IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v111y2017i3d10.1007_s11192-017-2337-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An entropy-based indicator system for measuring the potential of patents in technological innovation: rejecting moderation

Author

Listed:
  • Yi Zhang

    (University of Technology Sydney)

  • Yue Qian

    (Beijing Institute of Technology)

  • Ying Huang

    (Beijing Institute of Technology)

  • Ying Guo

    (Beijing Institute of Technology)

  • Guangquan Zhang

    (University of Technology Sydney)

  • Jie Lu

    (University of Technology Sydney)

Abstract

How to evaluate the value of a patent in technological innovation quantitatively and systematically challenges bibliometrics. Traditional indicator systems and weighting approaches mostly lead to “moderation” results; that is, patents ranked to a top list can have only good-looking values on all indicators rather than distinctive performances in certain individual indicators. Orienting patents authorized by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), this paper constructs an entropy-based indicator system to measure their potential in technological innovation. Shannon’s entropy is introduced to quantitatively weight indicators and a collaborative filtering technique is used to iteratively remove negative patents. What remains is a small set of positive patents with potential in technological innovation as the output. A case study with 28,509 USPTO-authorized patents with Chinese assignees, covering the period from 1976 to 2014, demonstrates the feasibility and reliability of this method.

Suggested Citation

  • Yi Zhang & Yue Qian & Ying Huang & Ying Guo & Guangquan Zhang & Jie Lu, 2017. "An entropy-based indicator system for measuring the potential of patents in technological innovation: rejecting moderation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1925-1946, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:111:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2337-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2337-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-017-2337-7
    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/s11192-017-2337-7?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. Loet Leydesdorff & Duncan Kushnir & Ismael Rafols, 2014. "Interactive overlay maps for US patent (USPTO) data based on International Patent Classification (IPC)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1583-1599, March.
    3. Janghyeok Yoon & Hyunseok Park & Kwangsoo Kim, 2013. "Identifying technological competition trends for R&D planning using dynamic patent maps: SAO-based content analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 313-331, January.
    4. Yong-Gil Lee, 2009. "What affects a patent’s value? An analysis of variables that affect technological, direct economic, and indirect economic value: An exploratory conceptual approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 79(3), pages 623-633, June.
    5. Grimaldi, Michele & Cricelli, Livio & Di Giovanni, Martina & Rogo, Francesco, 2015. "The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to leverage patent information for strategic technology planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 286-302.
    6. David C. Mowery & Bhaven N. Sampat & Arvids A. Ziedonis, 2002. "Learning to Patent: Institutional Experience, Learning, and the Characteristics of U.S. University Patents After the Bayh-Dole Act, 1981-1992," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 73-89, January.
    7. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
    8. Xu, Han & Martin, Eric & Mahidadia, Ashesh, 2014. "Contents and time sensitive document ranking of scientific literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 546-561.
    9. Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & Eleftherios Sapsalis & Ran Navon, 2006. "Academic vs. industry patenting: an in-depth analysis of what determines patent value," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/6197, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    10. 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.
    11. Luciano Kay & Nils Newman & Jan Youtie & Alan L. Porter & Ismael Rafols, 2014. "Patent overlay mapping: Visualizing technological distance," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 65(12), pages 2432-2443, December.
    12. Guellec, Dominique & Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno v., 2000. "Applications, grants and the value of patent," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 109-114, October.
    13. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    14. Yu-Shan Chen & Ke-Chiun Chang, 2012. "Using the entropy-based patent measure to explore the influences of related and unrelated technological diversification upon technological competences and firm performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 825-841, March.
    15. Blaise Cronin & Lokman Meho, 2006. "Using the h‐index to rank influential information scientistss," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(9), pages 1275-1278, July.
    16. Tijssen, Robert J. W., 2001. "Global and domestic utilization of industrial relevant science: patent citation analysis of science-technology interactions and knowledge flows," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 35-54, January.
    17. Sungchul Choi & Janghyeok Yoon & Kwangsoo Kim & Jae Yeol Lee & Cheol-Han Kim, 2011. "SAO network analysis of patents for technology trends identification: a case study of polymer electrolyte membrane technology in proton exchange membrane fuel cells," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(3), pages 863-883, September.
    18. Marianna Makri & Michael A. Hitt & Peter J. Lane, 2010. "Complementary technologies, knowledge relatedness, and invention outcomes in high technology mergers and acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(6), pages 602-628, June.
    19. Xiao-Ping Lei & Zhi-Yun Zhao & Xu Zhang & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang & Jia Zheng & Run-Sheng Liu & Jing Zhang & Yun-Hua Zhao, 2013. "Technological collaboration patterns in solar cell industry based on patent inventors and assignees analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 427-441, August.
    20. Zhang, Yi & Shang, Lining & Huang, Lu & Porter, Alan L. & Zhang, Guangquan & Lu, Jie & Zhu, Donghua, 2016. "A hybrid similarity measure method for patent portfolio analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1108-1130.
    21. von Wartburg, Iwan & Teichert, Thorsten & Rost, Katja, 2005. "Inventive progress measured by multi-stage patent citation analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1591-1607, December.
