IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i4d10.1007_s11192-024-04966-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowledge graph enhanced citation recommendation model for patent examiners

Author

Listed:
  • Yonghe Lu

    (Sun Yat-sen University
    Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Xinyu Tong

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Xin Xiong

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Hou Zhu

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

Abstract

In the face of a growing volume of patents, patent examiners grapple with prolonged examination cycles, prompting the need for more effective citation recommendations. To address this, we introduce the patent knowledge graph embedded in Bert (PK-Bert) model. This innovation combines a patent knowledge graph with semantic information in an advanced Transformer framework, outperforming conventional common-sense knowledge graph embedding. PK-Bert exhibits substantial improvements, boosting the recall of accurate citation recommendations by 2.15% over the benchmark model Bert and 1.25% over K-Bert with CnDBpedia. Ablation experiments highlight the significance of knowledge graph elements, with the inventor proving most influential, followed by the IPC number and assignee. At the same time, publication time and title information have a minor impact. Moreover, PK-Bert excels when trained with earlier data and evaluated for patents issued post-November 2023. Our study not only advances patent examiner recommendations but also presents an efficient integration method for knowledge graph-enhanced semantic patent characterization.

Suggested Citation

  • Yonghe Lu & Xinyu Tong & Xin Xiong & Hou Zhu, 2024. "Knowledge graph enhanced citation recommendation model for patent examiners," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(4), pages 2181-2203, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-024-04966-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-04966-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-024-04966-9
    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/s11192-024-04966-9?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. Xuefeng Wang & Huichao Ren & Yun Chen & Yuqin Liu & Yali Qiao & Ying Huang, 2019. "Measuring patent similarity with SAO semantic analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 1-23, October.
    3. Terrence A. Brooks, 1985. "Private acts and public objects: An investigation of citer motivations," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 36(4), pages 223-229, July.
    4. Jungpyo Lee & So Young Sohn, 2021. "Recommendation system for technology convergence opportunities based on self-supervised representation learning," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 1-25, January.
    5. Arts, Sam & Hou, Jianan & Gomez, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Natural language processing to identify the creation and impact of new technologies in patent text: Code, data, and new measures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    6. Yamauchi, Isamu & Nagaoka, Sadao, 2015. "Does the outsourcing of prior art search increase the efficiency of patent examination? Evidence from Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1601-1614.
    7. Sam Arts & Bruno Cassiman & Juan Carlos Gomez, 2018. "Text matching to measure patent similarity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 62-84, January.
    8. Kim, Yee Kyoung & Oh, Jun Byoung, 2017. "Examination workloads, grant decision bias and examination quality of patent office," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 1005-1019.
    9. 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.
    10. Yonghe Lu & Xin Xiong & Weiting Zhang & Jiaxin Liu & Ruijie Zhao, 2020. "Research on classification and similarity of patent citation based on deep learning," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(2), pages 813-839, May.
    11. Choi, Seokkyu & Lee, Hyeonju & Park, Eunjeong & Choi, Sungchul, 2022. "Deep learning for patent landscaping using transformer and graph embedding," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    12. Weiwei Deng & Jian Ma, 2022. "A knowledge graph approach for recommending patents to companies," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 1435-1466, December.
    13. Jaewoong Choi & Jiho Lee & Janghyeok Yoon & Sion Jang & Jaeyoung Kim & Sungchul Choi, 2022. "A two-stage deep learning-based system for patent citation recommendation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6615-6636, November.
    14. deGrazia, Charles A.W. & Pairolero, Nicholas A. & Teodorescu, Mike H.M., 2021. "Examination incentives, learning, and patent office outcomes: The use of examiner’s amendments at the USPTO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    15. Tong, Tony W. & Zhang, Kun & He, Zi-Lin & Zhang, Yuchen, 2018. "What determines the duration of patent examination in China? An outcome-specific duration analysis of invention patent applications at SIPO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 583-591.
    16. Martin Meyer, 2000. "What is Special about Patent Citations? Differences between Scientific and Patent Citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 49(1), pages 93-123, August.
    17. Choi, Jaewoong & Yoon, Janghyeok, 2022. "Measuring knowledge exploration distance at the patent level: Application of network embedding and citation analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    18. Jie Chen & Jialin Chen & Shu Zhao & Yanping Zhang & Jie Tang, 2020. "Exploiting word embedding for heterogeneous topic model towards patent recommendation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2091-2108, December.
