[16,29,1,28]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.16 Partial or Excessive Actions
The manufacturing system* should be adjustable, a little more, a little less.
IP.29 Controllable Soft Variables
The manufacturing system* should be managed with controllable soft variables: digital, electrical, pneumatic.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
The manufacturing system* should be divided into different parts, existing and new, with various controllable functionalities.
IP.28 Mechanics Substitution
The movement of the manufacturing system* should be automated and fully structured.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 9.46% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No. 29.

a. Use flexible rods and ropes, or another one-dimensional functionality, or shells and thin films, or another two-dimensional functionality, for Object S1, instead of complex three-dimensional structures, in type and number of components and shapes.
b. Separate/isolate Object S1 from the external environment with simple shapes, using flexible rods and ropes, or another one-dimensional functionality, or shells and thin films, or another two-dimensional functionality.
c. Use in or for Object S1 simple forms or ways of interaction with object S2, instead of complex forms and ways, or in number and type of actions to achieve desired objective.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests that the evaluated object should use simple forms to interact, one-dimensional or two-dimensional.
For example, let's review a contradiction in the case of serving hot coffee in a plastic cup to a customer, OBJECT S1: Plastic Cup, OBJECT S2: Customer, see more details in the link for solved cases, Case No. 1.
to improve service stability (Par.13 Stability) and preserve adaptability to the Customer (Par. 35), which is also shown in Case No. 1. Contradiction Par.[+13,+35] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[35,30,34,2]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
- The Plastic Cup* must transform its physical state to adapt to the Customer.
IP.30 Simple Shapes/ Ways to Interact
- By adding a flexible sheet to the Plastic Cup*.
IP.34 Discarding and Recovering
- The Plastic Cup* must use the flexible sheet and then discard it.
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- The flexible sheet is added to the Plastic Cup* as a temporary new feature.

Another example, in a case of innovation by imposition, the challenge is set to manufacture the Best Car in the World without design compromises. Object S1: Car Manufacturing System, moving, Object S2: New Model of Car, moving. For details, refer to the link for solved cases, Case No. 9.:
To improve the current high production cost (Par. 1 Heaviness of moving object), with a large workforce, and reduce the complexity of the manufacturing system (Par. 36 Complexity of Device/Action), the contradiction Par. [+1,+36] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[26,30,36,34]. The specific application is shown below: IP.26 Copying/ Replicating
- Instead of using the Car Manufacturing System* or any of its parts or properties, which may not be available, expensive, and/or fragile, it is recommended to use simpler and more cost-effective copies or replicas to fulfill the desired function, and if possible, with improved features and properties for the Car Manufacturing System*. Harmful, unwanted, or unnecessary features should be discarded. For example, a robotic system can be used.
IP.30 Simple Shapes/ Ways to Interact
- For the Car Manufacturing System*, instead of employing complex three-dimensional structures that involve a higher number of components, shapes, and workers, it is recommended to use new resources such as predominantly one-dimensional and flexible objects, like robotic arms.
IP.36 Phase, State or Condition Transitions
- Deriving an advantage from the phenomena that occur during changes in the state, dimension, or condition of the Car Manufacturing System* to influence the interaction and control of car manufacturing through a robotic system.
IP.34 Discarding and Recovering
- The above recommendations should be applied to facilitate the operation of a Car Manufacturing System* cycle and, once completed, apply it again. For example, manufacturing circuits should be used.

Another example, in a case of innovation by imposition, the challenge is set to manufacture the Best Car in the World without design compromises. Object S1: Car Manufacturing System, moving, Object S2: New Model of Car, moving. For details, refer to the link for solved cases, Case No. 9.:
To improve the current high production cost (Par. 1 Heaviness of moving object), with a large workforce, and reduce the complexity of the manufacturing system (Par. 36 Complexity of Device/Action), the contradiction Par. [+1,+36] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[26,30,36,34]. The specific application is shown below: IP.26 Copying/ Replicating
- Instead of using the Car Manufacturing System* or any of its parts or properties, which may not be available, expensive, and/or fragile, it is recommended to use simpler and more cost-effective copies or replicas to fulfill the desired function, and if possible, with improved features and properties for the Car Manufacturing System*. Harmful, unwanted, or unnecessary features should be discarded. For example, a robotic system can be used.
IP.30 Simple Shapes/ Ways to Interact
- For the Car Manufacturing System*, instead of employing complex three-dimensional structures that involve a higher number of components, shapes, and workers, it is recommended to use new resources such as predominantly one-dimensional and flexible objects, like robotic arms.
IP.36 Phase, State or Condition Transitions
- Deriving an advantage from the phenomena that occur during changes in the state, dimension, or condition of the Car Manufacturing System* to influence the interaction and control of car manufacturing through a robotic system.
IP.34 Discarding and Recovering
- The above recommendations should be applied to facilitate the operation of a Car Manufacturing System* cycle and, once completed, apply it again. For example, manufacturing circuits should be used.
IP.2 Remove / Adding
- It is recommended to separate parts or properties from the automotive manufacturing system that affect or interfere with productivity. Adjust staffing and eliminate obsolete machines.