    22. Dar-Zen Chen & Han-Wen Chang & Mu-Hsuan Huang & Feng-Cheng Fu, 2005. "Core technologies and key industries in Taiwan from 1978 to 2002: A perspective from patent analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 64(1), pages 31-53, July.
    23. Vinkler, Péter, 2013. "Comparative rank assessment of journal articles," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 712-717.
    24. Harhoff, Dietmar & Scherer, Frederic M. & Vopel, Katrin, 2003. "Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1343-1363, September.
    25. 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.
    26. Ludo Waltman & Clara Calero-Medina & Joost Kosten & Ed C.M. Noyons & Robert J.W. Tijssen & Nees Jan Eck & Thed N. Leeuwen & Anthony F.J. Raan & Martijn S. Visser & Paul Wouters, 2012. "The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(12), pages 2419-2432, December.
    27. Bessen, James, 2008. "The value of U.S. patents by owner and patent characteristics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 932-945, June.
    28. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    29. Martin S. Meyer & Puay Tang, 2007. "Exploring the “value” of academic patents: IP management practices in UK universities and their implications for Third-Stream indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 415-440, February.
    30. Guellec, Dominique & Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno v., 2001. "The internationalisation of technology analysed with patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(8), pages 1253-1266, October.
    31. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    32. Wang, Benjamin & Hsieh, Chih-Hung, 2015. "Measuring the value of patents with fuzzy multiple criteria decision making: insight into the practices of the Industrial Technology Research Institute," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 263-275.
    33. Shino Iwami & Junichiro Mori & Ichiro Sakata & Yuya Kajikawa, 2014. "Detection method of emerging leading papers using time transition," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1515-1533, November.
    34. Loet Leydesdorff, 2002. "Indicators of structural change in the dynamics of science: Entropy statistics of the SCI Journal Citation Reports," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(1), pages 131-159, January.
    35. Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Improving patent valuations for management purposes--validating new indicators by analyzing application rationales," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 939-957, September.
    36. Nicky J. Welton & Howard H. Z. Thom, 2015. "Value of Information," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(5), pages 564-566, July.
    37. Zhang, Yi & Porter, Alan L. & Hu, Zhengyin & Guo, Ying & Newman, Nils C., 2014. "“Term clumping” for technical intelligence: A case study on dye-sensitized solar cells," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 26-39.
    38. Basberg, Bjorn L., 1987. "Patents and the measurement of technological change: A survey of the literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 131-141, August.
    39. Shyh-Jen Wang, 2007. "Factors to evaluate a patent in addition to citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(3), pages 509-522, June.
    40. Michelle Gittelman & Bruce Kogut, 2003. "Does Good Science Lead to Valuable Knowledge? Biotechnology Firms and the Evolutionary Logic of Citation Patterns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 366-382, April.
    41. Reitzig, Markus, 2003. "What determines patent value?: Insights from the semiconductor industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 13-26, January.
    42. Sapsalis, Eleftherios & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & Navon, Ran, 2006. "Academic versus industry patenting: An in-depth analysis of what determines patent value," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1631-1645, December.
    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. Gao, Xue & Zhang, Yi, 2022. "What is behind the globalization of technology? Exploring the interplay of multi-level drivers of international patent extension in the solar photovoltaic industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    2. Zhang, Lili & Guo, Ying & Sun, Ganlu, 2019. "How patent signals affect venture capital: The evidence of bio-pharmaceutical start-ups in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 93-104.
    3. Hoyoon Lee & Dawoon Jeong & Jeong-Dong Lee, 2023. "Drivers of institutional evolution: phylogenetic inertia and ecological pressure," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 279-308, April.
    4. Mariani, Manuel Sebastian & Medo, Matúš & Lafond, François, 2019. "Early identification of important patents: Design and validation of citation network metrics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 644-654.
    5. Block, Carolin & Wustmans, Michael & Laibach, Natalie & Bröring, Stefanie, 2021. "Semantic bridging of patents and scientific publications – The case of an emerging sustainability-oriented technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    6. Francesco Paolo Appio & Luigi de Luca & Robert Morgan & Antonella Martini, 2019. "Patent portfolio diversity and firm profitability: A question of specialization or diversification?," Post-Print halshs-02292360, HAL.
    7. Manajit Chakraborty & Maksym Byshkin & Fabio Crestani, 2020. "Patent citation network analysis: A perspective from descriptive statistics and ERGMs," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-28, December.
    8. Juhyun Lee & Sangsung Park & Junseok Lee, 2023. "Exploring Potential R&D Collaboration Partners Using Embedding of Patent Graph," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-19, October.
    9. Zhang, Yi & Wu, Mengjia & Miao, Wen & Huang, Lu & Lu, Jie, 2021. "Bi-layer network analytics: A methodology for characterizing emerging general-purpose technologies," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    10. Chung, Park & Sohn, So Young, 2020. "Early detection of valuable patents using a deep learning model: Case of semiconductor industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    11. Wu, Mengjia & Zhang, Yi & Zhang, Guangquan & Lu, Jie, 2021. "Exploring the genetic basis of diseases through a heterogeneous bibliometric network: A methodology and case study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    12. Lin Zhu & Donghua Zhu & Xuefeng Wang & Scott W. Cunningham & Zhinan Wang, 2019. "An integrated solution for detecting rising technology stars in co-inventor networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 137-172, October.

