IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2022i1p218-d1012553.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prediction of University Patent Transfer Cycle Based on Random Survival Forest

Author

Listed:
  • Disha Deng

    (School of Management, Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430081, China)

  • Tao Chen

    (School of Management, Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430081, China
    Industrial Policy and Management Research Center of Hubei, Wuhan 430081, China)

Abstract

Taking the invention patents of the C9 League from 2002 to 2020 as samples, a random survival forest model is established to predict the dynamic time-point of patent transfer cycle. By ranking the variables based on importance, it is found that the countries citing, the non-patent citations and the backward citations have significant impacts on the patent transfer cycle. C-index, Brier score and integrated Brier score are used to measure the discrimination and calibration ability of the four different survival models respectively. It is found that the prediction accuracy of the random survival forest model is higher than that of the Cox proportional risk model, Cox model based on lasso penalty and random forest model. In addition, the survival function and cumulative risk function under the random survival forest are adopted to predict and analyze the individual university patent transfer cycle, which shows that the random survival forest model has good prediction performance and is able to help universities as well as enterprises to identify the patent transfer opportunities effectively, thereby shortening the patent transfer cycle and improving the patent transfer efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Disha Deng & Tao Chen, 2022. "Prediction of University Patent Transfer Cycle Based on Random Survival Forest," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:218-:d:1012553
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/218/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/218/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jingwei Xiong & Junfeng Shang, 2021. "A penalized approach to mixed model selection via cross-validation," Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(11), pages 2481-2507, June.
    2. Gambardella, Alfonso & Giuri, Paola & Luzzi, Alessandra, 2007. "The market for patents in Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1163-1183, October.
    3. Alessandro Muscio, 2010. "What drives the university use of technology transfer offices? Evidence from Italy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 181-202, April.
    4. Tie Wei & Tingting Liu, 2020. "Evolution of High-Value Patents in Reverse Innovation: Focus on Chinese Local Enterprises," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2020, pages 1-13, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Weiwei Deng & Jian Ma, 2022. "A knowledge graph approach for recommending patents to companies," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 1435-1466, December.
    2. Battaglia, Daniele & Landoni, Paolo & Rizzitelli, Francesco, 2017. "Organizational structures for external growth of University Technology Transfer Offices: An explorative analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 45-56.
    3. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Patent Thickets and the Market for Innovation: Evidence from Settlement of Patent Disputes," CEP Discussion Papers dp0889, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    4. Pietro Moncada-Paternò-Castello, 2022. "Top R&D investors, structural change and the R&D growth performance of young and old firms," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(1), pages 1-33, March.
    5. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jong-Chan Kim & Jae Young Choi, 2015. "Technology convergence: What developmental stage are we in?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 841-871, September.
    6. Tommaso Minola & Davide Hahn & Lucio Cassia, 2021. "The relationship between origin and performance of innovative start-ups: the role of technological knowledge at founding," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 553-569, February.
    7. Dequiedt, V. & Menière, Y. & Trommetter, M., 2007. "Collective management of intellectual property rights," Working Papers 200703, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    8. James A. Cunningham & Paul O’Reilly, 2018. "Macro, meso and micro perspectives of technology transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 545-557, June.
    9. Fabrizio Cesaroni & Andrea Piccaluga, 2016. "The activities of university knowledge transfer offices: towards the third mission in Italy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 753-777, August.
    10. Fischer, Timo & Henkel, Joachim, 2012. "Patent trolls on markets for technology – An empirical analysis of NPEs’ patent acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1519-1533.
    11. Milan Miric & Nan Jia & Kenneth G. Huang, 2023. "Using supervised machine learning for large‐scale classification in management research: The case for identifying artificial intelligence patents," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 491-519, February.
    12. Shen, Huijun & Coreynen, Wim & Huang, Can, 2022. "Exclusive licensing of university technology: The effects of university prestige, technology transfer offices, and academy-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    13. Chung, Jaemin & Ko, Namuk & Yoon, Janghyeok, 2021. "Inventor group identification approach for selecting university-industry collaboration partners," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    14. Christos Agiakloglou & Kyriakos Drivas & Dimitris Karamanis, 2016. "Individual inventors and market potentials: Evidence from US patents," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 147-156.
    15. Bernardina Algieri & Antonio Aquino & Marianna Succurro, 2013. "Technology transfer offices and academic spin-off creation: the case of Italy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 382-400, August.
    16. Bart Leten & Rene Belderbos & Bart Van Looy, 2016. "Entry and Technological Performance in New Technology Domains: Technological Opportunities, Technology Competition and Technological Relatedness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1257-1291, December.
    17. Mukund Chari & H. Kevin Steensma & Charles Connaughton & Ralph Heidl, 2022. "The influence of patent assertion entities on inventor behavior," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(8), pages 1666-1690, August.
    18. O’Kane, Conor & Mangematin, Vincent & Geoghegan, Will & Fitzgerald, Ciara, 2015. "University technology transfer offices: The search for identity to build legitimacy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 421-437.
    19. Jung, Taehyun & Ejermo, Olof, 2014. "Demographic patterns and trends in patenting: Gender, age, and education of inventors," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 110-124.
    20. Barirani, Ahmad & Beaudry, Catherine & Agard, Bruno, 2017. "Can universities profit from general purpose inventions? The case of Canadian nanotechnology patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 271-283.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:218-:d:1012553. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.