IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v86y2011i3d10.1007_s11192-010-0303-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Invention property-function network analysis of patents: a case of silicon-based thin film solar cells

Author

Listed:
  • Janghyeok Yoon

    (Pohang University of Science and Technology)

  • Sungchul Choi

    (Pohang University of Science and Technology)

  • Kwangsoo Kim

    (Pohang University of Science and Technology)

Abstract

Technology analysis is a process which uses textual analysis to detect trends in technological innovation. Co-word analysis (CWA), a popular method for technology analysis, encompasses (1) defining a set of keyword or key phrase patterns which are represented in technology-dependent terms, (2) generating a network that codifies the relations between occurrences of keywords or key phrases, and (3) identifying specific trends from the network. However, defining the set of keyword or key phrase patterns heavily relies on effort of experts, who may be expensive or unavailable. Furthermore defining keyword or key phrase patterns of new or emerging technology areas may be a difficult task even for experts. To solve the limitation in CWA, this research adopts a property-function based approach. The property is a specific characteristic of a product, and is usually described using adjectives; the function is a useful action of a product, and is usually described using verbs. Properties and functions represent the innovation concepts of a system, so they show innovation directions in a given technology. The proposed methodology automatically extracts properties and functions from patents using natural language processing. Using properties and functions as nodes, and co-occurrences as links, an invention property-function network (IPFN) can be generated. Using social network analysis, the methodology analyzes technological implications of indicators in the IPFN. Therefore, without predefining keyword or key phrase patterns, the methodology assists experts to more concentrate on their knowledge services that identify trends in technological innovation from patents. The methodology is illustrated using a case study of patents related to silicon-based thin film solar cells.

Suggested Citation

  • Janghyeok Yoon & Sungchul Choi & Kwangsoo Kim, 2011. "Invention property-function network analysis of patents: a case of silicon-based thin film solar cells," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 687-703, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:86:y:2011:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0303-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-010-0303-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-010-0303-8
    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/s11192-010-0303-8?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. Dean Hendrix, 2009. "Institutional self-citation rates: A three year study of universities in the United States," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 321-331, November.
    2. 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.
    3. Mark William Neff & Elizabeth A. Corley, 2009. "35 years and 160,000 articles: A bibliometric exploration of the evolution of ecology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 657-682, September.
    4. Peter Thompson & Melanie Fox-Kean, 2005. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 465-466, March.
    5. Lin Zhang & Frizo Janssens & Liming Liang & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2010. "Journal cross-citation analysis for validation and improvement of journal-based subject classification in bibliometric research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(3), pages 687-706, March.
    6. Bangrae Lee & Yong-Il Jeong, 2008. "Mapping Korea’s national R&D domain of robot technology by using the co-word analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(1), pages 3-19, October.
    7. Weiwei Zhang & Weihong Qian & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2009. "A bibliometric analysis of research related to ocean circulation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(2), pages 305-316, August.
    8. Pao-Long Chang & Chao-Chan Wu & Hoang-Jyh Leu, 2010. "Using patent analyses to monitor the technological trends in an emerging field of technology: a case of carbon nanotube field emission display," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(1), pages 5-19, January.
    9. Peter Thompson & Melanie Fox-Kean, 2005. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 450-460, 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. Forman, Chris & van Zeebroeck, Nicolas, 2019. "Digital technology adoption and knowledge flows within firms: Can the Internet overcome geographic and technological distance?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    2. Keith Head & Yao Amber Li & Asier Minondo, 2019. "Geography, Ties, and Knowledge Flows: Evidence from Citations in Mathematics," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(4), pages 713-727, October.
    3. Diemer, Andreas & Regan, Tanner, 2022. "No inventor is an island: Social connectedness and the geography of knowledge flows in the US," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    4. David Rigby, 2012. "The Geography of Knowledge Relatedness and Technological Diversification in U.S. Cities," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1218, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Oct 2012.
    5. Pierre Cotterlaz, 2021. "Three essays on spatial frictions [Trois essais sur les frictions spatiales]," SciencePo Working papers Main tel-03436173, HAL.
    6. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Hussinger, Katrin & Schneider, Cédric, 2011. "“Wacky” patents meet economic indicators," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 131-134.
    7. Lööf, Hans & Perez, Luis & Baum, Christopher F, 2018. "Directed Technical Change in Clean Energy: Evidence from the Solar Industry," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 470, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    8. Heide Fier & Andreas Pyka, 2014. "Against the one-way-street: analyzing knowledge transfer from industry to science," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 219-246, April.
    9. Stefan Wagner & Karin Hoisl & Grid Thoma, 2014. "Overcoming localization of knowledge — the role of professional service firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(11), pages 1671-1688, November.
    10. David H. Hsu & Kwanghui Lim, 2014. "Knowledge Brokering and Organizational Innovation: Founder Imprinting Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1134-1153, August.
    11. Delcamp, Henry & Leiponen, Aija, 2014. "Innovating standards through informal consortia: The case of wireless telecommunications," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 36-47.
    12. NAGAOKA Sadao & NISHIMURA Yoichiro, 2015. "Use of Grace Periods and Their Impact on Knowledge Flow: Evidence from Japan," Discussion papers 15072, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    13. Stuart J.H. Graham & Alan C. Marco & Richard Miller, 2018. "The USPTO Patent Examination Research Dataset: A window on patent processing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 554-578, September.
    14. Joel Blit, 2017. "Learning remotely: R&D satellites, intra‐firm linkages, and knowledge sourcing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 757-781, December.
    15. Li, Yao Amber, 2014. "Borders and distance in knowledge spillovers: Dying over time or dying with age?—Evidence from patent citations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 152-172.
    16. 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.
    17. Nelson, Andrew J., 2009. "Measuring knowledge spillovers: What patents, licenses and publications reveal about innovation diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 994-1005, July.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Po‐Hsuan Hsu & Hai‐Ping Hui & Hsiao‐Hui Lee & Kevin Tseng, 2022. "Supply chain technology spillover, customer concentration, and product invention," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 393-417, April.

    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:86:y:2011:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0303-8. 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.