An investigation into analyzing patents by chemical structure using Thomson's Derwent World Patent Index codes

World Patent Information

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 188-198

  Calcagno, Mark ^a  

^a PROCTER AND GAMBLE COMPANY   (United States)

Author keywords

Chemical information; Cluster analysis; Intellectual property analysis; Markush structures; Patent information

Indexed keywords

EID: 45649084075     PISSN: 01722190     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.wpi.2007.10.007     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Barnard J.M., and Downs G.M. Clustering of chemical structures on the basis of two-dimensional similarity measures. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 32 (1992) 644-649
2. Barnard J.M., and Downs G.M. Clustering methods and their uses in computational chemistry. In: Lipowitz K.B., and Boyd D.B. (Eds). Reviews in computational chemistry vol. 18 (2002), Wiley-VCH, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1-40
3. Lameijer E.-W., Kok J.N., Back T., and IJzerman A.P. Mining a chemical database for fragment co-occurrence: discovery of "chemical cliche's". J Chem Inf Model 46 (2006) 553-562
4. Jorgensen A.M.M., Langgard M., Gundertofte K., and Pedersen J.T. A fragment-weighted key-based similarity measure for use in structural clustering and virtual screening. QSAR Comp Sci 25 3 (2006) 221-234
5. Barnard J.M., and Downs G.M. Chemical fragment generation and clustering software. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 37 (1997) 141-142
6. Leach A.R., and Gillet V.J. An introduction to cheminformatics (2003), Kluwer, Dordrecht [chapter 3]
7. Barnard J.M., Downs G.M., von Scholley-Pfab A., and Brown R.D. Use of Markush structure analysis techniques for descriptor generation and clustering of large combinatorial libraries. J Mol Graph Modell 18 (2000) 452-463
8. http://www.ificlaims.com/index.html.
9. ©. The Thomson Corporation, all rights reserved; 2007. p. 1.
10. ©Thomson Derwent all rights reserved; 2002.
11. ®, CPI chemical indexing user guide, p. 12.
12. ©. The Thomson Corporation, all rights reserved; 2007. p. 209.
13. c.f. Raymond J.W., and Willett P. Maximum common subgraph isomorphism algorithms for the matching of chemical structures. J Comput-Aided Molec Des 16 7 (2002) 521-533
14. Cuissart B., Touffet F., Cremilleux B., Bureau R., and Rault S. The maximum common substructure as a molecular depiction in a supervised classification context: experiments in quantitative structure/biodegradability relationships. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 42 5 (2002) 10434-10452
15. Stahl M., and Mauser H. Database clustering with a combination of fingerprint and maximum common substructure methods. J Chem Inf Model 45 (2005) 542-548
16. John Barnard, Chemical structure representation and search systems, Lecture 5. November 13, 2003, Barnard Chemical Information Ltd., Sheffield, UK. www.indiana.edu/~cheminfo/C571/c571_Barnard6.ppt.
17. Shemetulskis N.E., Weininger D., Blankley C.J., Yang J.J., and Humblet C. Stigmata: an algorithm to determine structural commonalities in diverse datasets. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 36 4 (1996) 862-871