Embodiments herein relate to a computerized method and system that selects, sorts, or displays individual-related data for a plurality of candidates. The selection and sorting can be impacted by a comparison of the data being sorted with previous data found to be preferred.
Various embodiments provide a method for sorting data the method can include receiving, at a non-transitory computer memory, criteria data from a user regarding an open opportunity, wherein the criteria data comprises textual criteria data and defined field criteria data, wherein the defined field criteria data comprises first defined field criteria data, and second defined field criteria data; receiving, at the non-transitory computer memory, candidate data, wherein the candidate data comprises: textual candidate data; defined field candidate data, wherein the defined field candidate data comprises: first defined field candidate data, and second defined field candidate data; audio data of the candidate responding to a first prompt, a second prompt and a third prompt, wherein the audio data comprises: a first portion audio data of the candidate responding to the first prompt, a second portion audio data of the candidate responding to the second prompt, and a third portion audio data of the candidate responding to the third prompt; storing the candidate data in a candidate profile in a candidate database; evaluating the candidate data, wherein evaluating the candidate data comprises: comparing the textual criteria data with the textual candidate data to determine a first analysis result for the candidate data; comparing the defined field criteria data with the defined field candidate data to determine a defined field analysis result for the candidate data, wherein comparing defined field criteria data with defined field candidate data comprises: comparing the first defined field criteria data to the first defined field candidate data, and comparing the second defined field criteria data to the second defined field candidate data; comparing the audio data of the candidate to a database of successfully-selected candidates to determine an N-gram analysis result for the candidate data, wherein comparing the audio data to the database of successfully-selected candidates comprises: creating a first textual transcript of the audio data for the first portion audio data; removing stop words from the first textual transcript; creating a first N-gram data set of the candidate data based on the first textual transcript with stop words removed; comparing the first N-gram data set of the candidate data to a first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates, wherein the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates is determined by the successfully-selected candidates' responses to the first prompt; creating a second textual transcript of the audio data for the second portion audio data; removing stop words from the second textual transcript; creating a second N-gram data set based on the second textual transcript with stop words removed; comparing the second N-gram data set of the candidate data to a second N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates, wherein the second N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates is determined by the successfully-selected candidates' responses to the second prompt; creating a third textual transcript of the audio data for the third portion audio data; removing stop words from the third textual transcript; creating a third N-gram data set based on the third textual transcript with stop words removed; comparing the third N-gram data set of the candidate data to a third N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates, wherein the third N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates is determined by the successfully-selected candidates' responses to the third prompt; compiling the comparison of the first N-gram data set, the comparison of the second N-gram data set, and the comparison of the third N-gram data set to determine the N-gram analysis result for the audio data; compiling the first analysis result, the direct field analysis result and the N-gram analysis result into an overall analysis result; sorting the candidate data within a plurality of other candidate data using the overall analysis result.
In various embodiments, the method further comprising displaying the sorted candidate data on a user interface to the user.
In various embodiments, the method further comprising sorting the candidate data into one of three groups based on the overall analysis result.
In various embodiments, the first analysis results for the candidate data further comprises a distance analysis between geographical data in the criteria data and geographical data in the textual candidate data.
In various embodiments, the candidate data further comprises video data of the candidate responding to the first prompt, the second prompt, and the third prompt, wherein the video data is recorded simultaneously with the audio data.
In various embodiments, the second portion audio data or the third portion audio data was recorded prior to the first portion audio data.
In various embodiments, the method further comprising removing low-value words from the first N-gram data set, the second N-gram data set, and the third N-gram data set, wherein after removing low-value words from the first N-gram data set, the second N-gram data set and the third N-gram data set, only nouns, adjectives, verbs, and adverbs remain in the first N-gram data set, the second N-gram data set, and the third N-gram data set.
In various embodiments, compiling the first analysis result, the direct field analysis result, and the N-gram analysis results comprises weighting the first analysis result more than the direct field analysis result and the N-gram analysis result.
In various embodiments, compiling the first analysis result, the direct field analysis result, and the N-gram analysis results comprises weighting the direct field analysis result more than the N-gram analysis result.
In various embodiments, the candidate data comprises an initial first portion audio data and a secondary first portion audio data, wherein both the initial first portion audio data and the secondary first portion audio data are of the candidate responding to the first prompt.
In various embodiments, the method further comprising selecting one of the initial first portion audio data or the secondary first portion audio data for creating the first textual transcript.
In various embodiments, comparing the first N-gram data set of the candidate data to a first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates comprises comparing a first N-gram data set of the initial first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates and comparing a first N-gram data set of the secondary first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates.
In various embodiments, compiling the comparison of the first N-gram data set, the comparison of the second N-gram data set, and the comparison of the third N-gram data set to determine the N-gram analysis result for the audio data comprises:
determining a similarity value of the comparison of the first N-gram data set of the initial first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates and determining a similarity value of the first N-gram data set of the secondary first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates.
In various embodiments, the method further comprising: maintaining the initial first portion audio data for the N-gram analysis result when the similarity value of the first N-gram data set of the initial first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidate is greater than the similarity value of the first N-gram data set of the secondary first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidate, or maintaining the secondary first portion audio data for the N-gram analysis result when the similarity value of the first N-gram data set of the secondary first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidate is greater than the similarity value of the first N-gram data set of the initial first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidate; and wherein the maintained first portion audio data is incorporated into the compilation of the first analysis result, the direct field analysis result and the N-gram analysis result into the overall analysis result.
Various embodiments provide a method for sorting data. The method comprising: receiving, at a non-transitory computer memory, criteria data from a user regarding an open opportunity; receiving, at the non-transitory computer memory, candidate data, wherein the candidate data comprises audio data of the candidate responding to a first prompt, a second prompt and a third prompt, wherein the audio data comprises: a first portion audio data of the candidate responding to the first prompt, a second portion audio data of the candidate responding to the second prompt, and a third portion audio data of the candidate responding to the third prompt; storing candidate data in a candidate profile in a candidate database; evaluating the candidate data, wherein evaluating the candidate data comprises: comparing the audio data of the candidate to a database of successfully-selected candidates to determine an N-gram analysis result for the candidate data, wherein comparing the audio data to the database of successfully-selected candidates comprises: creating a first textual transcript of the audio data for the first portion audio data; removing stop words from the first textual transcript; creating a first N-gram data set based on the first textual transcript with stop words removed; comparing the first N-gram data set of the candidate data to a first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates, wherein the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates is determined by the successfully-selected candidates' responses to the first prompt; creating a second textual transcript of the audio data for the second portion audio data; removing stop words from the second textual transcript; creating a second N-gram data set based on the second textual transcript with stop words removed; comparing the second N-gram data set of the candidate data to a second N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates, wherein the second N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates is determined by the successfully-selected candidates' responses to the second prompt; creating a third textual transcript of the audio data for the third portion audio data; removing stop words from the third textual transcript; creating a third N-gram data set based on the third textual transcript with stop words removed; comparing the third N-gram data set of the candidate data to a third N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates, wherein the third N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates is determined by the successfully-selected candidates' responses to the third prompt; compiling the comparison of the first N-gram data set, the comparison of the second N-gram data set, and the comparison of the third N-gram data set to determine the N-gram analysis result for the audio data; sorting the candidate data within a plurality of other candidate data using the N-gram analysis result.
In various embodiments, the candidate data comprises an initial first portion audio data and a secondary first portion audio data, wherein both the initial first portion audio data and the secondary first portion audio data are of the candidate responding to the first prompt.
In various embodiments, comparing the first N-gram data set of the candidate data to a first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates comprises: comparing a first N-gram data set of the initial first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates and comparing a first N-gram data set of the secondary first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates.
In various embodiments, compiling the comparison of the first N-gram data set, the comparison of the second N-gram data set, and the comparison of the third N-gram data set to determine the N-gram analysis result for the audio data comprises: determining a similarity value of the comparison of the first N-gram data set of the initial first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates and determining a similarity value of the first N-gram data set of the secondary first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidates, maintaining the initial first portion audio data for the N-gram analysis result when the similarity value of the first N-gram data set of the initial first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidate is greater than the similarity value of the first N-gram data set of the secondary first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidate, or maintaining the secondary first portion audio data for the N-gram analysis result when the similarity value of the first N-gram data set of the secondary first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidate is greater than the similarity value of the first N-gram data set of the initial first portion audio data with the first N-gram data set of the successfully-selected candidate; and wherein the maintained first portion audio data is incorporated into the compilation of the first analysis result, the direct field analysis result and the N-gram analysis result into the overall analysis result.
