IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i4p3793-d1073667.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Method of TFN-TOPSIS Based on Possibility Degree Relation Model and Its Application in the Patent Value Estimation of Self-Balancing Vehicles

Author

Listed:
  • Zhili Huang

    (School of Economics and Management, Xiamen University of Technology, Xiamen 361024, China)

  • Hongge Yue

    (School of Economics and Management, Xiamen University of Technology, Xiamen 361024, China)

  • Qiang He

    (School of Economics and Management, Xiamen University of Technology, Xiamen 361024, China)

Abstract

With the advancement of technology and the development of intelligence, self-balancing scooters have gradually developed in the field of short-distance travel and have become a fashionable, popular and leisure means of transportation. In addition, both the export of self-balancing scooters and their safety are closely related to their core patents. Therefore, in order to promote the healthy development of the self-balancing automobile industry, this paper carries out the following research: First, we introduce the background of the self-balancing automobile patent and the research status of patent value evaluation at home and abroad. Then, considering the fuzziness of decision makers’ thinking and the uncertainty of patent indicators, this paper extends the traditional TOPSIS method to the field of triangular fuzzy numbers (TFNs), and proposes a TFN-TOPSIS multi-criteria decision model based on the possibility degree relationship model. In addition, this study establishes a core patent value system using three aspects of technology, law and economy, and applies the TFN-TOPSIS model to the top 20 balanced car patents with the highest comprehensive evaluation to rank and analyze the measurement results. On this basis, this paper provides reference opinions for relevant industry personnel from the aspects of future product technology updates and patent layouts.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhili Huang & Hongge Yue & Qiang He, 2023. "Method of TFN-TOPSIS Based on Possibility Degree Relation Model and Its Application in the Patent Value Estimation of Self-Balancing Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-20, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:4:p:3793-:d:1073667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3793/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3793/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jerry R. Green & Suzanne Scotchmer, 1995. "On the Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(1), pages 20-33, Spring.
    2. Harhoff, Dietmar & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verspagen, Bart, 2008. "The Value of European Patents," CEPR Discussion Papers 6848, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Hosseini Dehshiri, Seyyed Shahabaddin & Firoozabadi, Bahar, 2022. "A new application of measurement of alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution (MARCOS) in solar site location for electricity and hydrogen production: A case study in the southern clim," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    4. Li, Cong-Cong & Dong, Yucheng & Liang, Haiming & Pedrycz, Witold & Herrera, Francisco, 2022. "Data-driven method to learning personalized individual semantics to support linguistic multi-attribute decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    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. Gamba, Simona, 2017. "The Effect of Intellectual Property Rights on Domestic Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 15-27.
    2. Elizabeth Webster & Paul H. Jensen, 2011. "Do Patents Matter for Commercialization?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(2), pages 431-453.
    3. Huang, Kenneth Guang-Lih & Huang, Can & Shen, Huijun & Mao, Hao, 2021. "Assessing the value of China's patented inventions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    4. Lu, Louis Y.Y. & Liu, John S., 2016. "A novel approach to identify the major research themes and development trajectory: The case of patenting research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 71-82.
    5. Fischer, Timo & Leidinger, Jan, 2014. "Testing patent value indicators on directly observed patent value—An empirical analysis of Ocean Tomo patent auctions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 519-529.
    6. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    7. Llanes Gastón & Trento Stefano, 2011. "Anticommons and Optimal Patent Policy in a Model of Sequential Innovation," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-27, August.
    8. Hans K. Hvide & Benjamin F. Jones, 2018. "University Innovation and the Professor's Privilege," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(7), pages 1860-1898, July.
    9. Francesco Vona & Francesco Nicolli & Lionel Nesta, 2012. "Determinants of renewable energy innovation: environmental policies vs. market regulation," Sciences Po publications 2012-05, Sciences Po.
    10. Dietmar Harhoff & Georg von Graevenitz & Stefan Wagner, 2016. "Conflict Resolution, Public Goods, and Patent Thickets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(3), pages 704-721, March.
    11. Alberto Galasso & Hong Luo, 2018. "Punishing Robots: Issues in the Economics of Tort Liability and Innovation in Artificial Intelligence," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 493-504, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Dequiedt, V. & Versaevel, B., 2004. "Patent pools and the dynamic incentives to R&D," Working Papers 200412, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    13. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    14. Lewis, Tracy R. & Sappington, David E. M., 1999. "Access pricing with unregulated downstream competition," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 73-100, March.
    15. Vidyanand Choudhary & Mingdi Xin & Zhe Zhang, 2023. "Sequential IT Investment: Can the Risk of IT Implementation Failure Be Your Friend?," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1017-1044, September.
    16. Su, Hsin-Ning, 2017. "Collaborative and Legal Dynamics of International R&D- Evolving Patterns in East Asia," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 217-227.
    17. Tuomas Takalo, 2012. "Rationales and Instruments for Public Innovation Policies," Journal of Reviews on Global Economics, Lifescience Global, vol. 1, pages 157-167.
    18. Lorenzo Cassi & Anne Plunket, 2014. "Proximity, network formation and inventive performance: in search of the proximity paradox," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(2), pages 395-422, September.
    19. Thomas Hellmann & Veikko Thiele, 2019. "Fostering Entrepreneurship: Promoting Founding or Funding?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 2502-2521, June.
    20. Josh Lerner, 2002. "150 Years of Patent Protection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 221-225, May.

    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:2023:i:4:p:3793-:d:1073667. 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.