IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v16y2022i1s1751157721001188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which types of online resource support US patent claims?

Author

Listed:
  • Font-Julián, Cristina I
  • Ontalba-Ruipérez, José-Antonio
  • Orduña-Malea, Enrique
  • Thelwall, Mike

Abstract

Patents are key documents to support the commercial exploitation of inventions. Patent documents must claim inventiveness, industrial application, and novelty to be granted and may use citations and URLs to support these claims as well as to explain their ideas. Although there is much research into the citations used to support inventions, almost nothing is known about the cited URLs. This may hinder inventors and evaluators from deciding which URLs are appropriate. To investigate this issue, all 3,133,247 patents granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) from 2008 to 2018 were investigated, and 2,719,705 URLs (patent outlinks) were automatically extracted using heuristics, and analyzed using link analyses techniques. A minority of patents included URLs (17.1%), with the percentage increasing over time. The inclusion of URLs differs between disciplines, with Physics (especially the subcategory Computation) having the most URLs per patent. Patents are generally embedded in the “other citations” patent section (referring to academic publications) and the “description” section (e.g., supplementary information and definitions). Online content-oriented resources (e.g., Wayback Machine, Wikipedia, YouTube), academic bibliographic databases (e.g., IEEE Xplore, Microsoft Academic, PubMed, CiteSeerX) and technological companies (e.g., IBM, Amazon, Microsoft) are often linked from USPTO patents. These findings show the broad roles that URLs can play when supporting a patent claim. Finally, in order to avoid bad practices found in the inclusion of URLs in patents, a list of recommendations to cite online resources from patents is provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Font-Julián, Cristina I & Ontalba-Ruipérez, José-Antonio & Orduña-Malea, Enrique & Thelwall, Mike, 2022. "Which types of online resource support US patent claims?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:16:y:2022:i:1:s1751157721001188
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2021.101247
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157721001188
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2021.101247?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan Alcácer & Michelle Gittelman, 2006. "Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows: The Influence of Examiner Citations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 774-779, November.
    2. Meyer, Martin, 2000. "Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 409-434, March.
    3. Collins, Peter & Wyatt, Suzanne, 1988. "Citations in patents to the basic research literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 65-74, April.
    4. Hak Joon Kim, 2000. "Motivations for hyperlinking in scholarly electronic articles: A qualitative study," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 51(10), pages 887-899.
    5. An, Jaehyeong & Kim, Kyuwoong & Mortara, Letizia & Lee, Sungjoo, 2018. "Deriving technology intelligence from patents: Preposition-based semantic analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 217-236.
    6. Kim, Jeeeun & Lee, Sungjoo, 2015. "Patent databases for innovation studies: A comparative analysis of USPTO, EPO, JPO and KIPO," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 332-345.
    7. Bryan, Kevin A. & Ozcan, Yasin & Sampat, Bhaven, 2020. "In-text patent citations: A user's guide," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    8. Martin Meyer, 2000. "What is Special about Patent Citations? Differences between Scientific and Patent Citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 49(1), pages 93-123, August.
    9. Enrique Orduna-Malea & Mike Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha, 2017. "Web citations in patents: Evidence of technological impact?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(8), pages 1967-1974, August.
    10. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Michael S. Fogarty, 2000. "The Meaning of Patent Citations: Report on the NBER/Case-Western Reserve Survey of Patentees," NBER Working Papers 7631, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Alcácer, Juan & Gittelman, Michelle & Sampat, Bhaven, 2009. "Applicant and examiner citations in U.S. patents: An overview and analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 415-427, March.
    12. Kayvan Kousha & Mike Thelwall, 2017. "Patent citation analysis with Google," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(1), pages 48-61, January.
    13. Michael Roach & Wesley M. Cohen, 2013. "Lens or Prism? Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows from Public Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 504-525, October.
    14. Jacques Michel & Bernd Bettels, 2001. "Patent citation analysis.A closer look at the basic input data from patent search reports," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 185-201, April.
    15. Lee, Changyong & Kwon, Ohjin & Kim, Myeongjung & Kwon, Daeil, 2018. "Early identification of emerging technologies: A machine learning approach using multiple patent indicators," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 291-303.
    16. Judit Bar-Ilan, 2004. "A microscopic link analysis of academic institutions within a country — the case of Israel," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 391-403, March.
    17. Kayvan Kousha & Mike Thelwall, 2006. "Motivations for URL citations to open access library and information science articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(3), pages 501-517, September.
