IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v127y2022i4d10.1007_s11192-022-04307-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

One-to-many comparative summarization for patents

Author

Listed:
  • Zheng Liu

    (Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications)

  • Jialing Zhang

    (Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications)

  • Tingting Qin

    (Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications)

  • Yanwen Qu

    (Jiangxi Normal University)

  • Yun Li

    (Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications)

Abstract

Patents bring technology companies commercial values in modern business operations. However, companies have to bear the high cost of handling patent applications or infringement cases. A common yet expensive task among these jobs is to analyze relevant patent literature. Lengthy and technically complicated patents require a large number of human efforts. This paper focuses on automatically analyzing the similar contents between a patent and its relevant literature, relevant patents specifically, to help experts review the similarities among these patents. We formulate this as a one-to-many document comparison problem by generating a comparative summary of a given patent and its relevant patents. We extract essential technical features from semantic dependency trees based on sentences in claims and construct a multi-relational graph to model the relevance between features and patents. The key to generating the comparative summary is selecting comparative essential technical features, which we formulate as an optimization problem and solve by a fast greedy algorithm. Experiments on real-world datasets and case studies demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheng Liu & Jialing Zhang & Tingting Qin & Yanwen Qu & Yun Li, 2022. "One-to-many comparative summarization for patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1969-1993, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:127:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04307-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-022-04307-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-022-04307-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-022-04307-8?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. Cinthia M. Souza & Magali R. G. Meireles & Paulo E. M. Almeida, 2021. "A comparative study of abstractive and extractive summarization techniques to label subgroups on patent dataset," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 135-156, January.
    2. Lea Helmers & Franziska Horn & Franziska Biegler & Tim Oppermann & Klaus-Robert Müller, 2019. "Automating the search for a patent’s prior art with a full text similarity search," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, March.
    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. Daniel E. Ho & Lisa Larrimore Ouellette, 2020. "Improving Scientific Judgments in Law and Government: A Field Experiment of Patent Peer Review," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 190-223, June.
    3. Kong, Nancy & Dulleck, Uwe & Jaffe, Adam B. & Sun, Shupeng & Vajjala, Sowmya, 2023. "Linguistic metrics for patent disclosure: Evidence from university versus corporate patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    4. Jie Chen & Jialin Chen & Shu Zhao & Yanping Zhang & Jie Tang, 2020. "Exploiting word embedding for heterogeneous topic model towards patent recommendation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2091-2108, December.
    5. Shicheng Tan & Tao Zhang & Shu Zhao & Yanping Zhang, 2023. "Self-supervised scientific document recommendation based on contrastive learning," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 5027-5049, September.

    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:spr:scient:v:127:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04307-8. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.