IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0325998.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using the node importance of patent network to evaluate patent relational value

Author

Listed:
  • Jianming Guo

Abstract

Citation serves as a common and considerable metric for evaluating the relational value between patents and technologies. This relational value, generally, can be measured by the centrality of the patent citation network. Some centrality indicators can indicate the importance of patents in the citation network, but they ignore the structural information of neighborhood patents. The structural importance of patent network is defined and calculated by considering the degree of similarity between patents and their neighboring node pairs. Briefly, we pair the “neighbor patent” of the target patent and the “neighbor patent” of these “neighbor patents”, called “node pair”. On this basis, we measure the relational value of the target patents. The structure analysis method of patent citation network improves patent value evaluation method from a network science perspective. Firstly, a comprehensive patent citation network is constructed. Secondly, the degree of similarity of patents and their node pairs is used to characterize their local network structural importance, and based on this, PNII, a patent node importance index, is proposed for patent value evaluation. Finally, we applied SIR model to calculate the actual propagation influence of patents, which is used as a criterion to compare the evaluation effect of PNII and other centralities. The patent relational value evaluation result shows that the PNII based on the node importance of patent network is more scientific and accurate than the general network centralities.

Suggested Citation

  • Jianming Guo, 2025. "Using the node importance of patent network to evaluate patent relational value," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(7), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0325998
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0325998
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0325998
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0325998&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0325998?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guan-Can Yang & Gang Li & Chun-Ya Li & Yun-Hua Zhao & Jing Zhang & Tong Liu & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2015. "Using the comprehensive patent citation network (CPC) to evaluate patent value," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1319-1346, December.
    2. Olav Sorenson & Jan W. Rivkin & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Complexity, Networks and Knowledge Flows," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    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. Rehák Štefan & Hudec Oto & Buček Milan, 2013. "Path dependency and path plasticity in emerging industries: Two cases from Slovakia," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 57(1-2), pages 52-66, October.
    2. Boeker, Warren & Howard, Michael D. & Basu, Sandip & Sahaym, Arvin, 2021. "Interpersonal relationships, digital technologies, and innovation in entrepreneurial ventures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 495-507.
    3. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    4. Fei Li & Jin Chen & Ying Ying, 2019. "Innovation Search Scope, Technological Complexity, and Environmental Turbulence: A N-K Simulation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-12, August.
    5. repec:osf:socarx:49qxk_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Jiang, Cuiqing & Zhou, Yiru & Chen, Bo, 2023. "Mining semantic features in patent text for financial distress prediction," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    7. 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.
    8. Dirk Fornahl & Nils Grashof & Alexander Kopka, 2021. "Do not neglect the periphery?! - the emergence and diffusion of radical innovations," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2102, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    9. Hervas-Oliver, Jose-Luis & Lleo, María & Cervello, Roberto, 2017. "The dynamics of cluster entrepreneurship: Knowledge legacy from parents or agglomeration effects? The case of the Castellon ceramic tile district," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 73-92.
    10. Gupeng Zhang & Xiao Wang & Hongbo Duan, 2020. "Obscure but important: examining the indirect effects of alliance networks in exploratory and exploitative innovation paradigms," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 1745-1764, September.
    11. Tubiana, Matteo & Miguelez, Ernest & Moreno, Rosina, 2022. "In knowledge we trust: Learning-by-interacting and the productivity of inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    12. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & David Rigby & Ron Boschma, 2015. "The technological resilience of US cities," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 8(2), pages 167-184.
    13. 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.
    14. Mei-Chih Hu, 2011. "Evolution of knowledge creation and diffusion: the revisit of Taiwan’s Hsinchu Science Park," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(3), pages 949-977, September.
    15. Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Ardito, Lorenzo & Savino, Tommaso, 2018. "Maturity of knowledge inputs and innovation value: The moderating effect of firm age and size," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 190-201.
    16. Sylvaine Castellano & Philippe Davidson & Insaf Khelladi, 2017. "Creativity techniques to enhance knowledge transfer within global virtual teams in the context of knowledge-intensive enterprises," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 253-266, April.
    17. Mewes, Lars & Broekel, Tom, 2022. "Technological complexity and economic growth of regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    18. Melissa Haller & David L. Rigby, 2020. "The geographic evolution of optics technologies in the United States, 1976–2010," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(6), pages 1539-1559, December.
    19. Jiang He & M. Hosein Fallah, 2014. "Dynamics of Inventor Networks and the Evolution of Technology Clusters," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 2174-2200, November.
    20. Gatti, Corrado & Volpe, Loredana & Vagnani, Gianluca, 2015. "Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 711-722.
    21. Dibiaggio, Ludovic & Nasiriyar, Maryam & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "Substitutability and complementarity of technological knowledge and the inventive performance of semiconductor companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1582-1593.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0325998. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.