Various embodiments provide a method of populating a successfully-selected candidate database for a first type of open opportunity. The method comprising: receiving, at a non-transitory computer memory, criteria data from a user regarding an open opportunity of the first type; receiving, at the non-transitory computer memory, first candidate data, wherein the first candidate data comprises audio data of a first candidate responding to a first prompt, a second prompt and a third prompt, wherein the audio data comprises: a first portion audio data of the first candidate responding to the first prompt, a second portion audio data of the first candidate responding to the second prompt, and a third portion audio data of the first candidate responding to the third prompt; storing first candidate data in a first candidate profile in a candidate database; receiving an indication that the first candidate was selected for the open opportunity; saving the first candidate data in a successfully-selected candidate database for open opportunities of the first type, wherein the first candidate data comprises: a first N-gram data set; wherein the first N-gram data set is created by: creating a first textual transcript of the audio data for the first portion audio data; removing stop words from the first textual transcript; and forming a plurality of N-grams based on the first textual transcript with stop words removed, wherein the first N-gram data set comprises the plurality of N-grams; a second N-gram data set; wherein the second N-gram data set is created by: creating a second textual transcript of the audio data for the second portion audio data; removing stop words from the second textual transcript; and forming a plurality of N-grams based on the first textual transcript with stop words removed, wherein the first N-gram data set comprises the plurality of N-grams; a third N-gram data set; wherein the third N-gram data set is created by: creating a third textual transcript of the audio data for the third portion audio data; removing stop words from the third textual transcript; and forming a plurality of N-grams based on the third textual transcript with stop words removed, wherein the third N-gram data set comprises the plurality of N-grams.
In various embodiments, the method further comprising: receiving, at a non-transitory computer memory, criteria data from a second user regarding a second open opportunity of the first type; receiving, at the non-transitory computer memory, second candidate data, wherein the second candidate data comprises audio data of a second candidate responding to the first prompt, the second prompt and the third prompt, wherein the audio data comprises: a first portion audio data of the second candidate responding to the first prompt, a second portion audio data of the second candidate responding to the second prompt, and a third portion audio data of the second candidate responding to the third prompt; storing second candidate data in a second candidate profile in the candidate database; receiving an indication that the second candidate was selected for the second open opportunity; saving the second candidate data in the successfully-selected candidate database for open opportunities of the first type, wherein the second candidate data comprises: a first N-gram data set; wherein the first N-gram data set is created by: creating a first textual transcript of the audio data for the first portion audio data; removing stop words from the first textual transcript; and forming a plurality of N-grams based on the first textual transcript with stop words removed, wherein the first N-gram data set comprises the plurality of N-grams; a second N-gram data set; wherein the second N-gram data set is created by: creating a second textual transcript of the audio data for the second portion audio data; removing stop words from the second textual transcript; and forming a plurality of N-grams based on the first textual transcript with stop words removed, wherein the first N-gram data set comprises the plurality of N-grams; a third N-gram data set; wherein the third N-gram data set is created by: creating a third textual transcript of the audio data for the third portion audio data; removing stop words from the third textual transcript; and forming a plurality of N-grams based on the third textual transcript with stop words removed, wherein the third N-gram data set comprises the plurality of N-grams.
This summary is an overview of some of the teachings of the present application and is not intended to be an exclusive or exhaustive treatment of the present subject matter. Further details are found in the detailed description and appended claims. Other aspects will be apparent to persons skilled in the art upon reading and understanding the following detailed description and viewing the drawings that form a part thereof, each of which is not to be taken in a limiting sense. The scope herein is defined by the appended claims and their legal equivalents.
Aspects may be more completely understood in connection with the following figures (FIGS.), in which:
While embodiments are susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, specifics thereof have been shown by way of example and drawings, and will be described in detail. It should be understood, however, that the scope herein is not limited to the particular aspects described. On the contrary, the intention is to cover modifications, equivalents, and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope herein.
Various embodiments of searching and sorting systems and methods are described herein. The systems and methods described herein can including sorting one or more candidates for an open opportunity. The systems and methods described herein can compare candidate data with criteria data to determine a candidate's fit for an open opportunity. The candidate data can include facts or other information about the candidate that can be used to determine the candidate's fit or qualification for the open opportunity. Criteria data can include requirements or attributes that are desired for the open opportunity.
In various embodiments described herein, the systems and methods can use an N-gram analysis to sort or order current candidate data within a pool of other current candidate data. The N-gram analysis can be used to compare current candidate data with data of previously known successfully-selected candidates. Current candidates can be sorted, at least in part, based on their comparisons with the successfully-selected candidates.
In an example, the systems and methods described herein can be used to fill a job opening. The candidates that apply for the job can record video interviews, where audio responses of the candidate can be recorded in response to several prompts. The current candidate responses to the prompts can be compared to responses from previous candidates to the same prompts. The previous candidates can be limited to previous candidates that were successfully selected or hired for previous similar or same job openings. By comparing current candidates with candidates that are known to be desired and successful for similar opportunities, the pool of current candidates can be reduced or sorted to result in easier, more efficient, and better selection of candidates.
The various methods described herein use an N-gram analysis. An N-gram can refer to one or more words that are grouped together in a specific order, where “N” can refer to any number, such as five, four, three, two or one. In an example, a bigram is a combination of two words and a trigram is a combination of three words. In some examples, an N-gram data set can include groups of written units of N or less. As used herein N-gram can refer to any group of consecutive written units, such as words. A set of N-grams can include a group of consecutive written units. For example, a set of N-grams can include trigrams, bigrams, and single words.
In various embodiments, the booth 100 can be optimized to goals related to the searching and evaluating process described herein. In some embodiment, multiple booths 100 can be placed in high traffic areas, such as airports and shopping malls. The multiple booths can be connected across the network 150 to provide and share data.
In some embodiments, the booth 100 is configured to record high-quality audio and video data of a candidate. The high-quality audio can be utilized to create a transcript of the candidate in the booth. The booth 100 can show a candidate in their best light using the high-quality audio and video recording elements. The booth 100 can further output an audiovisual recording of a video interview of the candidate in the booth. The booth 100 can apply video editing techniques, such as camera switching, to ensure the output audiovisual recording is engaging and interesting for busy users of the system to further evaluate candidates. In various embodiments, the entity that maintains, controls and services the booth 100 can also be the entity that manages the system server. The entity that manages the system server can be independent of and serves both the user and the candidates.
In some embodiments, candidate data can be recorded within the booth 100. In other embodiments, as shown in
The booth 100 can include cameras 110 for recording candidate data in the form of video data of the candidate within the booth 100. In some embodiments the booth 100 can include a plurality of cameras 110, such as camera-1 112, camera-2 114, and camera-3 116.
The booth 100 can include microphones 120 for recording candidate data in the form of audio data of the candidate within the booth 100. In some embodiments, the booth 100 can include a plurality of microphones 120, such as a first microphone 122 and a second microphone 124.
The booth 100 or other device can gather candidate data in order to evaluate the candidate for the open position. Data recorded from the booth 100 or otherwise uploaded into the system 10 can be managed in part by the system server 170 and stored in database 180. In some embodiments, the system server 170 allows multiple user computer systems 160 to access candidate data from multiple booths 100.
The sound or audio data from the microphones 120 can be combined with the visual data from the cameras 112, 114, 116 into audio video material for evaluation of the candidate. In some embodiments, the audio data can be kept separate from the video data for analysis.
The sound recorded by the microphones 120 can also be used for behavioral analysis of the candidate 20. Speech recorded by the microphones 120 can be analyzed to extract behavioral data, such as vocal pitch and vocal tone, speech cadence, word patterns, word frequencies, total time spent speaking, and other information conveyed in the speaker's voice and speech.
The booth 100 can also incorporate one or more depth sensors 130 that can detect changes in the position of the candidate 20. Only one depth sensor 130 is shown in
A computer 102 at the booth 100 can capture visual data of the candidate 20 from the cameras 110, capture audio data of the candidate 20 from the microphones 120, and capture behavioral data of the candidate 20 from the depth sensors 130. This data can all be synchronized or aligned. This means, for example, that audio information recorded by all of the microphones 120 can be synchronized with the visual information recorded by all of the cameras 112, 114, 116 and the behavioral data taken from the sensors 130, so that all the data taken at the same time can be identified and compared for the same time segment.
