IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,407,898
Granted Patent B2
US 12,407,898 · App. 17/666,312 · Granted Sep 2, 2025

Methods and apparatus to determine when a smart device is out-of-tab

Inventors: Michael Evan Anderson (Chicago, IL); Samantha M. Mowrer (San Francisco, CA); Robert Gottesman (Chicago, IL); Astha Jain (El Cerrito, CA)
Assignee: The Nielsen Company (US), LLC
H04N21/44222H04H60/31H04H60/37H04H60/45H04N21/6582
View Patent ↗
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 12,407,898
App. No.
17/666,312
Granted
Sep 2, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Methods, apparatus, systems and articles of manufacture to determine whether a smart device is in-tab are disclosed. An example apparatus includes memory; instructions in the apparatus; and processor circuitry to execute the instructions to: provide smart television data from a smart television as an input to a model to generate an output, the smart television data being included in population data from a population of smart televisions; determine a tab status of the smart television based on the output; in response to the tab status of the smart television being out-of-tab, remove the smart television data from the population data; and credit media based on the population data.

Claims (65)

1. A computing system comprising:

a processor; and

a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, having stored thereon program instructions that, upon execution by the processor, cause performance of a set of operations comprising:

training a tab status model using a training data set;

testing the tab status model with a subset of the training data set that was not used to train the tab status model to obtain a plurality of test output tab statuses;

comparing the plurality of test output tab statuses from the tab status model with corresponding tab statutes of the subset of the training data that was not used to train the tab status model;

based on the comparison, determining that an accuracy of the tab status model exceeds an accuracy threshold;

providing smart television data from a smart television as an input to the tab status model to generate an output,

wherein the smart television data is included in population data from a population of smart televisions;

the training data set, comprising, for each of multiple smart televisions, respective training data that is labeled as in-tab or out-of-tab based on whether the smart television lacked network connectivity for a threshold amount of time preventing transmission of additional smart television data to a server;

determining a tab status of the smart television based on the output of the tab status model;

removing the smart television data from the population data based on the tab status of the smart television being out-of-tab; and

crediting media in a report based on the population data after removing the smart television data from the population data.

2. The computing system of claim 1 , wherein the tab status is in-tab when the smart television transmits data to the server within the threshold amount of time; and wherein the tab status is out-of-tab when the smart television transmits data outside the threshold amount of time from an anticipated time of transmission.

3. The computing system of claim 1 , wherein determining the tab status comprises:

determining that the smart television is out-of-tab, if the output satisfies a threshold; and

determining that the smart television is in-tab, if the output does not satisfy the threshold.

4. The computing system of claim 1 , wherein the smart television is a second smart television; and wherein the set of operations further comprises:

identifying a first smart television that corresponds to a first panelist by comparing first data from the first smart television to second data from the first panelist; and

generating training data by labelling the first smart television as in-tab or out-of-tab based on the second data from the first panelist.

5. The computing system of claim 4 , wherein the first data includes at least one of a media identifier, a smart television identifier, a timestamp, tuning data, or disconnect data.

6. The computing system of claim 4 , wherein the second data is meter data indicative of media exposure of the first panelist.

7. The computing system of claim 4 , wherein identifying the first smart television corresponds to the first panelist comprises determining when a threshold amount of tuning data of the first data is consistent with the second data.

8. The computing system of claim 4 , wherein training the tab status model based partly on the training data set further comprises:

labeling the first smart television as out-of-tab when tuning data of the first data is inconsistent with meter data of the second data.

9. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, having stored thereon program instructions that, upon execution by a processor, cause performance of a set of operations comprising:

training a tab status model using a training data set;

testing the tab status model with a subset of the training data set that was not used to train the tab status model to obtain a plurality of test output tab statuses;

comparing the plurality of test output tab statuses from the tab status model with corresponding tab statutes of the subset of the training data that was not used to train the tab status model;

based on the comparison, determining that an accuracy of the tab status model exceeds an accuracy threshold;

providing smart television data from a smart television as an input to the tab status model to generate an output,

wherein the smart television data is included in population data from a population of smart televisions;

the training data set, comprising, for each of multiple smart televisions, respective training data that is labeled as in-tab or out-of-tab based on whether the smart television lacked network connectivity for a threshold amount of time preventing transmission of additional smart television data to a server;

determining a tab status of the smart television based on the output of the tab status model;

removing the smart television data from the population data based on the tab status of the smart television being out-of-tab; and

crediting media in a report based on the population data after removing the smart television data from the population data.

10. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9 , wherein the tab status is in-tab when the smart television is capable of transmitting data to the server.

11. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 10 , wherein determining the tab status comprises:

determining that the smart television is out-of-tab, if the output satisfies a threshold; and

determining that the smart television is in-tab, if the output does not satisfy the threshold.

12. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9 , wherein the smart television is a second smart television, wherein the set of operations further comprises:

identifying a first smart television that corresponds to a first panelist by comparing first data from the first smart television to second data from the first panelist; and

generating training data by labelling the first smart television as in-tab or out-of-tab based on the second data from the first panelist.

13. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 12 , wherein the first data includes at least one of a media identifier, a smart television identifier, a timestamp, tuning data, or disconnect data.

14. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 12 , wherein the second data is meter data indicative of media exposure of the first panelist.

15. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 12 , wherein identifying the first smart television corresponds to the first panelist comprises determining when a threshold amount of tuning data of the first data is consistent with the second data.

16. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 12 , wherein training the tab status model based partly on the training data set further comprises: labeling the first smart television as out-of-tab when tuning data of the first data is inconsistent with meter data of the second data.

17. A method comprising:

training a tab status model using a training data set;

testing the tab status model with a subset of the training data set that was not used to train the tab status model to obtain a plurality of test output tab statuses;

comparing the plurality of test output tab statuses from the tab status model with corresponding tab statutes of the subset of the training data that was not used to train the tab status model;

based on the comparison, determining that an accuracy of the tab status model exceeds an accuracy threshold;

providing smart television data from a smart television as an input to the tab status model to generate an output,

wherein the smart television data is included in population data from a population of smart televisions;

the training data set, comprising, for each of multiple smart televisions, respective training data that is labeled as in-tab or out-of-tab based on whether the smart television lacked network connectivity for a threshold amount of time preventing transmission of additional smart television data to a server;

determining a tab status of the smart television based on the output of the tab status model;

discarding the smart television data from the population data based on the smart television being out-of-tab; and

crediting media in a report based on the population data after removing the smart television data from the population data.

18. The method of claim 17 , wherein the tab status is in-tab when the smart television is capable of transmitting data to the server or out-of-tab.

19. The method of claim 18 , wherein determining the tab status comprises:

determining that the smart television is out-of-tab, if the output satisfies a threshold; and

determining that the smart television is in-tab, if the output does not satisfy the threshold.

20. The method of claim 17 , wherein the smart television is a second smart television, further comprising:

identifying a first smart television that corresponds to a first panelist by comparing first data from the first smart television to second data from the first panelist; and

generating training data by labelling the first smart television as in-tab or out-of-tab based on the second data from the first panelist.

Assignments (4)
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded May 8, 2023
From: GRACENOTE DIGITAL VENTURES, LLC; GRACENOTE MEDIA SERVICES, LLC; GRACENOTE, INC.; TNC (US) HOLDINGS, INC.; THE NIELSEN COMPANY (US), LLC
To: ARES CAPITAL CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 063574/0632 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Apr 28, 2023
From: GRACENOTE DIGITAL VENTURES, LLC; GRACENOTE MEDIA SERVICES, LLC; GRACENOTE, INC.; TNC (US) HOLDINGS, INC.; THE NIELSEN COMPANY (US), LLC
To: CITIBANK, N.A.
Reel/Frame 063561/0381 →
SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Jan 31, 2023
From: GRACENOTE DIGITAL VENTURES, LLC; GRACENOTE MEDIA SERVICES, LLC; GRACENOTE, INC.; TNC (US) HOLDINGS, INC.; THE NIELSEN COMPANY (US), LLC
To: BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
Reel/Frame 063560/0547 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 31, 2022
From: ANDERSON, MICHAEL EVAN; MOWRER, SAMANTHA M.; GOTTESMAN, ROBERT; JAIN, ASTHA
To: THE NIELSEN COMPANY (US), LLC
Reel/Frame 059459/0066 →
Continuity (2)
Continuation 16862501 · Apr 29, 2020
Related Publication 20220159342A1 · May 19, 2022
References Cited (24)
US 6286005B1 · Cannon · 2001 [cited by examiner]
US 8000993B2 · Harvey et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8973023B1 · Rao et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 10511873B1 · Voytenko et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 11245963B2 · Anderson et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20090292587A1 · Fitzgerald · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20130159499A1 · Besehanic · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20150054639A1 · Rosen · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20180249214A1 · Sullivan · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180376184A1 · Sheppard · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20190158916A1 · Shankar et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190356955A1 · Nagaraja Rao et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190378034A1 · Mowrer · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200117979A1 · Sullivan et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200196008A1 · Chimenti et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200226465A1 · Harrington et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
JP 2019009775 · 2019 [cited by applicant]
KR 101893475 · 2018 [cited by applicant]
Interational Searching Authority, “Search Report and Written Opinion,” issued in connection with PCT Application No. PCT/US2021/029720, dated Aug. 19, 2021, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 16/862,501, filed Sep. 24, 2021, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Patent Cooperation Treaty, “International Search Report and Written Opinion,” issued in connection with Application No. PCT/US2021/029720, Aug. 19, 2021, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Patent Cooperation Treaty, “International Preliminary Report on Patentability”, issued in connection with International application No. PCT/US2021/029720, Oct. 27, 2022, 4 pages. [cited by applicant]
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Non-Final Office Action,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 17/976,434, dated Dec. 4, 2023, 14 pages. [cited by applicant]
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Final Office Action,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 17/976,434, dated May 9, 2024, 13 pages. [cited by applicant]