EXHIBIT 2002
`
`EXHIBIT 2002
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 2002
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PERFORMANCE OF LEADING
`OPTICAL HEART RATE MONITORS
`DURING INTERVAL EXERCISE
`CONDITIONS
`
`
`Valencell Biometrics Lab
`January 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`VALENCELL_0001
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Why we test
`
`As a developer of optical heart rate monitor (OHRM) technology, Valencell has a
`critical need to objectively understand how all OHRM technologies in the market,
`not just Valencell’s, perform in all conditions. We want to know how these
`technologies perform, why they perform the way they do, how they work, and under
`what conditions they don’t work. If our technology is not performing to our
`customers’ high standards for accuracy, our business will suffer. Period.
`
`As you will see from the results in this report, Valencell technology is performing at
`the highest levels in the industry.
`
`Valencell Biometrics Lab
`
`We created the Valencell Biometrics Lab to serve not only as a testing ground for
`the latest in biometric wearable technology, but as a check & balance on our
`product development teams to ensure the highest standards. The lab is run by Dr.
`Chris Eschbach, PhD exercise physiologist, and operated by a team of exercise
`scientists who have tested thousands of devices of all types on thousands of test
`subjects over the years.
`
`
`
`
`
`The Lab maintains a rotating pool of nearly 100 volunteers who visit the lab every
`week to participate in testing. The volunteer pool consists of a broad range of ages,
`weights, fitness levels, skin tones, and physiological habitus, which enables
`Valencell to test how devices work across a diverse population of users.
`
`Testing methodology
`
`This particular investigation involved testing several different devices and two of
`those devices in multiple positions on the arm. Subjects included 30 healthy adults
`(15 males and 15 females), ranging in age from 21 to 68. At most 4 devices under
`test were worn by the subject at one time – one on each wrist and arm (forearm or
`upper arm), respectively. All data was compared to the Polar H7 BLE chest strap
`heart rate monitor as a benchmark. Devices were always worn according to the
`
`
`
`2
`
`VALENCELL_0002
`
`
`
`
`manufacturer’s directions, and there was never more than one wrist device worn on
`the same wrist. All subjects performed the same test with all devices: an 8-minute
`indoor dynamic treadmill test, commonly known as the “Valencell Test”:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Over years of testing, the Valencell Test has been shown to identify weaknesses in
`OHRM devices, particularly in tracking changes in heart rate and other biometrics
`caused by varying activity intensity in different intervals.
`
`
`
`Devices tested
`The following devices were tested:
` Valencell’s reference design
` Valencell’s partners’ wrist/arm products
` Leading competitor products
`
`
`Device Placement, Recording & Data Extraction
`
`Wrist Devices
`Subjects wore one wrist device on each arm during testing, and the devices were
`assigned at random to the subject’s dominant and non-dominant sides. All devices
`were put on by the tester to ensure consistency. Placement was approximately one
`finger proximal to the ulnar styloid process. The device was tightened to the point
`where it would not slide when the subject shook their wrist but was not
`uncomfortable or squeezing the arm.
`
`Forearm Devices
`Subjects wore one forearm device on each arm during testing, and the devices
`were assigned at random to the subject’s dominant and non-dominant sides. All
`
`
`
`3
`
`VALENCELL_0003
`
`
`
`
`
`
`devices were put on by the tester to ensure consistency. Placement was
`approximately two fingers distal to the elbow crease and aligned with the radial
`artery. The straps were tightened snuggly to prevent sliding.
`
`Upper Arm Devices
`Subjects wore only one upper arm device at a time because they wore an armband
`with an iPod Touch on the other arm. Devices were assigned at random to the
`subject’s dominant and non-dominant sides. All devices were put on by the tester to
`ensure consistency. Placement was approximately four fingers distal to the
`shoulder joint on the lateral side of the arm, directly on top of the deltoid muscle.
`The straps were tightened snuggly to prevent sliding.
`
`
`
`
`
`Sources of Error
`
` Sweat occasionally caused the devices to slide, even when the test started
`with the proper tightness and fit.
` Due to arm and/or wrist circumference, the devices were in a slightly
`different location and tightness on some participants.
` The Valencell Reference Design at the upper arm had to be lower on the
`arm for several participants.
`
`
`It is also important to note that it is common for the benchmark chest straps to
`experience errors. Valencell has done simultaneous testing with multiple CSHRM
`devices and found that they typically produce results within +/-5% of each other
`anywhere from 95-98% of the time.
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`VALENCELL_0004
`
`
`
`Test Results
`
`Device
`
`Percent of data within
`
`Tests included in data
`
`(body location
`
`)
`
`+/— 5% of chest strap
`
`Valencell reference design
`
`20--
`
`94%
`
`(upper arm)
`
`Commercially available
`
`(upper arm)
`
`Commercially available
`
`(forearm)
`
`Commercially available
`
`(wrist)
`
`92%
`
`90%
`
`89%
`
`20
`
`20
`
`20
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`20--
`19--
`
`82%
`
`79%
`
`(wrist)
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`77%
`
`65%
`
`64%
`
`20--
`15--
`14--
`20--
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`47%
`
`Conclusions
`
`While many different products on the market today claim to monitor heart rate at the
`wrist, there remain significant differences in the accuracy in these OHRM products.
`This research clearly shows the accuracy in these devices varies significantly,
`particularly during interval training that involves numerous changes to the heart rate
`in short periods of time.
`
`Valencell has dedicated significant R&D resources to solving many of the
`challenges with measure biometrics at the wrist and devices powered by Valencell
`technology continue to outperfonn.
`
`VALENCELL_0005
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
