Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Akiyama (US 2024/0104456).
As per claims 1 and 14-15, Akiyama teaches, an action evaluation system and method and a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising: at least one memory storing instructions, and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to (Akiyama, ¶[0036] “In the description that follows, there are cases of explaining processes performed by executing programs. The programs are executed by a processor (e.g., CPU (Central Processing Unit) or GPU (Graphics Processing Unit)) in such a manner that predetermined processes are carried out using storage resources (e.g., memory) and/or an interface device (e.g., communication port) as needed. In that sense, the agent of the processing may be considered the processor. Likewise, the agent of the processing performed by program execution may be a controller, an apparatus, a system, a computer, or a node having the processor.” This represents the memory and processor configured to execute instructions ); detect a predetermined unit action associated with a posture of a worker from skeleton data about a structure of a body of the worker (Akiyama, ¶[0088] “The work posture may be calculated by use of various existing known techniques including one that extracts information regarding the skeleton of the worker for calculation purposes.” And ¶[0089] “The work posture calculation section 722 calculates the load of the work posture of the worker by referencing the posture of the worker obtained by calculation in step 1001 as well as the posture load score correspondence table 717” represents predetermined unit action about the load associated with the posture of a worker), the skeleton data being extracted from image data obtained by capturing a series of work actions performed by the worker on a work object (Akiyama, ¶[0088-89] “The work posture may be calculated by use of various existing known techniques including one that extracts information regarding the skeleton of the worker for calculation purposes. The work load calculation section 720 adds up the load score of the work posture calculated by the work posture calculation section 722 and the load score of the work intensity and action of the worker calculated in step 801, thereby providing the final load score of the worker.” This represents data being extracted from the skeleton and capturing a series of work actions); determine whether or not the unit action is similar to a predetermined registration action; and output a result of the determination (Akiyama, ¶ [0061] “As described above, the work action recognition system 1000 according to the present embodiment includes the action recognition section 112 that recognizes the action of the worker on the basis of the information detected by the sensor 100 worn by the worker and of a predetermined action recognition model (e.g., action recognition model 114);” this represents being able to tell if the action is similar to action recognition model 114 for example).
As per claim 2, Akiyama teaches the action evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instruction to detect the unit action when the skeleton data related to the unit action is similar to the skeleton data as the registration action based on forms of elements composing the skeleton data (Akiyama, ¶[0088] “The work posture may be calculated by use of various existing known techniques including one that extracts information regarding the skeleton of the worker for calculation purposes.” This represents skeleton data related to the unit action is similar to the skeleton data as the registration action based on forms of elements composing the skeleton data).
As per claims 3 and 17, Akiyama teaches, the action evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instruction to analyze the time-series work actions of the worker based on the skeleton data extracted from each of a plurality of image data captured at a plurality of different times (Akiyama, ¶[044] “Here, work intensity is a concept indicative of a degree of action on the work target by the worker at a given point in time during work.” This represents analysis at different times during at work).
As per claims 4 and 18, Akiyama teaches, the action evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to detect a plurality of the unit actions at a plurality of different times from the series of the work actions, and determine whether or not the series of the work actions includes the unit action similar to each of a plurality of the registration actions different from each other (Akiyama, ¶[0044] “For example, in the case where the worker handles a package as the work target, work intensity refers not only to the force required to carry the package but also to the effort of maintaining the posture of the worker holding the package. In another example where the worker handles the screw of a valve as the work target, work intensity refers not only to the force required to tighten the screw but also to the strain of trying to turn the screw when it is stuck resisting the tightening force exerted thereon. In a further example, where the worker handles a workpiece material as the work target, work intensity refers not only to the force required to cut the workpiece material but also to the force of trying to cut the workpiece material when it is not being cut resisting the cutting force exerted thereon. In this manner, work intensity is a concept that includes the orders of magnitude of various forces acting on the work target by the worker.” This represents different actions and if those actions are registered to be able to recognize it).
As per claims 5 and 19, Akiyama teaches, the action evaluation system according to claim 4, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to acquire an order in which the plurality of the unit actions are detected, and determine whether or not the plurality of the unit actions included in the series of the work actions are detected in a predetermined order (Akiyama, ¶[0069] “[0069] In FIG. 5B, the work display region 511 displays the video capturing the worker during work (Video 1), and the sensor value display region 512 displays the sensor values obtained by two sensors 100 worn by the worker, the sensor values being displayed on the screen from right to left in chronological order.” Actions appearing in chronological order represent unit actions included in the series of the work actions are detected in a predetermined order, as those actions being recognized are predetermined).