The computer 102 is a computing device that includes a processor for processing computer programming instructions. In most cases, the processor is a CPU, such as the CPU devices created by Intel Corporation (Santa Clara, Calif.), Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (Santa Clara, Calif.), or a RISC processer produced according to the designs of Arm Holdings PLC (Cambridge, England). Furthermore, computer 102 has memory, which generally takes the form of both temporary, random access memory (RAM) and more permanent storage such a magnetic disk storage, FLASH memory, or another non-transitory (also referred to as permanent) storage medium. The memory and storage (referred to collectively as “memory”) contain both programming instructions and data. In practice, both programming and data will be stored permanently on non-transitory storage devices and transferred into RAM when needed for processing or analysis. In some embodiments, the computer 110 may include a graphics processing unit (or GPU) for enhanced processing of visual input and outputs, or an audio processing board, a single chip audio processor, or a digital signal processor (or DSP) that accelerates the processing of audio inputs and outputs.
It should be understood that the receiving, processing, analyzing, and storage of data can take place at the computer 102 in the booth 100 or at a remote server, such as system server 170. Discussion of the steps taken with data can be understood to apply to both the computer 102 and the server 170.
In some embodiments, the computer 102 is tasked with receiving the raw visual data from the cameras, the raw audio data from the microphones, and the raw sensor data from the behavioral depth sensors. The computer 102 is also tasked with making sure that this data is safely stored. The data can be stored locally, or it can be stored remotely. In
Although this database 180 is shown as being connected to the booth 100 over network 150, the data 182, 184, 186, 188 can be stored locally to the booth 100 and computer 102. To save storage space, audio and video compression formats can be utilized when storing data 180. These can include, but are not limited to, H.264, AVC, MPEG-4 Video, MP3, AAC, ALAC, and Windows Media Audio. Note that many of the video formats encode both visual and audio data. To the extent the microphones 120 are integrated into the cameras, the received audio and video data from a single integrated device can be stored as a single file. However, in some embodiments, audio data is stored separately from the video data.
Candidate data can be stored in a candidate profile 190 specific to the candidate. The database 180 can include a plurality of candidate profiles, such as one candidate profile for each candidate. Recorded data, such as data from the cameras 110, the microphones 120, and the sensors 130, can be processed and saved as candidate data in the candidate profile 190. Candidate data can include interview data 182, N-gram data 184, and other candidate data 186 that is recorded data specific to the candidate 20. Alternatively, N-gram data 184 can be stored outside of the candidate profile 190, as shown in
The computer 102 is generally responsible for coordinating the various elements of the booth 100. For instance, the computer 102 is able to provide visual instructions or prompts to a candidate 20 through one or more interfaces 140 that are visible to the candidate 20 when using the booth 100. Furthermore, audio instructions can be provided to the candidate 20 either through speakers (not shown) integrated into the booth 100 or through earpieces or headphones (also not shown) worn by the candidate 20. In addition, the computer 102 can be responsible for receiving input data from the user, such as through a touchpad integrated into interface 140.
The system 10 shown in
In
In some embodiments, the user can refer to the decision maker. The user can be presented with the sorted or ordered candidates. The user computer system 160 can take the form of a mobile device such as a smartphone or tablet computer. If the user computer 160 is a standard computer system, it can operate custom application software or browser software 166 that allows it to communicate over the network 150 as part of the system 10. In particular, the programming 166 can at least allow communication with the system server 170 over the network 150. The system 10 can also be designed to allow direct communication between the user's computer system 160 and the booth's computer 102, such as for the real-time connection, or even between the user computer system 160 and data 180. If the user computer 160 is a mobile device, it will operate either a custom app or a browser app 166 that achieves the same communication over network 150.
Note that even though
Database 180 can also contain opportunity data 188 or opening data, such as criteria data. Opportunity data 188 or opening data can include information that is of interest to the candidate or the user. The opportunity data can be relevant to the open opportunity, such as requirements of the user. In the context of an employment search, the opportunity data 188 may containing various attributes and experience requirements for the job opening. The database 180 can further include a data related to the successfully-selected candidates 189, such as a successfully-selected candidate database shown in
Database 180 can also include N-gram data, such as data that is gathered and manipulated by the system 10. As will be discussed later, the system 10 can use the audio data from a video interview to create N-gram data. This information can be used to help evaluate, sort, or order a candidate within a pool of candidate. Finally, the database 180 maintains other candidate data 186. Other candidate data 186 can include other data about a current candidate or candidate data about previous candidates. Previous candidate data can be used in an N-gram analysis as discussed below.
Referring now to
Referring now to
The keyword comparison 192 can also be referred to as a first analysis result. The keyword comparison 192 can include a comparison between textual data from the user and textual data from the candidate as discussed in regards to
The defined field comparison 194 can include a direct comparison between defined fields in the criteria data and defined fields in the candidate data such as discussed in regards to
The N-gram analysis 196 can include a comparison between audio data from the candidate and audio data from previously successfully-selected candidates as discussed in
The components included in the overall analysis result 197 can be weighted to provide a desired emphasis on a portion or on portions of the evaluation. In various embodiments, the overall analysis result 197 of the candidate can include weighting one or more of the keyword comparison 192, the defined field comparison 194, and the N-gram analysis 196. In some embodiments, the keyword comparison 192 (first analysis) result can be weighted more heavily than the defined field comparison 194 and the N-gram analysis 196, and the defined field comparison 194 can be weighed more heavily than the N-gram analysis 196. In an example, the keyword comparison 192 can be weighted to 70% of the overall analysis result 197, the defined field comparison 194 can be weighted at 20%, and the N-gram analysis 196 can be weighted at 10%.
Keyword Comparison (
In various embodiments, the candidate can provide textual candidate data 404 to the system. In an employment example, the textual candidate data 404 can include a resume and/or a cover letter. The textual criteria data 402 can be compared with the textual candidate data 404 to determine the number of direct matches 406. It should be understood that the more matches between the textual criteria data 402 and the textual candidate data 404 the more likely the candidate is a good fit for the open opportunity.
In some embodiments, the keyword comparison 192 can include a distance analysis or proximity match 408. In some instances, it can be that the closer a candidate is to the geographical location of the opportunity, the better the fit can be. In some embodiments, the system can review the textual criteria data 402 to determine the location of the open opportunity. The system can further review the textual candidate data 404 to determine the location of the candidate. A distance analysis between the geographical data in the criteria data and the geographical data in the candidate data can be performed. In some embodiments, the keyword comparison can incorporate the distance analysis into the keyword comparison result.
In an example of a keyword comparison, a user, such as an employer, while providing opportunity data can select at least five main keywords to use in the comparison. In some examples, the system can scan through textual criteria data, such as a job description, and look for keywords that match a keywords database maintained on the system server 170 or database 180. The system can determine the presence of the keywords in the textual candidate data 404. In an example, each keyword can be worth 15 points or 15% for a total of 75 points or 75%. If a candidate matches all five keywords, the candidate can get 75 points or 75%. Similarly, if a candidate only matches three keywords, the candidate can get 45 points or 45%. The distance analysis can provide the remaining 25 points or 25%. For example, candidates that are located within 15-mile radius can receive 25 points or 25%. The points and percentage can decrease as the candidate's location increases. For example, one point or 1% can be subtracted from the total 25 points or 25% for each mile the candidate is located outside of the 15-mile radius. As an example, a candidate that lives 25 miles away can get 15 points or 15%.
Defined Field Comparison (
After the candidate provide textual data, the candidate can provide additional data, such as defined field candidate data. The system can update the candidate's evaluation as additional candidate data is provided.
In some embodiments, the defined field criteria data comprises data for a first defined field and a second defined field. The defined field candidate data can also include data for a first defined field and a second defined field. The criteria data for the first field can be compared to the candidate data for the first field to determine if the candidate data achieves the criteria data. Similarly, the criteria data for the second field can be compared to the candidate data for the second field. The results of comparing each field of the criteria data to each field of the candidate data can be compiled into a single defined field analysis result.
Populating the Candidate Database (
In an embodiment, the method for populating the successfully-selected candidate database can include receiving data for an open opportunity 602. The received data can relate to the open opportunity. The received data can be criteria data. In the employment example, the data related to the open opportunity can include a job description and requirements for potential candidates.
After receiving the data for the open opportunity, the method can include populating a candidate pool for the open opportunity 604. In some embodiments, the method can search through an already existing candidate pool and narrow the existing candidate pool to candidates that would meet the criteria data from the user. In some embodiments, the method can accept requests from candidates that are interested in the open opportunity and populate the candidate pool with the requesting candidates. In some examples, each of the candidates in the pool have recorded a video interview, such as the candidate responding verbally to a series of prompts or questions. The video interview can be saved in a candidate profile specific to the candidate.