    19. Dietmar Harhoff & Stefan Wagner, 2009. "The Duration of Patent Examination at the European Patent Office," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1969-1984, December.
    20. An, Xin & Li, Jinghong & Xu, Shuo & Chen, Liang & Sun, Wei, 2021. "An improved patent similarity measurement based on entities and semantic relations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    21. 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).
    22. Tetsuo Wada, 2018. "The choice of examiner patent citations for refusals: evidence from the trilateral offices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 825-843, November.
    23. Teng, Hao & Wang, Nan & Zhao, Hongyu & Hu, Yingtong & Jin, Haitao, 2024. "Enhancing semantic text similarity with functional semantic knowledge (FOP) in patents," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1).
    24. Chen, Lixin, 2017. "Do patent citations indicate knowledge linkage? The evidence from text similarities between patents and their citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 63-79.
    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. Jaewoong Choi & Jiho Lee & Janghyeok Yoon & Sion Jang & Jaeyoung Kim & Sungchul Choi, 2022. "A two-stage deep learning-based system for patent citation recommendation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6615-6636, November.
    2. Teng, Hao & Wang, Nan & Zhao, Hongyu & Hu, Yingtong & Jin, Haitao, 2024. "Enhancing semantic text similarity with functional semantic knowledge (FOP) in patents," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1).
    3. Bekamiri, Hamid & Hain, Daniel S. & Jurowetzki, Roman, 2024. "PatentSBERTa: A deep NLP based hybrid model for patent distance and classification using augmented SBERT," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    4. Zhu, Kejia & Malhotra, Shavin & Li, Yaohan, 2022. "Technological diversity of patent applications and decision pendency," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    5. 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).
    6. Shicheng Tan & Tao Zhang & Shu Zhao & Yanping Zhang, 2023. "Self-supervised scientific document recommendation based on contrastive learning," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 5027-5049, September.
    7. Nagaoka, Sadao & Yamauchi, Isamu, 2022. "Information constraints and examination quality in patent offices: The effect of initiation lags," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    8. Kang, Byeongwoo & Bekkers, Rudi, 2022. "The determinants of parallel invention : Measuring the role of information sharing and personal interaction between inventors," IIR Working Paper 22-06, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    9. Li Yao & He Ni, 2023. "Prediction of patent grant and interpreting the key determinants: an application of interpretable machine learning approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 4933-4969, September.
    10. An, Xin & Li, Jinghong & Xu, Shuo & Chen, Liang & Sun, Wei, 2021. "An improved patent similarity measurement based on entities and semantic relations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    11. Fernández, Ana María & Ferrándiz, Esther & Medina, Jennifer, 2022. "The diffusion of energy technologies. Evidence from renewable, fossil, and nuclear energy patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    12. Puccetti, Giovanni & Giordano, Vito & Spada, Irene & Chiarello, Filippo & Fantoni, Gualtiero, 2023. "Technology identification from patent texts: A novel named entity recognition method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PB).
    13. Satoshi Yasukawa & Shingo Kano, 2014. "Validating the usefulness of examiners’ forward citations from the viewpoint of applicants’ self-selection during the patent application procedure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 895-909, June.
    14. Cyril Verluise & Gabriele Cristelli & Kyle Higham & Gaetan de Rassenfosse, 2020. "The Missing 15 Percent of Patent Citations," Working Papers 13, Chair of Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy.
    15. Tetsuo Wada, 2024. "Experience effects of patent examiners: an empirical study of the career length and citation patterns on triadic patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(10), pages 6333-6348, October.
    16. Choi, Jaewoong & Yoon, Janghyeok, 2022. "Measuring knowledge exploration distance at the patent level: Application of network embedding and citation analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    17. Yoon, Naeun & Sohn, So Young, 2024. "Assessment framework for automotive suppliers' technological adaptability in the electric vehicle era," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    18. Natalie A. Carlson, 2023. "Differentiation in microenterprises," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(5), pages 1141-1167, May.
    19. Zhang, Gupeng & Xiong, Libin & Duan, Hongbo & Huang, Dujuan, 2020. "Obtaining certainty vs. creating uncertainty: Does firms’ patent filing strategy work as expected?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    20. Fernández, Ana María & Ferrándiz, Esther & Medina, Jennifer, 2022. "The diffusion of energy technologies. Evidence from renewable, fossil, and nuclear energy patents," MPRA Paper 123361, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:129:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-024-04966-9. 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.