In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 5.37% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No.30.

a. Take advantage of unused parts of OBJECT S1.
b. Remove or do not use unnecessary parts of OBJECT S1.
(e.g., make an object porous or add porous elements – inserts, coatings, etc. If an object is already porous, use the pores to introduce a useful substance or function).
Separation principle: Separation by condition.
Solution strategy: Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
Type: Operative inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests that the evaluated object should take advantage of or eliminate its own unused features or properties to achieve innovation.
An example can be found in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 1, which addresses the challenge of OBJECT S1: Plastic Cup, which has difficulty serving hot coffee to OBJECT S2: Customers. To improve the thermal heaviness of the Plastic Cup due to the hot coffee (Par.1 Heaviness of moving object) and attenuate the loss of sales caused by customer rejection due to burns on their hands (Par.23 Loss of substance), contradiction Par.[1,23] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[5,35,3,31]:
IP.5 Merging/ Separating
Merge the Plastic Cup* with another object, in this case, a curved circular sheet.
IP.35 Transformation/ Parameter Changes
This fusion transforms the Plastic Cup*.
IP.3 Local Quality
Apply a localized solution to the Plastic Cup*.
IP.31 Using/ Removing Unused Parts
Utilize the external part of the Plastic Cup*, which is available, to place a curved circular sheet.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 3.77% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No.31.

a. Change how is perceived, the appearance or shape of OBJECT S1 in relation to the object S2 with which it interacts.
b. Change the color, or appearance, of OBJECT S1 or its external environment.
c. Change the transparency of OBJECT S1 or its external environment.
Separation principle: Separation by condition.
Solution strategy: Improving if a solution has not yet emerged,
Type: Strategic inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests changing the features or properties of the evaluated object to provide it with a new perception to achieve innovation.
Example, Challenge: Design the best toy for children affected by Designer's paradigms, OBJECT S1: Designer, OBJECT S2: Children, see more details in the link for solved cases, Case No. 9.
To improve the Designer's heaviness due to their paradigms (Par.1 Heaviness of moving object) and attenuate the Designer's difficulty in detecting what children desire (Par.37 Difficulty of detecting and measuring), the contradiction Par. [+1,+37] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[28,29,26,32]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.28 Mechanics Substitution
The mechanics of the Designer's interaction with Children* must be improved by using sensory means, psychological approaches, and digital tools (software and computer applications) to capture the desires of the children.
IP.29 Controllable Soft Variables
The Designer's interaction with Children* should be controlled using soft variables, such as social, psychological, and digital elements.
IP.26 Copying/ Replicating
A replica or copy of the Designer* should be used to interact with Children, like a costume, acting through games, images, and videos, etc.
IP.32 Perception/ Appearance/ Color Changes
The Designer should be perceived in a more friendly manner.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 11.78% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No.32.

a. Make OBJECT S1 or any of its parts interact with another given object of the same material or function with identical or compatible properties.
Separation principle: Integration in supersystem.
Solution strategy: Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
Type: Operative inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle recommends that the evaluated object interacts with other objects of common and compatible characteristics to achieve innovation.
For example, "Houston, we have a problem!" was the message sent by the Apollo XIII crew to report that they were having trouble replacing the CO2 filter in the Lunar Module, where they were temporarily located during their return to Earth. They had a square filter, taken from the Command Module, which they had abandoned to save oxygen, and it didn't fit the circular and smaller area duct of the Lunar Module's CO2 extractor.
The challenge was as follows: Ensure a reliable connection of Object S1: the circular, mobile duct of the Lunar Module's CO2 extractor, which was affected by a different area, with Object S2: the square, moving filter (see Case No. 20). The following contradiction is analyzed to improve the smaller area of the circular duct (Par.5 Area of moving object) and attenuate the harmful factors caused by physical incompatibility with the square filter (Par. 30 Object-affected harmful factors). Contradiction Par.[-5,+30] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[22,33,28,1]:
IP.22 Convert harm to benefit
Enlarge the area of the Circular Duct* to the point where it is no longer harmful.
IP.33 Homogeneity / Compatibility
Make the Circular Duct* or one of its parts interact with another object of the same material or function (material or function with similar and compatible properties). Compatible parts available in the Command Module, such as tapes and socks, are added to the Circular Duct*.
IP.28 Mechanics Substitution
Replace an inappropriate mechanism action of the Circular Duct* to interact with the square filter with a mechanical action or tool. Create an appropriate connection mechanism that fits both areas involved.
IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
Divide the Circular Duct* into existing and new parts to build a connection mechanism. This construction was supported by Ground Control, which sent them a 19-step procedure to execute, which can be found on the Internet. In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 2.49% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No.33.

