A new instrument for technology monitoring: Novelty in patents measured by semantic patent analysis

Scientometrics

Volumn 91, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 645-670

  Gerken, Jan M ^a   Moehrle, Martin G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BREMEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Citation analysis; Classification analysis; Inventive progress; Novelty measurement; Semantic patent analysis; Technology monitoring

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860570242     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0635-7     Document Type: Review

References (77)

1. Achilladelis, B., Schwarzkopf, A., & Cines, M. (1987). A study of innovation in the pesticide industry: Analysis of the innovation record of an industrial sector. Research Policy, 16(2-4), 175-212.
2. Achilladelis, B., Schwarzkopf, A., & Cines, M. (1990). The dynamics of technological innovation: The case of the chemical industry. Research Policy, 19(1), 1-34.
3. Ahuja, G., & Lampert, C. M. (2001). Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 521-544.
4. An, X. Y., & Wu, Q. Q. (2011). Co-word analysis of the trends in stem cells field based on subject heading weighting. Scientometrics, 88(1), 133-144.
5. Andersen, B. (1999). The hunt for S-shaped growth paths in technological innovation: A patent study. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 9(4), 487-526.
6. Anderson, P., & Tushman, M. L. (1990). Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: A cyclical model of technological change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(4), 604-633.
7. Bergmann, I., Butzke, D., Walter, L., Fuerste, J. P., Moehrle, M. G., & Erdmann, V. A. (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.
8. Buehl, A. (2010). PASW 18: Einführung in die moderne Datenanalyse (12th ed.). München: Pearson Studium.
9. Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemistry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155-205.
10. Cascini, G., Fantechi, A., & Spinicci, E. (2004). Natural language processing of patents and technical documentation. In S. Marinai & A. Dengel (Eds.), Document analysis systems VI (pp. 89-92). Berlin: Springer.
11. Chandy, R. K., & Tellis, G. J. (1998). Organizing for radical product innovation: The overlooked role of willingness to cannibalize. Journal of Marketing Research, 35(4), 474-487.
12. Choi, S., Yoon, J., Kim, K., Lee, J. Y., & Kim, C. (2011). SAO network analysis of patents for technology trends identification: A case study of polymer electrolyte membrane technology in proton exchange membrane fuel cells. Scientometrics, 88(3), 863-883.
13. Christensen, C. M., & Overdorf, M. (2000). Meeting the challenge of disruptive change. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 66-77.
14. Dahlin, K. B., & Behrens, D. M. (2005). When is an invention really radical? Defining and measuring technological radicalness. Research Policy, 34(5), 717-737.
15. Debackere, K., Verbeek, A., Luwel, M., & Zimmermann, E. (2002). Measuring the progress and evolution in science and technology-II: The multiple uses of technometric indicators. International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(3), 213-231.
16. Egghe, L. (2000). The distribution of N-grams. Scientometrics, 47(2), 237-252.
17. Engelsman, E. C., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1994). A patent-based cartography of technology. Research Policy, 23(1), 1-26.
18. Fendt, H. (1988). Technische Trends rechtzeitig erkennen-Patentschriften gewähren Blicke hinter die Kulissen von F& E. Havard Manager, 10(4), 72-80.
19. Fleming, L. (2001). Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Science, 1, 117-132.
20. Fleming, L., Mingo, S., & Chen, D. (2007). Collaborative brokerage, generative creativity, and creative success. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(3), 443.
21. Fleming, L., & Sorenson, O. (2001). Technology as a complex adaptive system: Evidence from patent data. Research Policy, 30(7), 1019-1039.
22. Frietsch, R. (2007). Patente in Europa und der Triade: Strukturen und deren Veränderung. Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer Institut für System- und Innovationsforschung.