    18. Martin Meyer & Tatiana Siniläinen & Jan Timm Utecht, 2003. "Towards hybrid Triple Helix indicators: A study of university-related patents and a survey of academic inventors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 321-350, October.
    19. Chang, Ke-Chiun & Chen, Dar-Zen & Huang, Mu-Hsuan, 2012. "The relationships between the patent performance and corporation performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 131-139.
    20. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Haunschild, Robin & Bornmann, Lutz, 2023. "Which papers cited which tweets? An exploratory analysis based on Scopus data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    2. Enrique Orduña-Malea & Adolfo Alonso-Arroyo & José-Antonio Ontalba-Ruipérez & Ferrán Catalá-López, 2023. "Evaluating the online impact of reporting guidelines for randomised trial reports and protocols: a cross-sectional web-based data analysis of CONSORT and SPIRIT initiatives," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 407-440, January.
    3. Enrique Orduña-Malea & Cristina I. Font-Julián, 2022. "Are patents linked on Twitter? A case study of Google patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6339-6362, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adam B. Jaffe & Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2017. "Patent citation data in social science research: Overview and best practices," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(6), pages 1360-1374, June.
    2. Joaquín M. Azagra-Caro & Elena M. Tur, 2018. "Examiner trust in applicants to the European Patent Office: country specificities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 1319-1348, December.
    3. Julie Callaert & Maikel Pellens & Bart Looy, 2014. "Sources of inspiration? Making sense of scientific references in patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1617-1629, March.
    4. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    5. Yuandi Wang & Xiongfeng Pan & Yantai Chen & Xin Gu, 2013. "Do references in transferred patent documents signal learning opportunities for the receiving firms?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 731-752, May.
    6. Yong-Gil Lee & Jeong-Dong Lee & Yong-Il Song & Se-Jun Lee, 2007. "An in-depth empirical analysis of patent citation counts using zero-inflated count data model: The case of KIST," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 27-39, January.
    7. Azagra-Caro,Joaquín M. & Tur,Elena M., 2014. "Examiner amendments to applications to the european patent office: Procedures, knowledge bases and country specificities," INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series 201406, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV), revised 29 Nov 2018.
    8. Chen, Lixin, 2017. "Do patent citations indicate knowledge linkage? The evidence from text similarities between patents and their citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 63-79.
    9. Corredoira, Rafael A. & Goldfarb, Brent D. & Shi, Yuan, 2018. "Federal funding and the rate and direction of inventive activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1777-1800.
    10. Criscuolo, Paola & Verspagen, Bart, 2008. "Does it matter where patent citations come from? Inventor vs. examiner citations in European patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1892-1908, December.
    11. Inchae Park & Yujin Jeong & Byungun Yoon, 2017. "Analyzing the value of technology based on the differences of patent citations between applicants and examiners," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 665-691, May.
    12. Wang, Jean J. & Ye, Fred Y., 2021. "Probing into the interactions between papers and patents of new CRISPR/CAS9 technology: A citation comparison," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    13. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2017. "Academic knowledge quality differentials and the quality of firm innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(5), pages 821-844.
    14. Gazni, Ali, 2020. "The growing number of patent citations to scientific papers: Changes in the world, nations, and fields," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    15. Jordan A. Comins, 2015. "Data-mining the technological importance of government-funded patents in the private sector," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 425-435, August.
    16. Joaquín M. Azagra-Caro & Ignacio Fernández-de-Lucio & François Perruchas & Pauline Mattsson, 2009. "What do patent examiner inserted citations indicate for a region with low absorptive capacity?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(2), pages 441-455, August.
    17. Dechezlepretre, Antoine & Martin, Ralf & Mohnen, Myra, 2014. "Knowledge spillovers from clean and dirty technologies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60501, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Ke, Qing, 2018. "Comparing scientific and technological impact of biomedical research," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 706-717.
    19. Martin Meyer & Kevin Grant & Piera Morlacchi & Dagmara Weckowska, 2014. "Triple Helix indicators as an emergent area of enquiry: a bibliometric perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(1), pages 151-174, April.
    20. Amalia Mas-Bleda & Mike Thelwall, 2016. "Can alternative indicators overcome language biases in citation counts? A comparison of Spanish and UK research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2007-2030, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:16:y:2022:i:1:s1751157721001188. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.