As per claims 6 and 20, Akiyama teaches, the action evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to store the registration action, and when the at least one processor detects the registration action similar to the skeleton data of the worker, associate an action related to the skeleton data with the registration action and recognizes the associated action as the unit action (Akiyama, ¶[0044] “the intensity of the work performed by a recognized worker performing some kind of action. Here, work intensity is a concept indicative of a degree of action on the work target by the worker at a given point in time during work. For example, in the case where the worker handles a package as the work target, work intensity refers not only to the force required to carry the package but also to the effort of maintaining the posture of the worker holding the package. In another example where the worker handles the screw of a valve as the work target, work intensity refers not only to the force required to tighten the screw but also to the strain of trying to turn the screw when it is stuck resisting the tightening force exerted thereon. In a further example, where the worker handles a workpiece material as the work target, work intensity refers not only to the force required to cut the workpiece material but also to the force of trying to cut the workpiece material when it is not being cut resisting the cutting force exerted thereon. In this manner, work intensity is a concept that includes the orders of magnitude of various forces acting on the work target by the worker.” This represents the skeleton data of the worker, associate an action related to the skeleton data with the registration action and recognizes the associated action as the unit action, the moving of the packages or valve job for example represents the actions being tied to that skeleton as in ¶[0088]).
As per claim 7, Akiyama teaches, the action evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to acquire the image data; and extract the skeleton data from the image data (Akiyama, ¶[0088] “ The work posture may be calculated by use of various existing known techniques including one that extracts information regarding the skeleton of the worker for calculation purposes.” And fig.5B showing the image ).
As per claim 8, Akiyama teaches, the action evaluation system according to claim 7, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instruction to specify a person present in a predetermined area of the image data as the worker (Akiyama, ¶[0094] “However, this system is also capable of managing the work load of a worker as well as his or her action and work with respect to each of multiple workers. Explained below is thus the case where this system is applied to multiple workers.” system applied to multiple workers).
As per claim 9, Akiyama teaches, the action evaluation system according to claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instruction to start or end the analysis of the series of the work actions when the worker enters the predetermined area from an area other than the predetermined area or when the worker moves from the predetermined area to an area other than the predetermined area (Akiyama, ¶[0047] “[0047] The storage section 116 may be a RAM (Random Access Memory) for example, which provides a work area in which the CPU executes programs.” The work area which these programs run presents starting and stopping analysis at predefined areas. Meaning out of the work area then this would not be analyzed).
As per claim 10, Akiyama teaches, the action evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instruction to receive attribute data about an attribute of the work object, wherein the at least one processor determines whether or not the unit action is similar to the predetermined registration action corresponding to the attribute (Akiyama, ¶[0044] “For example, in the case where the worker handles a package as the work target, work intensity refers not only to the force required to carry the package but also to the effort of maintaining the posture of the worker holding the package. In another example where the worker handles the screw of a valve as the work target, work intensity refers not only to the force required to tighten the screw but also to the strain of trying to turn the screw when it is stuck resisting the tightening force exerted thereon.” The screw or the valve or the package would be attribute and ¶[0067] “For example, the worker may take a video of his or her work with a camera, not depicted, by use of the computer 410, and by operating the information presentation device 101 while verifying the captured video and the sensor values constituting the information detected by the sensor 100, the worker performs labeling to associate the sensor values with the type of action and the work intensity of the worker.” Camera images to back this data up).
As per claim 11, Akiyama teaches, the action evaluation system according to claim 10, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to associate the attribute data about the work object with the series of the work actions performed on the work object and store the associated data (Akiyama, ¶[0044] “For example, in the case where the worker handles a package as the work target, work intensity refers not only to the force required to carry the package but also to the effort of maintaining the posture of the worker holding the package. In another example where the worker handles the screw of a valve as the work target, work intensity refers not only to the force required to tighten the screw but also to the strain of trying to turn the screw when it is stuck resisting the tightening force exerted thereon.” The screw or the valve or the package would be attribute and ¶[0067] “For example, the worker may take a video of his or her work with a camera, not depicted, by use of the computer 410, and by operating the information presentation device 101 while verifying the captured video and the sensor values constituting the information detected by the sensor 100, the worker performs labeling to associate the sensor values with the type of action and the work intensity of the worker.” Camera images to back this data up and the work has to do with that attribute).
As per claim 12, Akiyama teaches, the action evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instruction to record a work action image so that it is possible to reproduce the work action image, the work action image including at least the unit action for which a determination as to whether or not the unit action is similar to the registration action has been made (Akiyama, ¶[0067] “For example, the worker may take a video of his or her work with a camera, not depicted, by use of the computer 410, and by operating the information presentation device 101 while verifying the captured video and the sensor values constituting the information detected by the sensor 100, the worker performs labeling to associate the sensor values with the type of action and the work intensity of the worker.” Camera images to back this data up of work done).
As per claim 13, Akiyama teaches, the action evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to specify the worker as an individual (Akiyama, fig.5B per worker data), wherein the at least one processor determines whether or not the unit action related to the specified individual is similar to the predetermined registration action related to the specified individual (Akiyama, fig.5B per worker data showing individual actions per worker ).
16. The non-transitory computer readable medium according to claim 15, wherein the evaluation method further comprising; detecting the unit action when the skeleton data related to the unit action is similar to the skeleton data as the registration action based on forms of elements composing the skeleton data.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANTIAGO GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5182. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am-5:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at (571) 272-9752. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SANTIAGO GARCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2673
/SG/