IP Library Patent Application 13942522
Patent Application
App. No. 13/942,522

METHOD, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR DYNAMICS/KINETICS MODEL SELECTION

Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US None
App. No.
13/942,522
Abstract

Provided herein are systems, methods and computer readable media for assessing the health, fitness, operation, or performance of an individual. An example method comprises selecting an individual dynamics/kinetics model from a database and comparing it to tag location data. Another example method comprises selecting a health, fitness, operation and performance (HFOP) model from a database and comparing it to the sensor-derived data.

Claims (39)

1 . A method for assessing a health or fitness of an individual, the method comprising:

receiving tag derived data comprising tag location data and blink data;

selecting an individual dynamics/kinetics model from an individual dynamics/kinetics models database;

comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model;

and

determining a health, fitness, operation and performance (HFOP) status for the individual based on the comparison of the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model.

2 .- 7 . (canceled)

8 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises matching one or more field values of the tag location data to one or more corresponding field values of the individual dynamics/kinetic model.

9 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises determining that at least one field value of the tag location data has exceeded a control limit defined by the individual dynamics/kinetic model.

10 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises determining that at least one field value of the tag location data is trending.

11 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises determining that the tag location data falls within a cluster range.

12 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises calculating the covariance of the tag location data with the individual dynamics/kinetics model.

13 .- 20 . (canceled)

21 . A computer program product comprising at least one computer-readable storage medium having computer-executable program code instructions stored therein, the computer-executable program code instructions comprising program code instructions for:

receiving tag derived data comprising tag location data and blink data;

selecting an individual dynamics/kinetics model from an individual dynamics/kinetics models database;

comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model;

and

determining a health, fitness, operation and performance (HFOP) status for the individual based on the comparison of the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model.

22 .- 27 . (canceled)

28 . The computer program product according to claim 21 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises matching one or more field values of the tag location data to one or more corresponding field values of the individual dynamics/kinetic model.

29 . The computer program product according to claim 21 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises determining that at least one field value of the tag location data has exceeded a control limit defined by the individual dynamics/kinetic model.

30 . The computer program product according to claim 21 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises determining that at least one field value of the tag location data is trending.

31 . The computer program product according to claim 21 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises determining that the tag location data falls within a cluster range.

32 . The computer program product according to claim 21 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises calculating the covariance of the tag location data with the individual dynamics/kinetics model.

33 .- 40 . (canceled)

41 . An apparatus for assessing a health or fitness of an individual, the apparatus comprising a processor and a memory having computer code stored therein, the computer code configured, when executed by the processor, to cause the apparatus to:

receive tag derived data comprising tag location data and blink data;

select an individual dynamics/kinetics model from an individual dynamics/kinetics models database;

compare the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model;

and

determine a health, fitness, operation and performance (HFOP) status for the individual based on the comparison of the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model.

42 .- 47 . (canceled)

48 . The apparatus according to claim 41 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises matching one or more field values of the tag location data to one or more corresponding field values of the individual dynamics/kinetic model.

49 . The apparatus according to claim 41 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises determining that at least one field value of the tag location data has exceeded a control limit defined by the individual dynamics/kinetic model.

50 . The apparatus according to claim 41 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises determining that at least one field value of the tag location data is trending.

51 . The apparatus according to claim 41 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises determining that the tag location data falls within a cluster range.

52 . The apparatus according to claim 41 , wherein comparing the tag location data to the individual dynamics/kinetics model comprises calculating the covariance of the tag location data with the individual dynamics/kinetics model.

53 .- 60 . (canceled)

Assignments (3)
PATENT SECURITY INTEREST ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT Recorded Oct 25, 2017
From: MORGAN STANLEY SENIOR FUNDING, INC., AS THE EXISTING AGENT
To: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENT
Reel/Frame 044791/0842 →
SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Oct 31, 2014
From: ZIH CORP.; LASER BAND, LLC; ZEBRA ENTERPRISE SOLUTIONS CORP.; SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
To: MORGAN STANLEY SENIOR FUNDING, INC. AS THE COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 034114/0270 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jul 15, 2013
From: O'HAGAN, JAMES J.; WOHL, MICHAEL
To: ZIH CORP.
Reel/Frame 030800/0565 →