23. Gerken, J. M., Moehrle, M. G., & Walter, L. (2010a). Patents as an information source for product forecasting: Insights from a longitudinal study in the automotive industry. R&D Management Conference 2010 Proceedings. Manchester.
24. Gerken, J. M., Moehrle, M. G., & Walter, L. (2010b). Semantische Patentlandkarten zur Analyse technologischen Wandels: Eine Längsschnittstudie aus der Allradtechnik. In J. Gausemeier (Ed.). 6. Symposium für Vorausschau und Technologieplanung (pp. 325-349). Paderborn: Heinz Nixdorf Institut.
25. Gerken, J. M., Walter, L., & Moehrle, M. G. (2010c). Semantische Patentlandkarten. Einsatz semantischer Patentlandkarten im Anwendungsfeld der Antriebstechnik-Eine explorative Analyse am Beispiel der Planentengetriebe. Heft Nr. 924 der Forschungsvereinigung Antriebstechnik. Frankfurt/Main: VDMA.
26. Granstrand, O. (2000). The Economics and management of intellectual property: Towards intellectual capitalism. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
27. Grupp, H. (1997). Messung und Erklärung des technischen Wandels: Grundzüge einer empirischen Innovationsökonomik. Berlin: Springer.
28. Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The NBER patent citations data file: lessons, insights and methodological tools. NBER Working Paper 8498.
29. Han, Y., & Park, Y. (2006). Patent network analysis of inter-industrial knowledge flows: The case of Korea between traditional and emerging industries. World Patent Information, 28(3), 235-247.
30. Hargadon, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1997). Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4), 716-749.
31. Haupt, R., Kloyer, M., & Lange, M. (2007). Patent indicators for the technology life cycle development. Research Policy, 36(3), 387-398.
32. Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (1999). International knowledge flows: Evidence from patent citations. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 8(1/2), 105-136.
33. Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 577-598.
34. Jeong, B., Lee, D., Cho, H., & Lee, J. (2008). A novel method for measuring semantic similarity for XML schema matching. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(3), 1651-1658.
35. Kangasabai, R., & Pan, H. (2008). Method of text similarity measurement. US-Patent 7, 346, 491 B2.
36. Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American Documentation, 14(1), 10-25.
37. Kim, Y. G., Suh, J. H., & Park, S. C. (2008). Visualization of patent analysis for emerging technology. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(3), 1804-1812.
38. Knight, H. J. (2004). Patent strategy for researchers and research managers, (2nd ed.). Chichester: Wiley.
39. Kurmaniak, C. (2008). Electromagnetics comes through in the clutch. ANSYS Advantage, 2(3), 30-31.
40. Lee, C., Jeon, J., & Park, Y. (2011). Monitoring trends of technological changes based on the dynamic patent lattice: A modified formal concept analysis approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(4), 690-702.
41. Lee, S., Yoon, B., Lee, C., & Park, J. (2009a). Business planning based on technological capabilities: Patent analysis for technology-driven roadmapping. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(6), 769-786.
42. Lee, S., Yoon, B., & Park, Y. (2009b). An approach to discovering new technology opportunities: Keyword-based patent map approach. Technovation, 29(6-7), 481-497.
43. Li, Y., Wang, L., & Hong, C. (2009). Extracting the significant-rare keywords for patent analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 5200-5204.
44. Lichtenthaler, E. (2004). Technological change and the technology intelligence process: A case study. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 21(4), 331-348.
45. Mann, H. B., & Whitney, D. R. (1947). On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18(1), 50-60.
46. Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schütze, H. (2008). Introduction to information retrieval. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
47. Manning, C. D., & Schütze, H. (2005). Foundations of statistical natural language processing. Cambridge: MIT Press.