The candidates can be evaluated 606 to determine which candidate will be selected. In evaluating the candidates, the system can review or analyze candidate data for each candidate. A candidate can be selected 608. In an employment example, the selected candidate can be hired.
After the candidate is selected, it can be determined if the candidate was good selection 610. In some embodiments, a time period can pass and then the user can respond to the system either confirming that the selected candidate was a good selection or that the selected candidate is still employed. Alternatively, the user can respond that the candidate was not a good selection or is no longer employed. In some embodiments, it can be assumed that all selected candidates are good selections.
If the candidate is not a good selection, the successfully-selected candidate database is not update 612. In some embodiments, if the candidate is a good selection, the successfully-selected candidate data can be updated 614 to include the selected candidate's candidate data. In some embodiments, if the candidate is a good selection, the candidate's profile is updated to reflect that the candidate is a successfully-selected candidate. In various embodiments, a transcript of or the audio data of the candidate's video interview is saved in the successfully-selected candidate database. This database of video interview data from successfully-selected candidates can be used in future selection processes as described in
Evaluation Using Successfully-Selected Candidate Database (
The method can include receiving criteria data 702. In various embodiments, the criteria data can be received at a non-transitory computer memory, such as a portion of the system server. The criteria data received from the user can include textual criteria data, and defined field criteria data. As discussed above, the defined field criteria data can include first defined field criteria data and second defined field criteria data. In some embodiments, the criteria data can include a opportunity code that aligns with a successfully-selected candidate database for open opportunities with the same opportunity code. For example, if the system is being used to sort candidates for a nursing position, the system can access a successfully-selected candidate database for previous nursing positions. In some embodiments, the system can have very nuanced opportunity types, such as a nursing manager for a large hospital or an emergency room nurse for a rural hospital.
The method can include populating a candidate pool 704. In some embodiments, the method can search through an already existing candidate pool and narrow the existing candidate pool to candidates that would meet the criteria data from the user. In some embodiments, the method can accept requests from candidates that are interested in the open opportunity and populate the candidate pool with the requesting candidates. The method can further include receiving candidate data 706. Each candidate can have candidate data stored in a candidate profile on the database, as shown in
The system can analyze or evaluate each candidate 708. The evaluation can include one or more of the following portions (1) keyword comparison 710, (2) defined field comparison 712, and (3) N-gram analysis 714 with a successfully-selected candidate database 716. The keyword comparison was discussed above in
N-Gram Analysis (
Video Interview
In various embodiments, the candidate data can include an audio recording or an audio and video recording of a video interview, also referred to as a video resume. The video interview can include a series of candidate responses to prompts. In some embodiments, the video interview can be recorded in a booth (as shown in
In some embodiments, the series of prompts that are presented to each candidate can be is the same for different open opportunities of the same type. Similarly, each candidate for a specific open opportunity can be provided the same set of prompts. For example, the same prompts can be used for all open opportunities in health care positions. In other embodiments, the series of prompts is used only for candidates of more similar open opportunities. For example, the prompts to potential candidates for a current nursing position can be the same prompts as previous potential candidates responded to for a previous nursing position, such as a triage nurse position, a medical/surgical floor nurse position, an emergency room nurse position, or a nurse manager position.
In an embodiment, the number of prompts can be at least three and not more than fifteen. In an example, there can be three prompts total. In an example, there can be four prompts total. In an example, there can be five prompts total. In an example, there can be six prompts total. In an example, there can be seven prompts total. In an example, there can be eight prompts total. In an example, there can be nine prompts total. In an example, there can be ten prompts total. In an example, there can be eleven prompts total. In an example, there can be twelve prompts total. In an example, there can be thirteen prompts total. In an example, there can be fourteen prompts total. In an example, there can be fifteen prompts total.
In some embodiments, a candidate can be unhappy with his/her response to a prompt and opt to rerecord the response to that prompt. For example, candidate #3 might have only been pleased with his/her response to prompt C, and opted to rerecord the responses to prompts A, B, D, and E, which could explain why prompt C comes before the responses to prompts A, B, D, and E. In some embodiments, the system can automatically replace previous responses when a subsequent response to the same prompt is recorded. In other embodiments, the system allows the candidate the option of which response to the prompt should be retained for their video interview. In other embodiments, the system can recommend the candidate retain a specific version of their response, such as based on the N-gram analysis of both responses.
In another embodiment, candidate #3 might have skipped prompt A and prompt B. Candidate #3 then might have answered prompt C. After responding to prompt C, candidate #3 might have answered prompts A, B, D, and E in order.
It should be understood that “same prompt” can refer to different prompts that are related or similar, such as intending to capture the same subject matter. “Same prompts” can be slightly different, such that an update prompt can include updated vocabulary or rewording of a previous prompt, but still be considered the “same.” For example, prompts can be updated to account for societal shifts in language. The data that was recorded and maintained to the original (non-updated) prompt can still be quite relevant and still be used in the comparison, when a current candidate has responded to the updated prompt.
In an embodiment, each prompt can be assigned a specific code. The specific code can be used to identify which prompts (when updating has occurred) should be compared to each other. For example, a first iteration of a first prompt could include “What do you do in a stressful work situation?”. A second iteration of the first prompt could include “How do you handle stressful work situations?”. While these two prompts are not identical the data from the first iteration of the prompt can still be very relevant to the responses to the second iteration of the prompt. As such, the original prompt and the revised prompt can be given the same code, such that the stored responses to the original prompt can be used in a comparison with responses to the revised prompt.
N-Gram Creation
The audio data from the video interview can be used for the N-gram analysis. The audio data can be converted into a text-based transcript. The conversion from audio data to text-based transcript can be performed by one of the known conventionally used speech to text programs that are currently available.
The text-based transcript of the video interview or a portion of the video interview can be modified to remove stop words. Stop words can include commonly used words that provide very little useful information when determining the content of text-based transcript. Examples of common stop words include “a,” “that,” “as,” “and,” “my,” and “to”.
Once the stop words are removed, a cleaned transcript of the audio data exists, shown in
In some embodiments, after the N-grams are created, low value words can be removed. Low value words are additional words that do not provide significant context or contributions to the overall understanding of the data. In some examples, low value words can refer to words that are not nouns, adjectives, verbs, and adverbs. In some embodiments, after removing low value words only nouns, adjectives, verbs, and adverbs remain in the N-grams. Removing low value words from an N-gram data set can provide an N-gram data set that includes N-grams of different sizes.
Prior to removing the low value words, all of the N-grams shown in
In some embodiments, to aid in processing speeds, the list of N-grams can be alphabetized. The alphabetized list of N-grams can come from the N-gram data set shown in
After the N-gram data set is completed, the N-gram data set can be compared to the database of N-grams. The database of N-grams can be populated from the video interview (audio data) from previous candidates that were selected for a similar open opportunity.
It can be determined that candidates that have a high similarity rate with the databased of successfully-selected candidates compared to other current candidates are potentially a better fit for the current open opportunity, since they responded to the prompts in the video interview in more similar ways to previous candidates that were selected. In some embodiments, a percentage of candidate N-grams that match with the database of N-grams can be used, such as to normalize the data for the candidates regardless of how verbose he/she is in their responses to the prompts. As shown in TABLE 1 below, Candidate #1 matches more N-grams with the successfully-selected candidate N-grams than Candidate #2. However, that does not always equate to Candidate #1 being more similar to the successfully selected candidates. Candidate #2 has a higher percentage of matched N-grams. Table 1 shows Candidate #1 recorded a much wordier response than Candidate #2. In some embodiments, Candidate #1 can score more highly than Candidate #2, because Candidate #1 had more matched N-grams. In other embodiments, Candidate #2 can score more highly than Candidate #1, because Candidate #2 had a higher percentage of matched N-grams.
It should be understood that the steps discussed in
Recording Additional Responses to Prompts
As mentioned above in reference to
In some embodiments, both the initial recording and the secondary recording can be analyzed with the N-gram analysis. After the N-gram analysis has been completed for both recordings, the system can save or maintain the portions of the audio data that scored more highly (had a higher percentage of matched N-grams with the successfully-selected candidates) or had a higher similarity value. The similarity value can be equivalent to the percentage of matched N-grams between the current candidate's data and the successfully-selected candidate database. In various embodiments, the system can indicate to the candidate which recording has the highest similarity score.
User Interface (
Once the evaluation process for the candidates has been completed for each of the candidates, the candidates can be sorted based on their evaluations.
The candidates can be organized into a plurality of categories. In an embodiment, the candidates are organized into three categories. In some embodiments, the user interface can include a visual indication showing the assigned category for each candidate.
