Knowledge combination modeling: The measurement of knowledge similarity between different technological domains

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 94, Issue , 2015, Pages 187-201

  Nakamura, Hiroko ^a   Suzuki, Shinji ^a   Sakata, Ichiro ^a   Kajikawa, Yuya ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

^b TOKYO INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Bibliometrics; Breadth search; Citation analysis; Knowledge recombination; Patent analysis

Indexed keywords

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY; CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION); INFORMATION ANALYSIS;

BIBLIOMETRICS; BREADTH SEARCH; CITATION ANALYSIS; KNOWLEDGE RECOMBINATION; PATENT ANALYSIS;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

AIRCRAFT; AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY; KNOWLEDGE; MODELING;

EID: 84954095500     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2014.09.009     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Adai A.T., Date S.V., Wieland S., Marcotte E.M. LGL: creating a map of protein function with an algorithm for visualizing very large biological networks. J. Mol. Biol. 2004, 340(1):179-190.
2. Alavi M., Leidner D. Review: knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Q. 2001, 25(1):107-136.
3. Cantu F.J., Ceballos H.G. A multiagent knowledge and information network approach for managing research assets. Expert Syst. Appl. 2010, 37:5272-5284.
4. Criscuolo P. The 'home advantage' effect and patent families. A comparison of OECD triadic patents, the USPTO and the EPO. Scientometrics 2006, 66(1):23-41.
5. Cronin B. Bibliometrics and beyond: some thoughts on web-based citation analysis. J. Inf. Sci. 2001, 27(1):1-7.
6. Dosi G. Technological paradigms and technological trajectories - a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Res. Policy 1982, 11:147-162.
7. Eriksson S. Technology spill-over from the aircraft industry: the case of Volvo Aero. Technovation 2000, 20:653-664.
8. Everett J.E., Pecotich A. Citation analysis mapping of journals in applied and clinical-psychology. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1993, 23(9):750-766.
9. Fleming L., Sorenson O. Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data. Res. Policy 2001, 30:1019-1039.
10. Garfield L. Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool?. Scientometrics 1979, 1(4):359-375.
11. Gassmann O., Zeschky M. Opening up the solution space: the role of analogical thinking for breakthrough product innovation. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2008, 17(2):97-106.
12. Gordon M.D., Lindsay R.K., Fan W. Literature based discovery on the world wide web. ACM Trans. Internet Technol. 2002, 2(4):261-275.
13. Griliches Z. Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey. J. Econ. Lit. 1990, 28(4):1661-1707. (90).
14. Herrero A., Corchado E., Sáiz L., Abraham A. DIPKIP: a connectionist knowledge management system to identify knowledge deficits in practical cases. Comput. Intell. 2010, 26(1):26-56.
15. Jaffe A.B. Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firm's patents, profits, and market value. Am. Econ. Rev. 1986, 76(5):984-1001.
16. Jones B., Miller B. Innovation diffusion in the new economy: the tacit component 2007, Routledge, New York.
17. Kajikawa Y., Abe K., Noda S. Filling the gap between researchers studying different materials and different methods: a proposal for structured keywords. J. Inf. Sci. 2006, 32:511-524.
18. Kajikawa Y., Yoshikawa J., Takeda Y., Matsushima K. Tracking emerging technologies in energy research: toward a roadmap for sustainable energy. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2008, 75(6):771-782.
19. Katila R., Ahuja G. Something old, something new: a longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Acad. Manag. J. 2002, 45:1183-1194.
20. Kostoff R.N. The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation. Scientometrics 1998, 43:27-43.
21. Kostoff R.N. Literature-related discovery (LRD): introduction and background. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2008, 75(2):165-185.