a. Make portions of OBJECT S1 , which have fulfilled their functions or are unnecessary, go away (discard by absorption, dissolving, evaporating, etc.).
b. Conversely, restore consumable parts of OBJECT S1 directly in operation.
Separation principle: Separation in time.
Solution strategy: Improving if a solution has not yet emerged.
Type: Tactical inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle aims to ensure operational continuity by eliminating already used resources, replacing consumable resources, and enabling self-disposition of means and resources.
For example, we can examine a contradiction in the case of a person carrying a heavy and bulky suitcase, Object S1, moving: Suitcase, and Object S2, moving: Person. Please see further details in the link to Solved Cases, Case N°3.
To improve the transportation of the Suitcase due to its greater of movement (Par.7 Volume of moving object) and attenuate the increased time loss caused by the difficulty in transporting it (Par.25 Loss of Time), a contradiction is applied, Par.[+7,+25], considering the following inventive principles IP.[2,6,34,10]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.2 Taking out/ Adding
- A new part or mechanism must be added to the Suitcase* to facilitate its movement.
IP.6 Universality
- Make one part of the Suitcase* perform useful functions without the need for anything else
IP.34 Discarding and Recovering
- Apply an action to the Suitcase* that facilitates its movement and, once it's fulfilled, apply it again (this is the principle of the wheel: it turns and turns again).
IP.10. Preliminary Action
- Anticipate the addition of a wheel system to the suitcase.

Another typical example of inventive principle No. 34 occurs in vehicle combustion systems, which consist of 4 stages:
Stage 1 - Intake: The cylinder is supplied with the air-fuel mixture with the piston down.
Stage 2 - Compression: The piston moves upward and compresses the mixture to facilitate ignition.
Stage 3 - Combustion: The spark plug emits an electric spark that triggers the explosion. The combustion gas expands and moves the piston downward.
Stage 4 - Exhaust: Once the combustion phase is complete, and the piston is at its lowest point, it begins to move upward again due to the crankshaft's rotation. This expels the exhaust gases from the cylinder through the exhaust valve.
After this, the crankshaft's movement pushes the piston downward and is ready for the new intake cycle. This generates continuous motion driven by combustion, where the piston's position cycle is governed by the crankshaft's motion energy.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 8.42% of the identified contradictions contain the tactical inventive principle No.34.

a. Change OBJECT S1's physical or chemical state (e.g., in shape, in composition, to a gas, liquid, solid or plasma).
b. Change the composition or condition of OBJECT S1 by adding or removing components.
c. Change the concentration or consistency; change the degree of flexibility; change the temperature or the level of internal activity of OBJECT S1.
Separation principle: Separation by condition / Separation alternative.
Solution strategy: Improve attributes ; Improve the 7 quality factors(**).
(**) Quality, Reliability, Maintainability, Supportability, Human Factors, Security, Protection.
Type: Strategic inventive principle.
Examples of Application:
This inventive principle suggests that the evaluated object undergo physical and/or operational transformation to achieve innovation. It is the principle with the highest participation in the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, as it is included in 413 contradictions, 33.1% of the total.
Example, addressing the challenge of OBJECT S1: Plastic cup. moving, which has difficulty serving hot coffee to OBJECT S2: Customers, moving. To improve the greater thermal heaviness of the Plastic Cup due to hot coffee (Par.1 Heaviness of moving object) and attenuate the increased loss of sales due to customer rejection from burning their hands (Par.23 Loss of substance), contradiction Par.[+1,+23] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[5,35,3,31]. The specific application is as follows:
IP.5 Merging/ Separating
Merge the Plastic Cup* with another object, in this case, a curved circular sheet, see IP.1
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
This fusion transforms the Plastic Cup*.
IP.3 Local Quality
Apply a localized solution to the Plastic Cup*, making it non-uniform.
IP.31 Using/ Removing Unused Parts

Another example applies in the case of designing the best toy for children, influenced by designer paradigms. OBJECT S1: Designer, moving, OBJECT S2: Children, moving, see details in the link to Solved Cases, Case No. 9. To improve the ease of achieving the designer's desired outcome that satisfies the children (Par.32 Ease of achieving the desired outcome) and to preserve the designer's ease of change, repair, or maintenance (Par.34 Ease of change, repair, or maintain), the contradiction Par.[+32,+34] is applied, considering the following inventive principles IP.[35,1,11,9]. The specific application is shown below:
IP.35 Transformation / Parameter Changes
The designer must transform in order to communicate with the children. IP.1 Segmenting/ Integrating
The designer should divide themselves, adding new parts with a more playful character: clown, mime, interact through video games, in order to truly understand what the children desire.
IP.11 Beforehand Cushioning
The designer should prepare emergency means in advance to compensate for the relatively low reliability in getting the children to express their wishes. Prepare alternative communication plans.
IP.9 Preliminary Anti-action
The designer should anticipate actions that will oppose undesirable communication difficulties that are known to occur at some point. Distraction, tiredness, boredom, and children's apathy.
Utilize the external part of the Plastic Cup* that is available.

In the TRIZ Contradiction Matrix, 33.09% of the identified contradictions contain the strategic inventive principle No.35.

"panel-collapse collapse off">