48. Moehrle, M. G. (2010). Measures for textual patent similarities: A guided way to select appropriate approaches. Scientometrics, 85(1), 95-109.
49. Moehrle, M. G., & Geritz, A. (2007). Developing acquisition strategies based on patent maps. In T. Khalil & Y. Hosni (Eds.), Management of technology: New directions in technology management (pp. 19-29). Oxford: Elsevier.
50. Moehrle, M. G., Walter, L., Geritz, A., & Müller, S. (2005). Patent-based inventor profiles as a basis for human resource decisions in research and development. R&D Management, 35(5), 513-524.
51. Naunheimer, H., Novak, W., & Ryborz, J. (2007). Fahrzeuggetriebe: Grundlagen, Auswahl, Auslegung und Konstruktion. Berlin: Springer.
52. Park, H., Yoon, J., & Kim, K. (2011). Identifying patent infringement using SAO based semantic technological similarities. Scientometrics, 90(2), 515-529.
53. Park, Y., Yoon, B., & Lee, S. (2005). The idiosyncrasy and dynamism of technological innovation across industries: Patent citation analysis. Technology in Society, 27(4), 471-485.
54. Pope, B. (2009). All-wheel-drive suppliers get grip on changing market. Resource document. Accessed March 8, 2010 http://wardsauto. com/ar/suppliers_grip_market_090427/.
55. Princeton University. (2006). WordNet 3. 0. Resource document. Accessed March 23, 2011, from http://wordnetweb. princeton. edu/perl/webwn.
56. Reitzig, M. (2003a). What do patent indicators really measure? A structural test of 'novelty' and 'inventive step' as determinants of patent profitability. LEFIC Working paper 2003-1. Copenhagen, DK.
57. Reitzig, M. (2003b). What determines patent value? Insights from the semiconductor industry. Research Policy, 32(1), 13-26.
58. Rost, K. (2010). The strength of strong ties in the creation of innovation. Research Policy. doi: 10. 1016/j. respol. 2010. 12. 001.
59. Schoenmakers, W., & Duysters, G. (2010). The technological origins of radical inventions. Research Policy, 39(8), 1051-1059.
60. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
61. Sood, A., & Tellis, G. J. (2005). Technological evolution and radical innovation. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 152-168.
62. Sternitzke, C., & Bergmann, I. (2009). Similarity measures for document mapping: A comparative study on the level of an individual scientist. Scientometrics, 78(1), 113-130.
63. Stock, W. G. (2007). Information retrieval: Informationen suchen und finden. München: Oldenbourg.
64. Stockmar, J. (2004). Das große Buch der Allradtechnik. Stuttgart: Motorbuch-Verl.
65. SUBARU Deutschland GmbH (Ed.). (2005). 33 Jahre SUBARU-Allradantrieb. Resource document. Accessed May 15, 2009, from http://www. subaru-presse. de/fileadmin/templates/downloads/awd/PressemappeSubaruAllrad-Technologie04-2005SUB. doc.
66. Trajtenberg, M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 21(1), 172-187.
67. Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., & Jaffe, A. (1997). University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 5(1), 19-50.
68. Trippe, A. J. (2003). Patinformatics: Tasks to tools. World Patent Information, 25(3), 211-221.
69. Tseng, Y., Lin, C., & Lin, Y. (2007). Text mining techniques for patent analysis. Information Processing & Management, 43(5), 1216-1247.
70. USPTO (Ed.). (2007). Manual of patent examining procedure (8th ed.). Alexandria.
71. van Rijsbergen, C. J. (1981). Information retrieval (2th ed.). London: Butterworth.
72. von Wartburg, I., Teichert, T., & Rost, K. (2005). Inventive progress measured by multi-stage patent citation analysis. Research Policy, 34(10), 1591-1607.
73. Witt, U. (2009). Propositions about novelty. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 70(1-2), 311-320.
74. Yoon, J., & Kim, K. (2011a). Detecting signals of new technological opportunities using semantic patent analysis and outlier detection. Scientometrics. doi: 10. 1007/s11192-011-0543-2.
75. 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.
76. Yoon, B., & Park, Y. (2004). A text-mining-based patent network: Analytical tool for high-technology trend. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 15(1), 37-50.
77. 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.