22. Leiponen A., Helfat C.E. Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth. Strateg. Manag. J. 2010, 31(2):224-236.
23. Leydesdorff L. Patent classifications as Indicators of intellectual organization. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2008, 59(10):1582-1597.
24. Leydesdorff L., Kushnir D., Rafols I. Interactive overlay maps for US patent (USPTO) data based on international patent classifications (IPC). Scientometrics 2012, 10.1007/s11192-012-0923-2.
25. Martin B.R. The evolution of science policy and innovation studies. Res. Policy 2012, 41:1219-1239.
26. Meyer M. What is special about patent citations? Differences between scientific and patent citations. Scientometrics 2000, 49:93-123.
27. Michel J., Bettels B. Patent citation analysis. A closer look at the basic input data from patent search reports. Scientometrics 2001, 51(1):185-201.
28. Moorthy S., Polley D.E. Technological knowledge breadth and depth: performance impacts. J. Knowl. Manag. 2010, 14(3):359-377.
29. Nakamura H., Suzuki S., Tomobe H., Kajikawa Y., Sakata I. Citation lag analysis in supply chain research. Scientometrics 2011, 87(2):221-232.
30. Nakamura H., Kajikawa Y., Suzuki S. Innovation for sustainability in aviation: world challenges and visions. Technological, Managerial and Organizational Core Competencies: Dynamic Innovation and Sustainable Advantage 2011, IGI Global. F. Nobre, D. Walker, R. Harris (Eds.).
31. Nakamura H., Kajikawa Y., Suzuki S. Multi-level perspectives with technology readiness measures for aviation innovation. Sustain. Sci. 2012, 10.1007/s11625-012-0187-z.
32. Narin F. Patent bibliometrics. Scientometrics 1994, 30(1):147-155.
33. Nelson R.R., Winter S.G. In search of useful theory of innovation. Res. Policy 1977, 6:36-76.
34. Nerur S.P., Rasheed A.A., Natarajan V. The intellectual structure of the strategic management field: an author co-citation analysis. Strateg. Manag. J. 2008, 29:319-336.
35. Nesta L., Saviotti P.P. Coherence of the knowledge base and the firm's innovative performance: evidence from the U.S. Pharm. Ind. 2005, 8(1):123-142.
36. Newman M.E.J. Fast algorithm for detecting community structure in networks. Phys. Rev. 2004, 69:066133.
37. Newman M.E.J., Girvan M. Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Phys. Rev. 2004, 69:026133.
38. Nicolaisen J. Citation analysis. Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2007, 14(3):609-641.
39. Nonaka I. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ. Sci. 1994, 5(1):14-37.
40. Nonaka I. The knowledge-creating company. Harv. Bus. Rev. November-December 1991, 96-104.
41. OECD The measurement of scientific and technological activities: using patent data as science and technology indicators 1994, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, (108 pages).
42. Pavitt K. Patent statistics as indicators of innovative activities: possibilities and problems. Scientometrics 1985, 7(1-2):77-99.
43. Schilling M.A., Green E. Recombinant search and breakthrough idea generation: an analysis of high impact papers in the social sciences. Res. Policy 2011, 40(10):1321-1331.
44. Schoen A., Villard L., Laurens P., Cointet J.-P., Heimeriks G., Alkemade F. The network structure of technological developments; technological distance as a walk on the technology map, 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators 2012.
45. Schoenmakers W., Duijsters G.M. The technological origins of radical inventions. Res. Policy 2010, 39(8):1051-1059.
46. Schumpeter J. The Theory of Economic Development 1934, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
47. Smalheiser N.R. Literature-based discovery: beyond the ABCs. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2012, 63(2):218-224.
48. Smallheiser N.R., Swanson D.R. Using ARROWSMITH: a computer-assisted approach to formulating and assessing scientific hypothesis. Comput. Methods Prog. Biomed. 1998, 57(3):149-153.
49. Soete L.G., Wyatt S.M.E. The use of foreign patenting as an internationally comparable science and technology output indicator. Scientometrics 1983, 5(1):31-54.
50. Tijssen R.J.W. A quantitative assessment of interdisciplinary structures in science and technology: co-classification analysis of energy research. Res. Policy 1992, 21(1):27-44.