Comparing
The interfaces shown in
The various user interface embodiments described herein can provide an improved user experience. The user interface can provide a more efficient display of the current candidates and relevant information than the prior interfaces. The improved user interface can also allow a decision maker to more easily recognize which candidates the decision maker would like to follow up with or remove from consideration based on the functionality and presentation of the described interfaces.
Recording Additional Responses
Database Structure
The database can include groupings of successfully-selected candidates. The groupings can be determined based on the opportunity type that the candidate was selected for. For example, if the current open opportunity is for a nursing position, the database that corresponds with successfully-selected candidates for previous nursing positions can be accessed for the comparison with the current candidates.
In some embodiments, the successfully-selected candidate database can continue to grow as additional candidates are selected for open opportunities. As a result, future potential candidate can have more N-grams to be compared to than previous potential candidates, since each selected candidates' N-grams can be added to the existing database of N-grams.
In some embodiments, the successfully-selected candidate database can be configured to maintain a desired size, such as a desired number of N-grams or a desired number of successfully-selected candidates being in the database. In some embodiments, once the desired number is reached, as additional candidates or candidate data are added to the successfully-selected candidate database other candidates, candidate data, or N-grams can be removed. In some embodiments, the candidates that were selected more recently can be maintained or can replace candidates in the database that have been in the database the longest or were selected (added to the database) the most time ago.
In some embodiments, the successfully-selected candidate data within the successfully-selected candidate database can be weighted. In some embodiments, the most recently successfully-selected candidates can be weighted more heavily than previously selected candidates. In some scenarios, the N-grams of the most recently selected candidates can be more relevant, such as for including more relevant terminology or content, such as to account for societal shifts in language or updates in technology. For example, candidates that were selected in the previous year can have a weight of two, whereas candidates that were selected more than year prior can have a weight of one. If an N-gram within the candidate's N-gram data set matches with an N-gram of a candidate selected within the last year, it can be worth twice as much as matching an N-gram with an N-gram of a candidate that was selected more than one year prior.
In some embodiments, the data within the successfully-selected candidate database can expire or be removed from the database on a candidate-by-candidate basis. In some embodiments, the data within the successfully-selected candidate database can expire or be removed from the database on a prompt-by-prompt basis. In some embodiments, the responses to a first prompt can be maintained for a different time period than the response to a second prompt. For example, the first prompt can be a general question about what a person enjoys about their current job and the second prompt can be a specific questions about a specific technology the candidate prefers to use. The data for the first prompt can remain relevant for a longer period of time. In contrast, the data for the second prompt can become irrelevant quickly as new technology is introduced and utilized. In such an example, the data for the first prompt can be maintained longer than data for the second prompt.
The systems and methods provided herein can be used in a variety of context where various candidates are to be evaluated, sorted, organized, or ranked. For example, the systems and methods described herein could be used in a hiring/employment situation, a school admissions situation, a dating situation, or a political candidate selection process.
It should be noted that, as used in this specification and the appended claims, the singular forms “a,” “an,” and “the” include plural referents unless the content clearly dictates otherwise. It should also be noted that the term “or” is generally employed in its sense including “and/or” unless the content clearly dictates otherwise.
It should also be noted that, as used in this specification and the appended claims, the phrase “configured” describes a system, apparatus, or other structure that is constructed or configured to perform a particular task or adopt a particular configuration. The phrase “configured” can be used interchangeably with other similar phrases such as arranged and configured, constructed and arranged, constructed, manufactured and arranged, and the like.
All publications and patent applications in this specification are indicative of the level of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention pertains. All publications and patent applications are herein incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each individual publication or patent application was specifically and individually indicated by reference.
As used herein, the recitation of numerical ranges by endpoints shall include all numbers subsumed within that range (e.g., 2 to 8 includes 2.1, 2.8, 5.3, 7, etc.).
The headings used herein are provided for consistency with suggestions under 37 CFR 1.77 or otherwise to provide organizational cues. These headings shall not be viewed to limit or characterize the invention(s) set out in any claims that may issue from this disclosure. As an example, although the headings refer to a “Field,” such claims should not be limited by the language chosen under this heading to describe the so-called technical field. Further, a description of a technology in the “Background” is not an admission that technology is prior art to any invention(s) in this disclosure. Neither is the “Summary” to be considered as a characterization of the invention(s) set forth in issued claims.
The embodiments described herein are not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise forms disclosed in the following detailed description. Rather, the embodiments are chosen and described so that others skilled in the art can appreciate and understand the principles and practices. As such, aspects have been described with reference to various specific and preferred embodiments and techniques. However, it should be understood that many variations and modifications may be made while remaining within the spirit and scope herein.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1173785 | Deagan | Feb 1916 | A |
| 1686351 | Spitzglass | Oct 1928 | A |
| 3152622 | Rothermel | Oct 1964 | A |
| 3764135 | Madison | Oct 1973 | A |
| 5109281 | Kobori et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5410344 | Graves et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
| 5835667 | Wactlar et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5867209 | Irie et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5884004 | Sato et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5886967 | Aramaki | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5897220 | Huang et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5906372 | Recard | May 1999 | A |
| 5937138 | Fukuda et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5949792 | Yasuda et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 6128414 | Liu | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6229904 | Huang et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6289165 | Abecassis | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6484266 | Kashiwagi et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
| 6502199 | Kashiwagi et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
| 6504990 | Abecassis | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| RE37994 | Fukuda et al. | Feb 2003 | E |
| 6600874 | Fujita et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6618723 | Smith | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6981000 | Park et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
| 7095329 | Saubolle | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7146627 | Ismail et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
| 7293275 | Krieger et al. | Nov 2007 | B1 |
| 7313539 | Pappas et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
| 7336890 | Lu et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7499918 | Ogikubo | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7606444 | Erol et al. | Oct 2009 | B1 |
| 7650286 | Obeid | Jan 2010 | B1 |
| 7702542 | Aslanian | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7725812 | Balkus et al. | May 2010 | B1 |
| 7797402 | Roos | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7810117 | Karnalkar et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7865424 | Pappas et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 7895620 | Haberman et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
| 7904490 | Ogikubo | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7962375 | Pappas et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
| 7974443 | Kipman et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
| 7991635 | Hartmann | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 7996292 | Pappas et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8032447 | Pappas et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8046814 | Badenell | Oct 2011 | B1 |
| 8099415 | Luo et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8111326 | Talwar | Feb 2012 | B1 |
| 8169548 | Ryckman | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8185543 | Choudhry et al. | May 2012 | B1 |
| 8229841 | Pappas et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8238718 | Toyama et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8241628 | Diefenbach-Streiber et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8266068 | Foss et al. | Sep 2012 | B1 |
| 8300785 | White | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8301550 | Pappas et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8301790 | Morrison et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8326133 | Lemmers | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8326853 | Richard et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8331457 | Mizuno et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8331760 | Butcher | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8339500 | Hattori et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8358346 | Hikita et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8387094 | Ho et al. | Feb 2013 | B1 |
