Erratum: Quantitative determination of technological improvement from patent data (PLoS ONE (2015) 10:4 (e0121635) 10.1371/journal.pone.0121635);Quantitative determination of technological improvement from patent data

PLoS ONE

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2015, Pages

  Benson, Christopher L ^a   Magee, Christopher L ^a  

^a Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONCEPT FORMATION; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; HYPOTHESIS; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; KNOWLEDGE; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; PATENT; PREDICTION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; HUMAN; TECHNOLOGY;

HUMANS; PATENTS AS TOPIC; TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 84928902544     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151931     Document Type: Erratum

References (77)

1. Moore GE. Cramming more components onto integrated circuits. Electronics Magazine. 1965; 38, No. 8.
2. Sahal D. A Theory of Progress Functions. AIIE Transactions. 1979; 11(1) 23-29. doi: 10.1186/1297-9686-11-1-23 PMID: 22896125
3. Nordhaus WD. The Perils of the Learning Model for Modeling Endogenous Technological Change, Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper No. 1685. 2009; 1-17.
4. Nagy B, Farmer JD, Bui QM, Trancik JE. Statistical Basis for Predicting Technological Progress. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8(2), 1-7. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052669
5. Magee CL, Basnet S, Funk JL, Benson CL. Quantitative empirical trends in technical performance (No. (ESD-WP-2014-22)). MIT Engineering Systems Working Paper (ESD-WP-2014-22). 2014; Cambridge, MA. https://esd.mit.edu/WPS/2014/esd-wp-2014-22.pdf
6. Martino J. Examples of Technological Trend Forecasting for Research and Development Planning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 1971; 2 (3/4). 247-260
7. Nordhaus WD. Two Centuries of Productivity Growth in Computing. The Journal of Economic History. 2007; 67(01), 17-22. doi: 10.1017/S0022050707000058
8. Koh H, Magee CL. A functional approach for studying technological progress: Application to information technology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2006; 73(9), 1061-1083. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2006.06.001
9. Koh H, Magee CL. A functional approach for studying technological progress: Extension to energy technology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2008; 75(6), 735-758. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2007.05.007
10. Trajtenberg M. The Welfare Analysis of Product Innovations, with an Application to Computed Tomography Scanners. Journal of Political Economy. 1989; 97(2), 444. doi: 10.1086/261611
11. Fleming L. Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search. Management Science. 2001; 47(1), 117-132. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.47.1.117.10671
12. Nerkar A. Old is gold? The value of temporal exploration in the creation of new knowledge. Management Science. 2003; 49(2), 211-229.
13. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Frascati Manual 2002: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development. OECD. 2002.
14. rd Edition. The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities. 2005; OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264013100-en
15. Jaffe AB, Lerner J. Innovation and its Discontents. Capitalism and Society. 2006; 1(3). Chicago
16. Trajtenberg M, Henderson R, Jaffe A. University Versus Corporate Patents : A Window On The Basicness Of Invention. Economics of Innovation and new technology. 1997; 5(1), 19-50.
17. Hall B, Jaffe A. The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. Working paper #8498, National Bureau of Economic Research. 2001.
18. Mones E, Pollner P, Vicsek T. Universal hierarchical behavior of citation networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment. 2014; (5:) , P05023.
19. Benson C, Magee CL. On improvement rates for renewable energy technologies: Solar PV, wind turbines, capacitors, and batteries. Renewable Energy. 2014; 68, 745-751
20. Wright T. Factors Affecting the Cost of Airplanes. Journal of Aeronautical Sciences. 1936; 3(4), 122128.
21. Arrow K. The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing. The Review of Economic Studies. 1962; 29 (3), 155-173.
22. Lundberg E. Produktivitet och rdntabilitet. Stockholm: P. A. Norstedt and Soner. 1961.
23. Alchian A. Reliability of Progress curves in airframe production. Econometrica. 1963; 31(4), 679-694
24. Ayres R, Martinas K. Experience and the life cycle, Technovation. 1992; 12(7): 465-486
25. Sinclair G, Klepper S, Cohen W. What's experience got to do with it? Sources of cost reduction in a large specialty chemicals producer. Management Science. 2000; 46, 28-45.
26. Christensen CM. Exploring the Limits of the Technology S-Curve. Part I: Component Technologies. Production and Operations Management. 1992; 1(4), 334-357. doi: 10.1111/j.1937-5956.1992.tb00001.x
27. Foster RN. Timing Technological Transitions. Technology in Society. 1985; 7(2/3), 127-141.
28. Margolis RM, Kammen DM. Underinvestment: The Energy Technology and R&D Policy Challenge. Science. 1999; 285(5428), 690-692. doi: 10.1126/science.285.5428.690 PMID: 10426983
29. Sahal D. Patterns of Technological Innovation. London: Addison-Wesley; 1981.
30. Tushman M, Anderson P. Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1986; 9(1), 439-465.
31. Girifalco LA. Dynamics of technological change. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold; 1991.
32. Sood A, Tellis G. Technological evolution and radical innovation. Journal of Marketing. 2005; 69 (July), 152-168.
33. Trajtenberg M. A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics. 1990; 21(1), 172. doi: 10.2307/2555502
34. Harhoff D, Narin F, Scherer FM, Vopel K. Citation frequency and the value of patented inventions, The Review of Economics and Statistics. 1999; 81, 511-515.
35. Alcácer J, Gittelman M. Patent citations as a measure of knowledge flows: The influence of examiner citations. The Review of Economics and Statistics. 2006; 88(November), 774-779.
36. Ethiraj S. Allocation of inventive effort in complex product systems. Strategic Management Journal. 2007; 584(January), 563-584. doi: 10.1002/smj
