IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0346056.html

Technological impact, generality, and complementarity of artificial intelligence patents: Evidence from Samsung Electronics

Author

Listed:
  • Sangrok Lee
  • Taehyun Jung

Abstract

This study examines the extent to which artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are more pervasive and technologically complementary than non-AI technologies. Drawing on the literature on general purpose technologies (GPTs), we hypothesize that AI technologies exhibit greater pervasiveness—reflected in higher technological impact and broader generality—and stronger technological complementarity than non-AI patents. Using a firm-level analysis of patents filed by Samsung Electronics between 1982 and 2018, we find that AI patents demonstrate significantly higher impact, wider generality, and stronger systematic complementarity compared to matched non-AI patents. These results are robust across alternative matching specifications and multiple operationalizations of the key variables. Our findings offer firm-level empirical supporting AI’s GPT-like characteristics and shed light on how AI-driven innovations may generate sustained incentives for technological advancement, even amid processes of creative destruction. The paper concludes by discussing key theoretical, managerial, and policy implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Sangrok Lee & Taehyun Jung, 2026. "Technological impact, generality, and complementarity of artificial intelligence patents: Evidence from Samsung Electronics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(5), pages 1-35, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0346056
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0346056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0346056
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0346056&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0346056?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. Ajay Agrawal & Joshua Gans & Avi Goldfarb, 2019. "Economic Policy for Artificial Intelligence," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(1), pages 139-159.
    2. Hall, B. & Jaffe, A. & Trajtenberg, M., 2001. "The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," Papers 2001-29, Tel Aviv.
    3. Kerstin Hotte & Taheya Tarannum & Vilhelm Verendel & Lauren Bennett, 2022. "Measuring artificial intelligence: a systematic assessment and implications for governance," Papers 2204.10304, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2025.
    4. Blind, Knut & Cremers, Katrin & Mueller, Elisabeth, 2009. "The influence of strategic patenting on companies' patent portfolios," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 428-436, March.
    5. Fujii, Hidemichi & Managi, Shunsuke, 2018. "Trends and priority shifts in artificial intelligence technology invention: A global patent analysis," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 60-69.
    6. Erik Brynjolfsson & Daniel Rock & Chad Syverson, 2018. "Artificial Intelligence and the Modern Productivity Paradox: A Clash of Expectations and Statistics," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 23-57, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Deeviya Francis Xavier & Christian Korunka & Roni Reiter-Palmon, 2025. "AI integration and workforce development: Exploring job autonomy and creative self-efficacy in a global context," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(6), pages 1-17, June.
    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. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Fernández, Gastón P. & Rammer, Christian, 2023. "Artificial intelligence and firm-level productivity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 188-205.
    2. Venturini, Francesco, 2022. "Intelligent technologies and productivity spillovers: Evidence from the Fourth Industrial Revolution," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 220-243.
    3. Anastasios Evgenidis & Apostolos Fasianos, 2025. "AI news shocks and the macroeconomy: evidence from UK patent data," IFS Working Papers W25/48, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    4. Masatoshi Kato & Koichiro Onishi & Yuji Honjo, 2022. "Does patenting always help new firm survival? Understanding heterogeneity among exit routes," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 449-475, August.
    5. Ajay Agrawal & Joshua Gans & Avi Goldfarb, 2019. "Economic Policy for Artificial Intelligence," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(1), pages 139-159.
    6. Xueyuan Gao & Hua Feng, 2023. "AI-Driven Productivity Gains: Artificial Intelligence and Firm Productivity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-21, June.
    7. Lapo Santarlasci & Armando Rungi & Loredana Fattorini & Nestor Maslej, 2025. "Owning the Intelligence: Global AI Patents Landscape and Europe's Quest for Technological Sovereignty," Papers 2512.19569, arXiv.org.
    8. Horim Kim & Jaeyoung Kim & Kyungmyung Jang & Jaemin Han, 2020. "Are the Blockchain-Based Patents Sustainable for Increasing Firm Value?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, February.
    9. Haucap, Justus & Rasch, Alexander & Stiebale, Joel, 2019. "How mergers affect innovation: Theory and evidence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 283-325.
    10. Frietsch, Rainer & Neuhäusler, Peter & Michels, Carolin & Dornbusch, Friedrich, 2014. "Medical research at universities – An international comparison," Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem 8-2014, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin.
    11. Radeef Chundakkadan & Subash Sasidharan & Kausik Chaudhuri, 2025. "Automation, firm performance, and employment: Evidence from developing countries," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 35(5), pages 873-900, November.
    12. Bradley, Wendy A. & Kolev, Julian, 2023. "How does digital piracy affect innovation? Evidence from software firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3).
    13. Peiyi Jia & Ciprian Stan, 2021. "Artificial Intelligence Factory, Data Risk, and VCs’ Mediation: The Case of ByteDance, an AI-Powered Startup," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-19, May.
    14. Haucap, Justus & Stiebale, Joel, 2016. "How mergers affect innovation: Theory and evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," DICE Discussion Papers 218, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    15. J. Klinger & J. Mateos-Garcia & K. Stathoulopoulos, 2018. "Deep learning, deep change? Mapping the development of the Artificial Intelligence General Purpose Technology," Papers 1808.06355, arXiv.org.
    16. Bessen, James & Neuhäusler, Peter & Turner, John L. & Williams, Jonathan, 2018. "Trends in private patent costs and rents for publicly-traded United States firms," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 53-69.
    17. Yagi, Michiyuki & Managi, Shunsuke, 2018. "Shadow price of patent stock as knowledge stock: Time and country heterogeneity," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 43-61.
    18. Alexander Kopka & Dirk Fornahl, 2024. "Artificial intelligence and firm growth — catch-up processes of SMEs through integrating AI into their knowledge bases," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 63-85, January.
    19. Soyea Lee & Junseok Hwang & Eunsang Cho, 2022. "Comparing technology convergence of artificial intelligence on the industrial sectors: two-way approaches on network analysis and clustering analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 407-452, January.
    20. George Messinis, 2011. "Triadic citations, country biases and patent value: the case of pharmaceuticals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 813-833, December.

    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:pone00:0346056. 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.