| 8505054 | Kirley | Aug 2013 | B1 |
| 8508572 | Ryckman et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8543450 | Pappas et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
| 8560482 | Miranda et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8566880 | Dunker et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8600211 | Nagano et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
| 8611422 | Yagnik et al. | Dec 2013 | B1 |
| 8620771 | Pappas et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
| 8633964 | Zhu | Jan 2014 | B1 |
| 8650114 | Pappas et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
| 8751231 | Larsen et al. | Jun 2014 | B1 |
| 8774604 | Torii et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8792780 | Hattori | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8824863 | Kitamura et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8854457 | De Vleeschouwer et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8856000 | Larsen et al. | Oct 2014 | B1 |
| 8902282 | Zhu | Dec 2014 | B1 |
| 8909542 | Montero et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
| 8913103 | Sargin et al. | Dec 2014 | B1 |
| 8918532 | Lueth et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
| 8930260 | Pappas et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
| 8988528 | Hikita | Mar 2015 | B2 |
| 9009045 | Larsen et al. | Apr 2015 | B1 |
| 9015746 | Holmdahl et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
| 9026471 | Pappas et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
| 9026472 | Pappas et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
| 9047634 | Pappas et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
| 9064258 | Pappas et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
| 9070150 | Pappas et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
| 9092813 | Pappas et al. | Jul 2015 | B2 |
| 9106804 | Roberts et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9111579 | Meaney et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9117201 | Kennell et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9129640 | Hamer | Sep 2015 | B2 |
| 9135674 | Yagnik et al. | Sep 2015 | B1 |
| 9223781 | Pearson et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
| 9224156 | Moorer | Dec 2015 | B2 |
| 9305286 | Larsen et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
| 9305287 | Krishnamoorthy et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
| 9355151 | Cranfill et al. | May 2016 | B1 |
| 9378486 | Taylor et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
| 9398315 | Oks et al. | Jul 2016 | B2 |
| 9402050 | Recchia et al. | Jul 2016 | B1 |
| 9437247 | Pendergast et al. | Sep 2016 | B2 |
| 9438934 | Zhu | Sep 2016 | B1 |
| 9443556 | Cordell et al. | Sep 2016 | B2 |
| 9456174 | Boyle et al. | Sep 2016 | B2 |
| 9462301 | Paśko | Oct 2016 | B2 |
| 9501663 | Hopkins et al. | Nov 2016 | B1 |
| 9501944 | Boneta et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
| 9542452 | Ross et al. | Jan 2017 | B1 |
| 9544380 | Deng et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
| 9554160 | Han et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
| 9570107 | Boiman et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
| 9583144 | Ricciardi | Feb 2017 | B2 |
| 9600723 | Pantofaru et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
| 9607655 | Bloch et al. | Mar 2017 | B2 |
| 9652745 | Taylor et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
| 9653115 | Bloch et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
| 9666194 | Ondeck et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
| 9684435 | Carr et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
| 9693019 | Fluhr et al. | Jun 2017 | B1 |
| 9710790 | Taylor et al. | Jul 2017 | B2 |
| 9723223 | Banta et al. | Aug 2017 | B1 |
| 9747573 | Shaburov et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
| 9792955 | Fleischhauer et al. | Oct 2017 | B2 |
| 9805767 | Strickland | Oct 2017 | B1 |
| 9823809 | Roos | Nov 2017 | B2 |
| 9876963 | Nakamura et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
| 9881647 | McCauley et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
| 9936185 | Delvaux et al. | Apr 2018 | B2 |
| 9940508 | Kaps et al. | Apr 2018 | B2 |
| 9940973 | Roberts et al. | Apr 2018 | B2 |
| 9979921 | Holmes | May 2018 | B2 |
| 10008239 | Eris | Jun 2018 | B2 |
| 10019653 | Wilf et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
| 10021377 | Newton et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
| 10108932 | Sung et al. | Oct 2018 | B2 |
| 10115038 | Hazur et al. | Oct 2018 | B2 |
| 10147460 | Ullrich | Dec 2018 | B2 |
| 10152695 | Chiu et al. | Dec 2018 | B1 |
| 10152696 | Thankappan et al. | Dec 2018 | B2 |
| 10168866 | Wakeen et al. | Jan 2019 | B2 |
| 10178427 | Huang | Jan 2019 | B2 |
| 10235008 | Lee et al. | Mar 2019 | B2 |
| 10242345 | Taylor et al. | Mar 2019 | B2 |
| 10268736 | Balasia et al. | Apr 2019 | B1 |
| 10296873 | Balasia et al. | May 2019 | B1 |
| 10310361 | Featherstone | Jun 2019 | B1 |
| 10318927 | Champaneria | Jun 2019 | B2 |
| 10325243 | Ross et al. | Jun 2019 | B1 |
| 10325517 | Nielson et al. | Jun 2019 | B2 |
| 10331764 | Rao et al. | Jun 2019 | B2 |
| 10346805 | Taylor et al. | Jul 2019 | B2 |
| 10346928 | Li et al. | Jul 2019 | B2 |
| 10353720 | Wich-vila | Jul 2019 | B1 |
| 10433030 | Packard et al. | Oct 2019 | B2 |
| 10438135 | Larsen et al. | Oct 2019 | B2 |
| 10489439 | Calapodescu et al. | Nov 2019 | B2 |
| 10607188 | Kyllonen et al. | Mar 2020 | B2 |
| 10657498 | Dey et al. | May 2020 | B2 |
| 10694097 | Shirakyan | Jun 2020 | B1 |
| 10728443 | Olshansky | Jul 2020 | B1 |
| 10735396 | Krstic et al. | Aug 2020 | B2 |
| 10748118 | Fang | Aug 2020 | B2 |
| 10796217 | Wu | Oct 2020 | B2 |
| 10963841 | Olshansky | Mar 2021 | B2 |
| 11023735 | Olshansky | Jun 2021 | B1 |
| 11127232 | Olshansky | Sep 2021 | B2 |
| 20010001160 | Shoff et al. | May 2001 | A1 |
| 20010038746 | Hughes et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20020097984 | Abecassis | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020113879 | Battle et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020122659 | McGrath et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020191071 | Rui et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030005429 | Colsey | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030027611 | Recard | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030189589 | Leblanc et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030194211 | Abecassis | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20040033061 | Hughes et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040186743 | Cordero | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040264919 | Taylor et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050060175 | Farber | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050095569 | Franklin | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050137896 | Pentecost et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050187765 | Kim et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050232462 | Vallone et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050235033 | Doherty | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050271251 | Russell et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060042483 | Work et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060045179 | Mizuno et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060100919 | Levine | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060116555 | Pavlidis et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060229896 | Rosen et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20070088601 | Money et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070124161 | Mueller et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070237502 | Ryckman et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070288245 | Benjamin | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20080086504 | Sanders et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20090083103 | Basser | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090083670 | Roos | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090087161 | Roberts et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090144785 | Walker et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090171899 | Chittoor et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090248685 | Pasqualoni et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090258334 | Pyne | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20100086283 | Ramachandran et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100143329 | Larsen | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100183280 | Beauregard et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100191561 | Jeng et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100199228 | Latta et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100223109 | Hawn et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100325307 | Roos | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20110055098 | Stewart | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110055930 | Flake et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110060671 | Erbey et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110076656 | Scott et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110088081 | Folkesson et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110135279 | Leonard | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20120036127 | Work et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