37. Arts S, Appio FP, Van Looy B. Inventions shaping technological trajectories: do existing patent indicators provide a comprehensive picture? Scientometrics. 2013; 97(2), 397-419. doi: 10.1007/s11192-013-1045-1
38. Fischer T, Leidinger J. Testing patent value indicators on directly observed patent value - An empirical analysis of Ocean Tomo patent auctions. Research Policy. 2014; 43(3), 519-529. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.07.013 PMID: 24481497
39. Schumpeter JA. The Stability of Capitalism, The Economic Journal. 1928; 38 (151).
40. Bush V. Science: The Endless Frontier. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science. 1945; 48(3), 231-264.
41. Freeman C. The greening of technology and models of innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 1996; 53(1), 27-39. doi: 10.1016/0040-1625(96)00060-1
42. Price D. D. S. Is technology historically independent of science? A study in statistical historiography. Technology and Culture. 1965; 553-568.
43. Nelson R. The simple economics of basic scientific research. The Journal of Political Economy. 1971; 67(3), 297-306
44. Levin RC, Klevorick AK, Nelson RR, Winter SG. Appropriating the Returns from Industrial R&D. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. 1987; 783-831
45. Godin B. The Linear Model of Innovation: The Historical Construction of an Analytical Framework. Science, Technology & Human Values. 2006; 31(6), 639-667. doi: 10.1177/0162243906291865
46. Balconi M, Brusoni S, Orsenigo L. In defence of the linear model: An essay. Research Policy. 2010; 39 (1), 1-13. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2009.09.013 PMID: 20305892
47. Trajtenberg M, Henderson R, Jaffe A. University Versus Corporate Patents : A Window On The Basicness Of Invention. Economics of Innovation and new technology. 1997; 5(1), 19-50.
48. Klevorick A, Levin R, Nelson R, Winter S. On the sources and significance of interindustry differences technological opportunities. Research Policy. 1995; 24, 185-205.
49. Fleming L, Sorenson O. Science as a map in technological search. Strategic Management Journal. 2004; 25, 909-928.
50. Murray F. Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: exploring tissue engineering. Research Policy. 2002; 31(8-9), 1389-1403. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00070-7
51. Murray F. The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life. Research Policy. 2004; 33(4), 643-659. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.013
52. Rothaermal F, Thursby M. The nanotech versus the biotech revolution: Sources of productivity in incumbent firm research. Research Policy. 2007; 36, 832-849
53. Henderson R, Jaffe A, Trajtenberg M. Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965-1988. The Review of Economics and Statistics. 1998; 80, 119-127.
54. Hall B, Jaffe A. The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. Working paper #8498, National Bureau of Economic Research. 2001.
55. Valentini G. Measuring the effect of M&A on Patenting Quantity and Quality. Strategic Management Journal. 2012; 346, 336-346. doi: 10.1002/smj
56. Schoenmakers W, Duysters G. The technological origins of radical inventions. Research Policy. 2010; 39(8), 1051-1059. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2010.05.013
57. Price DJ. Networks of Scientific Papers. Science. 1965; 149(3683), 510-5. PMID: 14325149
58. Rosenberg N. Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; 1982.
59. Nelson R, Winter S. The Schumpterian Tradeoff Revisited. The American Economic Review. 1982; 3 (1), 114-132.
60. Ruttan VW. Technology, Growth, and Development: An Induced Innovation Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press; 2001.
61. Nemet G, Johnson E. Do important inventions benefit from knowledge originating in other technological domains? Research Policy. 2012; 41 (1), 190-200.
62. Arthur WB. The structure of invention. Research Policy. 2007; 36(2), 274-287. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.11.005
63. Benson CL, Magee CL. A Framework for Analyzing the Underlying Inventions That Drive Technical Improvements in a Specific Technological Field. Engineering Management Research. 2012; 1(1), 2-14. doi: 10.5539/emr.v1n1p2
64. Christensen C. The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 1997.
65. Anderson P, Tushman M. Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1990; 35, 604-633
66. Benson CL, Magee CL. A hybrid keyword and patent class methodology for selecting relevant sets of patents for a technological field. Scientometrics. 2013; 96(1), 69-82. doi: 10.1007/s11192-012-0930-3
67. Benson CL. Cross-Domain Comparison of Quantitative Technology Improvement Using Patent Derived Characteristics. PhD thesis, MIT; 2014.
68. Benson CL, Magee CL. Technology Structural Implications from the Extension of a Patent Search Method Scientometrics. 2014; doi: 10.1007/s11192-014-1493-2
69. Nagy B, Farmer JD, Trancik JE, Gonzales JP. Super-exponential long-term trends in information technology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2011; 78 (8), 1356-1364
70. Griliches Z. The search for R&D spillovers. Scandinavian Journal of Economics. 1992; 94, 29-47.
71. Alcacer J, Chung W. Location Strategies and Knowledge Spillovers. Management Science. 2007; 53 (5), 760-776.
72. Fu K, Chan J, Cagan J, Kotovsky K. The Meaning Of "Near" And "Far" : The Impact Of Structuring Design Databases And The Effect Of Distance Of Analogy On Design Output. Journal of Mechanical Design. 2013; 135(2), 1-12.
73. Mcnerney J, Farmer JD, Redner S, Trancik JE. Role of design complexity in technology improvement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2011; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1017298108/-/DCSupplemental.www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1017298108
74. Agrawal A, Henderson R. Putting patents in context: Exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science. 2002; 48(1) 44-60.
75. Bresnahan T, Trajtenberg M. General Purpose Technologies "Engines of growth"? Journal of Econometrics. 1995; 65, 83-108.
76. Funk JL. Technology Change and the Rise of New Industries, Stanford University Press; 2013.
77. Funk JL, Magee CL. Exponential Change: What Drives it? What does it tell us about the future? Kindle ebook at amazon.com; 2013.