    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. Bo Kyeong Lee & So Young Sohn, 2017. "Exploring the effect of dual use on the value of military technology patents based on the renewal decision," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1203-1227, September.
    2. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Federico Munari & Maurizio Sobrero, 2011. "Economic and Management Perspectives on the Value of Patents," Chapters, in: Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), The Economic Valuation of Patents, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2007. "Patents only live twice: a patent survival analysis in Europe," Working Papers CEB 07-028.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    6. Eun Han & So Sohn, 2015. "Patent valuation based on text mining and survival analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 821-839, October.
    7. Jungpyo Lee & So Young Sohn, 2017. "What makes the first forward citation of a patent occur earlier?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 279-298, October.
    8. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.
    9. Barbieri, Nicolò & Marzucchi, Alberto & Rizzo, Ugo, 2020. "Knowledge sources and impacts on subsequent inventions: Do green technologies differ from non-green ones?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    10. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara DiGuardo, 2017. "Sustainability of patent-based competitive advantage in the U.S. communications services industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1334-1361, December.
    11. Yong-Gil Lee & Ji-Hoon Lee, 2010. "Different characteristics between auctioned and non-auctioned patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(1), pages 135-148, January.
    12. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry, 2019. "Capturing the economic value of triadic patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 127-157, January.
    13. 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).
    14. Acosta, Manuel & Coronado, Daniel & Martínez, M. Ángeles, 2012. "Spatial differences in the quality of university patenting: Do regions matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 692-703.
    15. Hain, Daniel S. & Jurowetzki, Roman & Buchmann, Tobias & Wolf, Patrick, 2022. "A text-embedding-based approach to measuring patent-to-patent technological similarity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    16. Hsin-Ning Su & Carey Ming-Li Chen & Pei-Chun Lee, 2012. "Patent litigation precaution method: analyzing characteristics of US litigated and non-litigated patents from 1976 to 2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(1), pages 181-195, July.
    17. Sterzi, Valerio, 2013. "Patent quality and ownership: An analysis of UK faculty patenting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 564-576.
    18. 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.
    19. Ying Huang & Donghua Zhu & Yue Qian & Yi Zhang & Alan L. Porter & Yuqin Liu & Ying Guo, 2017. "A hybrid method to trace technology evolution pathways: a case study of 3D printing," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(1), pages 185-204, April.
    20. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2021. "Identification of “Valuable” Technologies via Patent Statistics in India: An Analysis Based on Renewal Information," BASE University Working Papers 13/2021, BASE University, Bengaluru, India.

    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:111:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2337-7. 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.