| 20120053996 | Galbavy | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120084649 | Dowdell et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120114246 | Weitzman | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120130771 | Kannan et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120257875 | Sharpe et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120271774 | Clegg | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20130007670 | Roos | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130016815 | Odinak et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130016816 | Odinak et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130016823 | Odinak et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130024105 | Thomas | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130111401 | Newman et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130121668 | Meaney et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130124998 | Pendergast et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130124999 | Agnoli et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130125000 | Fleischhauer et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130177296 | Geisner et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130212033 | Work et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130212180 | Work et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130216206 | Dubin et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130218688 | Roos | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130222601 | Engstroem et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130226578 | Bolton et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130226674 | Field et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130226910 | Work et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130254192 | Work et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20130259447 | Sathish et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130266925 | Nunamaker et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130268452 | MacEwen et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130283378 | Costigan et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130290210 | Cline et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130290325 | Work et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130290420 | Work et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130290448 | Work et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130297589 | Work et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130332381 | Clark et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130332382 | Lapasta et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20140012586 | Rubin | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140036023 | Croen et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140089217 | McGovern et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140092254 | Mughal et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
| 20140123177 | Kim et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140125703 | Roveta et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140143165 | Posse et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140153902 | Pearson et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
| 20140186004 | Hamer | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140191939 | Penn et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140192200 | Zagron | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140198196 | Howard et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140214709 | Greaney | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140245146 | Roos | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140258288 | Work et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140270706 | Pasko | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140278506 | Rogers et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140278683 | Kennell et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140279634 | Seeker | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140282709 | Hardy et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140317009 | Bilodeau et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
| 20140317126 | Work et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
| 20140325359 | Vehovsky et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
| 20140325373 | Kramer et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
| 20140327779 | Eronen et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
| 20140330734 | Sung et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
| 20140336942 | Pe'er et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
| 20140337900 | Hurley | Nov 2014 | A1 |
| 20140356822 | Hoque et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
| 20140358810 | Hardtke et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
| 20140359439 | Lyren | Dec 2014 | A1 |
| 20150003603 | Odinak et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
| 20150003605 | Odinak et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
| 20150006422 | Carter et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
| 20150012453 | Odinak et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
| 20150046357 | Danson et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
| 20150063775 | Nakamura et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
| 20150067723 | Bloch et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
| 20150099255 | Aslan et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
| 20150100702 | Krishna et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
| 20150127565 | Chevalier et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
| 20150139601 | Mate et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
| 20150154564 | Moon et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
| 20150155001 | Kikugawa et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
| 20150170303 | Geritz et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
| 20150201134 | Carr et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| 20150205800 | Work et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| 20150205872 | Work et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| 20150206102 | Cama et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| 20150222815 | Wang et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150228306 | Roberts et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150242707 | Wilf et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150269165 | Work et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
| 20150269529 | Kyllonen et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
| 20150269530 | Work et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
| 20150271289 | Work et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
| 20150278223 | Work et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
| 20150278290 | Work et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
| 20150278964 | Work et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
| 20150324698 | Karaoguz et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
| 20150339939 | Gustafson et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
| 20150356512 | Bradley | Dec 2015 | A1 |
| 20150380052 | Hamer | Dec 2015 | A1 |
| 20160005029 | Ivey et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
| 20160036976 | Odinak et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
| 20160104096 | Ovick et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
| 20160116827 | Tarres Bolos | Apr 2016 | A1 |
| 20160117942 | Marino et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
| 20160139562 | Crowder et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
| 20160154883 | Boerner | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160155475 | Hamer | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160180234 | Siebach et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160180883 | Hamer | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160219264 | Delvaux et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
| 20160225409 | Eris | Aug 2016 | A1 |
| 20160225410 | Lee et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
| 20160247537 | Ricciardi | Aug 2016 | A1 |
| 20160267436 | Silber et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
| 20160313892 | Roos | Oct 2016 | A1 |
| 20160323608 | Bloch et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
| 20160330398 | Recchia et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
| 20160364692 | Bhaskaran et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
| 20170026667 | Pasko | Jan 2017 | A1 |
| 20170039525 | Seidle et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
| 20170076751 | Hamer | Mar 2017 | A9 |
| 20170134776 | Ranjeet et al. | May 2017 | A1 |
| 20170164013 | Abramov et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
| 20170164014 | Abramov et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
| 20170164015 | Abramov et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
| 20170171602 | Qu | Jun 2017 | A1 |
| 20170178688 | Ricciardi | Jun 2017 | A1 |
| 20170195491 | Odinak et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
| 20170206504 | Taylor et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
| 20170213190 | Hazan | Jul 2017 | A1 |
| 20170213573 | Takeshita et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
| 20170227353 | Brunner | Aug 2017 | A1 |
| 20170236073 | Borisyuk et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
| 20170244894 | Aggarwal et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
| 20170244984 | Aggarwal et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
| 20170244991 | Aggarwal et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
| 20170262706 | Sun et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
| 20170264958 | Hutten | Sep 2017 | A1 |
| 20170293413 | Matsushita et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
| 20170316806 | Warren et al. | Nov 2017 | A1 |
| 20170332044 | Marlow et al. | Nov 2017 | A1 |
| 20170353769 | Husain et al. | Dec 2017 | A1 |
| 20170372748 | McCauley et al. | Dec 2017 | A1 |
| 20180011621 | Roos | Jan 2018 | A1 |
| 20180025303 | Janz | Jan 2018 | A1 |
| 20180054641 | Hall et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
| 20180070045 | Holmes | Mar 2018 | A1 |
| 20180074681 | Roos | Mar 2018 | A1 |
| 20180082238 | Shani | Mar 2018 | A1 |
| 20180082680 | Pereg | Mar 2018 | A1 |
| 20180096307 | Fortier et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
| 20180109737 | Nakamura et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
| 20180109826 | McCoy et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
| 20180110460 | Danson et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
| 20180114154 | Bae | Apr 2018 | A1 |
| 20180130497 | McCauley et al. | May 2018 | A1 |
| 20180132014 | Khazanov et al. | May 2018 | A1 |
| 20180150604 | Arena et al. | May 2018 | A1 |
| 20180158027 | Venigalla | Jun 2018 | A1 |
| 20180182436 | Ullrich | Jun 2018 | A1 |
| 20180191955 | Aoki et al. | Jul 2018 | A1 |
| 20180218238 | Viirre et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
| 20180226102 | Roberts et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
| 20180227501 | King | Aug 2018 | A1 |
| 20180232751 | Terhark et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
| 20180247271 | Van Hoang et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
| 20180253697 | Sung et al. | Sep 2018 | A1 |
| 20180268868 | Salokannel et al. | Sep 2018 | A1 |
| 20180270613 | Park | Sep 2018 | A1 |
| 20180302680 | Cormican | Oct 2018 | A1 |
| 20180308521 | Iwamoto | Oct 2018 | A1 |
| 20180316947 | Todd | Nov 2018 | A1 |
| 20180336528 | Carpenter et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
| 20180336930 | Takahashi | Nov 2018 | A1 |
| 20180350405 | Marco et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
