Detecting signals of new technological opportunities using semantic patent analysis and outlier detection

Scientometrics

Volumn 90, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 445-461

  Yoon, Janghyeok ^a   Kim, Kwangsoo ^b  

^a Korea Institute of Intellectual Property   (South Korea)

^b Pohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH)   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Multidimensional scaling (MDS); Outlier detection; Patent mining; Research and development (R D) planning; Semantic patent similarity; Subject action object (SAO) structure; Technological opportunity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855536630     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0543-2     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Albert, M., Avery, D., Narin, F., & McAllister, P. (1991). Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents. Research Policy, 20(3), 251-259.
2. Aleskerov, E., Freisleben, B., & Rao, B. (2002). Cardwatch: A neural network based database mining system for credit card fraud detection. In IEEE (pp. 220-226).
3. Altschuller, G. (1984). Creativity as an exact science: The theory of the solution of inventive problems. New York: Gordon and Breach.
4. Barnett, V., Lewis, T., & Abeles, F. (1979). Outliers in statistical data. Physics Today, 32, 73.
5. Bergmann, I., Butzke, D., Walter, L., Fuerste, J., Moehrle, M., & Erdmann, V. (2008). Evaluating the risk of patent infringement by means of semantic patent analysis: The case of DNA chips. R & D Management, 38(5), 550-562.
6. Cascini, G., Fantechi, A., & Spinicci, E. (2004). Natural language processing of patents and technical documentation. Document Analysis Systems, VI, 508-520.
7. Cascini, G., Russo, D., & Zini, M. (2007). Computer-aided patent analysis: Finding invention peculiarities. In N. Leon-Rovira (Ed.), Trends in computer aided innovation (pp. 167-178). Boston: Springer.
8. Cascini, G., & Zini, M. (2008). Measuring patent similarity by comparing inventions functional trees. IFIP International Federation for Information Processing, 277, 31-42.
9. Chandola, V., Banerjee, A., & Kumar, V. (2009). Anomaly detection: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 41(3), 1-58.
10. Choi, S., Lim, J., Yoon, J., & Kim, K. (2010). Patent function network analysis: A function based approach for analyzing patent information. In IAMOT2010, Cairo, Egypt.
11. Christensen, C., & Leslie, D. (1997). The innovator's dilemma. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
12. Franses, P., Kloek, T., & Lucas, A. (1998). Outlier robust analysis of long-run marketing effects for weekly scanning data. Journal of Econometrics, 89(1-2), 293-315.
13. Fujii, A., Iwayama, M., & Kando, N. (2007). Introduction to the special issue on patent processing. Information Processing & Management, 43(5), 1149-1153.
14. Gerken, J., Moehrle, M., & Walter, L. (2010). Patents as an information source for product forecasting: Insights from a longitudinal study in the automotive industry. In The R & D management conference 2010, Manchester, England.
15. Hodge, V., & Austin, J. (2004). A survey of outlier detection methodologies. Artificial Intelligence Review, 22(2), 85-126.
16. Karki, M. (1997). Patent citation analysis: A policy analysis tool. World Patent Information, 19(4), 269-272.
17. Kruskal, J. (1964). Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: A numerical method. Psychometrika, 29(2), 115-129.
18. Lee, S., Yoon, B., & Park, Y. (2009). An approach to discovering new technology opportunities: Keyword-based patent map approach. Technovation, 29(6-7), 481-497.
19. Leung, K., & Leckie, C. (2005). Unsupervised anomaly detection in network intrusion detection using clusters (pp. 333-342). Sydney: Australian Computer Society, Inc.
20. Lin, D. (2010). Minipar. http://webdocs. cs. ualberta. ca/~lindek/minipar. htm. Accessed 1 Oct 2011.
21. Mann, D. (2002). Hands-on systematic innovation. Leper: CREAX Press.
22. Mann, D. (2003). Better technology forecasting using systematic innovation methods. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 70(8), 779-795.
23. Miller, G. (1995). Wordnet: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38(11), 39-41.
24. Moehrle, M., & Geritz, A. (2004). Developing acquisition strategies based on patent maps. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on management of technology (pp. 1-9), Washington, DC, USA.
25. Moehrle, M., Walter, L., Geritz, A., & Muller, S. (2005). Patent-based inventor profiles as a basis for human resource decisions in research and development. R & D Management, 35(5), 513-524.
26. Mogee, M., & Kolar, R. (1994). International patent analysis as a tool for corporate technology analysis and planning. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 6(4), 485-504.
27. Narin, F. (1994). Patent bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 30(1), 147-155.
28. Park, B. (2002). An outlier robust GARCH model and forecasting volatility of exchange rate returns. Journal of Forecasting, 21(5), 381-393.
29. Radauer, A., & Walter, L. (2010). Elements of good practice for providers of publicly funded patent information services for SMEs-selected and amended results of a benchmarking exercise. World Patent Information, 32(3), 237-245.
30. Resnik, P. (1999). Semantic similarity in a taxonomy: An information-based measure and its application to problems of ambiguity in natural language. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 11(95), 130.
31. Savransky, S. (2000). Engineering of creativity: Introduction to TRIZ methodology of inventive problem solving. Boca Raton: CRC.
32. Schuh, G., & Grawatsch, M. (2004). TRIZ-based technology intelligence. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on management of technology, Washington, DC, USA.
33. Sekar, R., Gupta, A., Frullo, J., Shanbhag, T., Tiwari, A., Yang, H., et al. (2002). Specification-based anomaly detection: A new approach for detecting network intrusions. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on computer and communications security, New York, USA.
34. Simpson, T., & Dao, T. (2005). Wordnet-based semantic similarity measurement. http://www. codeproject. com/KB/string/semanticsimilaritywordnet. aspx. Accessed 1 Oct 2011.
35. Siris, V., & Papagalou, F. (2006). Application of anomaly detection algorithms for detecting SYN flooding attacks. Computer Communications, 29(9), 1433-1442.
36. Stanford. (2010). The Stanford parser: A statistical parser. http://nlp. stanford. edu/software/lex-parser. shtml. Accessed 1 Oct 2011.
37. Yoon, B. (2008). On the development of a technology intelligence tool for identifying technology opportunity. Expert Systems with Applications, 35(1-2), 124-135.
38. Yoon, J., Choi, S., & Kim, K. (2011). Invention property-function network analysis of patents: A case of silicon-based thin film solar cells. Scientometrics, 86(3), 687-703.
39. Yoon, J., & Kim, K. (2011a). Generation of patent maps using SAO-based semantic patent similarity. Entrue Journal of Information Technology, 10(1), 19-27.
40. Yoon, J., & Kim, K. (2011b). Identifying rapidly evolving technological trends for R & D planning using SAO-based semantic patent networks. Scientometrics, 88(1), 213-228.
41. Yoon, B., & Park, Y. (2004). Morphology analysis approach for technology forecasting. In 2004 IEEE international engineering management conference (Vol. 2, pp. 566-570), Singapore.
42. Yoon, B., & Park, Y. (2005). A systematic approach for identifying technology opportunities: Keyword-based morphology analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72(2), 145-160.
43. Yoon, B., Yoon, C., & Park, Y. (2002). On the development and application of a self-organizing feature map-based patent map. R & D Management, 32(4), 291-300.