| 20180353769 | Smith et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
| 20180374251 | Mitchell et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
| 20180376225 | Jones et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
| 20190005373 | Nims et al. | Jan 2019 | A1 |
| 20190019157 | Saha et al. | Jan 2019 | A1 |
| 20190057356 | Larsen et al. | Feb 2019 | A1 |
| 20190087455 | He | Mar 2019 | A1 |
| 20190087558 | Mercury et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
| 20190096307 | Liang et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
| 20190141033 | Kaafar et al. | May 2019 | A1 |
| 20190220824 | Liu | Jul 2019 | A1 |
| 20190244176 | Chuang et al. | Aug 2019 | A1 |
| 20190259002 | Balasia et al. | Aug 2019 | A1 |
| 20190295040 | Clines | Sep 2019 | A1 |
| 20190311488 | Sareen | Oct 2019 | A1 |
| 20190325064 | Mathiesen et al. | Oct 2019 | A1 |
| 20200012350 | Tay | Jan 2020 | A1 |
| 20200110786 | Kim | Apr 2020 | A1 |
| 20200126545 | Kakkar et al. | Apr 2020 | A1 |
| 20200143329 | Gamaliel | May 2020 | A1 |
| 20200175961 | Thomson | Jun 2020 | A1 |
| 20200311163 | Ma et al. | Oct 2020 | A1 |
| 20200311682 | Olshansky | Oct 2020 | A1 |
| 20200311953 | Olshansky | Oct 2020 | A1 |
| 20200396376 | Olshansky | Dec 2020 | A1 |
| 20210035047 | Mossoba et al. | Feb 2021 | A1 |
| 20210158663 | Buchholz et al. | May 2021 | A1 |
| 20210174308 | Olshansky | Jun 2021 | A1 |
| 20210233262 | Olshansky | Jul 2021 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 2002310201 | Mar 2003 | AU |
| 2007249205 | Mar 2013 | AU |
| 2206105 | Dec 2000 | CA |
| 2763634 | Dec 2012 | CA |
| 109146430 | Jan 2019 | CN |
| 1376584 | Jan 2004 | EP |
| 1566748 | Aug 2005 | EP |
| 1775949 | Dec 2007 | EP |
| 1954041 | Aug 2008 | EP |
| 2009258175 | Nov 2009 | JP |
| 2019016192 | Jan 2019 | JP |
| 9703366 | Jan 1997 | WO |
| 9713366 | Apr 1997 | WO |
| 9713367 | Apr 1997 | WO |
| 9828908 | Jul 1998 | WO |
| 9841978 | Sep 1998 | WO |
| 9905865 | Feb 1999 | WO |
| 0133421 | May 2001 | WO |
| 0117250 | Sep 2002 | WO |
| 03003725 | Jan 2003 | WO |
| 2004062563 | Jul 2004 | WO |
| 2005114377 | Dec 2005 | WO |
| 2006103578 | Oct 2006 | WO |
| 2006129496 | Dec 2006 | WO |
| 2007039994 | Apr 2007 | WO |
| 2007097218 | Aug 2007 | WO |
| 2008029803 | Mar 2008 | WO |
| 2008039407 | Apr 2008 | WO |
| 2009042858 | Apr 2009 | WO |
| 2009042900 | Apr 2009 | WO |
| 2009075190 | Jun 2009 | WO |
| 2009116955 | Sep 2009 | WO |
| 2009157446 | Dec 2009 | WO |
| 2010055624 | May 2010 | WO |
| 2010116998 | Oct 2010 | WO |
| 2011001180 | Jan 2011 | WO |
| 2011007011 | Jan 2011 | WO |
| 2011035419 | Mar 2011 | WO |
| 2011129578 | Oct 2011 | WO |
| 2011136571 | Nov 2011 | WO |
| 2012002896 | Jan 2012 | WO |
| 2012068433 | May 2012 | WO |
| 2012039959 | Jun 2012 | WO |
| 2012089855 | Jul 2012 | WO |
| 2013026095 | Feb 2013 | WO |
| 2013039351 | Mar 2013 | WO |
| 2013074207 | May 2013 | WO |
| 2013088208 | Jun 2013 | WO |
| 2013093176 | Jun 2013 | WO |
| 2013131134 | Sep 2013 | WO |
| 2013165923 | Nov 2013 | WO |
| 2014089362 | Jun 2014 | WO |
| 2014093668 | Jun 2014 | WO |
| 2014152021 | Sep 2014 | WO |
| 2014163283 | Oct 2014 | WO |
| 2014164549 | Oct 2014 | WO |
| 2015031946 | Apr 2015 | WO |
| 2015071490 | May 2015 | WO |
| 2015109290 | Jul 2015 | WO |
| 2016031431 | Mar 2016 | WO |
| 2016053522 | Apr 2016 | WO |
| 2016073206 | May 2016 | WO |
| 2016123057 | Aug 2016 | WO |
| 2016138121 | Sep 2016 | WO |
| 2016138161 | Sep 2016 | WO |
| 2016186798 | Nov 2016 | WO |
| 2016189348 | Dec 2016 | WO |
| 2017022641 | Feb 2017 | WO |
| 2017042831 | Mar 2017 | WO |
| 2017049612 | Mar 2017 | WO |
| 2017051063 | Mar 2017 | WO |
| 2017096271 | Jun 2017 | WO |
| 2017130810 | Aug 2017 | WO |
| 2017150772 | Sep 2017 | WO |
| 2017192125 | Nov 2017 | WO |
| 2018042175 | Mar 2018 | WO |
| 2018094443 | May 2018 | WO |
| 2020198230 | Oct 2020 | WO |
| 2020198240 | Oct 2020 | WO |
| 2020198363 | Oct 2020 | WO |
| 2021108564 | Jun 2021 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| “Air Canada Keeping Your Points Active Aeroplan,” https://www.aircanada.com/us/en/aco/home/aeroplan/your-aeroplan/inactivity-policy.html, 6 pages. |
| “American Express Frequently Asked Question: Why were Membership Rewards points forfeited and how can I reinstate them?” https://www.americanexpress.com/us/customer-service/faq.membership-rewards-points-forfeiture.html, 2 pages. |
| “DaXtra Parser (CVX) Technical Specifications,” DaXtra Parser Spec. available at URL: <https://cvxdemo.daxtra.com/cvx/download/Parser%20Technical%20Specifications.pdf> at least as early as Feb. 25, 2021 (3 pages). |
| File History for U.S. Appl. No. 16/366,746, filed Sep. 7, 2021 (353 pages). |
| File History for U.S. Appl. No. 16/828,578, filed Sep. 7, 2021 (353 pages). |
| File History for U.S. Appl. No. 16/366,703, filed Sep. 7, 2021 (727 pages). |
| File History for U.S. Appl. No. 17/212,688, filed Sep. 7, 2021 (311 pages). |
| File History for U.S. Appl. No. 16/696,781, filed Sep. 7, 2021 (453 pages). |
| File History for U.S. Appl. No. 17/025,902, filed Sep. 7, 2021 (368 pages). |
| File History for U.S. Appl. No. 16/931,964, filed Sep. 7, 2021 (259 pages). |
| “International Search Report and Written Opinion,” for PCT Application No. PCT/US2020/024470 dated Jul. 9, 2020 (13 pages). |
| “International Search Report and Written Opinion,” for PCT Application No. PCT/US2020/024488 dated May 19, 2020 (14 pages). |
| “International Search Report and Written Opinion,” for PCT Application No. PCT/US2020/024722 dated Jul. 10, 2020 (13 pages). |
| “International Search Report and Written Opinion,” for PCT Application No. PCT/US2020/062246 dated Apr. 1, 2021 (18 pages). |
| “International Search Report and Written Opinion,” for PCT Application No. PCT/US2021/024423 dated Jun. 16, 2021 (13 pages). |
| “International Search Report and Written Opinion,” for PCT Application No. PCT/US2021/024450 dated Jun. 4, 2021 (14 pages). |
| “Invitation to Pay Additional Fees,” for PCT Application No. PCT/US2020/062246 dated Feb. 11, 2021 (14 pages). |
| “Non-Final Office Action,” for U.S. Appl. No. 16/910,986 dated Jun. 23, 2021 (70 pages). |
| “Nurse Resumes,” Post Job Free Resume Search Results for “nurse” available at URL <https://www.postjobfree.com/resumes?q=nurse&l=&radius=25> at least as early as Jan. 26, 2021 (2 pages). |
| “Nurse,” LiveCareer Resume Search results available online at URL <https://www.livecareer.com/resume-search/search?jt=nurse> website published as early as Dec. 21, 2017 (4 pages). |
| “Resume Database,” Mighty Recruiter Resume Database available online at URL <https://www.mightyrecruiter.com/features/resume-database> at least as early as Sep. 4, 2017 (6 pages). |
| “Resume Library,” Online job board available at Resume-library.com at least as early as Aug. 6, 2019 (6 pages). |
| “Television Studio,” Wikipedia, Published Mar. 8, 2019 and retrieved May 27, 2021 from URL <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index/php?title=Television_studio&oldid=886710983> (3 pages). |
| “Understanding Multi-Dimensionality in Vector Space Modeling,” Pythonic Excursions article published Apr. 16, 2019, accessible at URL <https://aegis4048.github.io/understanding_multi-dimensionality_in_vector_space_modeling> (29 pages). |
| Advantage Video Systems “Jeffrey Stansfield of AVS interviews rep about Air-Hush products at the 2019 NAMM Expo,” YouTube video, available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWzrM99qk_o, accessed Jan. 17, 2021. |
| Alley, E. “Professional Autonomy in Video Relay Service Interpreting: Perceptions of American Sign Language-English Interpreters,” (Order No. 10304259). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Professional. (Year: 2016), 209 pages. |
| Bishop, Todd “Microsoft patents tech to score meetings using body language, facial expressions, other data,” Article published Nov. 28, 2020 at URL <https://www.geekwire.com/author/todd/> (7 pages). |
| Brocardo, Marcelo Luiz, et al. “Verifying Online User Identity using Stylometric Analysis for Short Messages,” Journal of Networks, vol. 9, No. 12, Dec. 2014, pp. 3347-3355. |
| Hughes, K. “Corporate Channels: How American Business and Industry Made Television Useful,” (Order No. 10186420). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Professional. (Year: 2015), 499 pages. |
| Jakubowski, Kelly, et al. “Extracting Coarse Body Movements from Video in Music Performance: A Comparison of Automated Computer Vision Techniques with Motion Capture Data,” Front. Digit. Humanit. 2017, 4:9 (8 pages). |
| Johnston, A. M, et al. “A Mediated Discourse Analysis of Immigration Gatekeeping Interviews,” (Order No. 3093235). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Professional (Year: 2003), 262 pages. |
| Lai, Kenneth, et al. “Decision Support for Video-based Detection of Flu Symptoms,” Biometric Technologies Laboratory, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Calgary, Canada, Aug. 24, 2020 available at URL <https://ucalgary.ca/labs/biometric-technologies/publications> (8 pages). |
| Liu, Weihua, et al.“RGBD Video Based Human Hand Trajectory Tracking and Gesture Recognition System,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering vol. 2015, article ID 863732 (16 pages). |
| Luenendonk, Martin “The Secrets to Interviewing for a Role That's Slightly Out of Reach,” Cleverism Article available at URL <https://www.cleverism.com/interviewing-for-a-role-thats-slightly-out-of-reach/> last updated Sep. 25, 2019 (13 pages). |
| Pentland, S. J. “Human-Analytics in Information Systems Research and Applications in Personnel Selection,” (Order No. 10829600). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Professional. (Year: 2018), 158 pages. |
| Ramanarayanan, Vikram, et al. “Evaluating Speech, Face, Emotion and Body Movement Time-series Features for Automated Multimodal Presentation Scoring,” In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM on (ICMI 2015). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 23-30 (8 pages). |
| Randhavane, Tanmay, et al. “Identifying Emotions from Walking Using Affective and Deep Features,” Jan. 9, 2020 Article available at Cornell University website URL <https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.11884v4> (15 pages). |
| Swanepoel, De Wet, et al.“A Systematic Review of Telehealth Applications in Audiology,” Telemedicine and e-Health 16.2 (2010): 181-200 (20 pages). |
| Wang, Jenny “How to Build a Resume Recommender like the Applicant Tracking System (ATS),” Towards Data Science article published Jun. 25, 2020, accessible at URL <https://towardsdatascience.com/resume-screening-tool-resume-recommendation-engine-in-a-nutshell-53fcf6e6559b> (14 pages). |
| Yun, Jaeseok, et al. “Human Movement Detection and Identification Using Pyroelectric Infrared Sensors,” Sensors 2014, 14, 8057-8081 (25 pages). |