IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v82y2010i1d10.1007_s11192-009-0033-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using patent analyses to monitor the technological trends in an emerging field of technology: a case of carbon nanotube field emission display

Author

Listed:
  • Pao-Long Chang

    () (Feng Chia University)

  • Chao-Chan Wu

    (National Chiao Tung University
    Chungyu Institute of Technology)

  • Hoang-Jyh Leu

    (Feng Chia University)

Abstract

Carbon nanotube field emission display (CNT-FED) represents both emerging application of nanotechnology and revolutionary invention of display. Therefore, it is an important subject to monitor the states and trends of CNT-FED technology before the next stage of development. The present paper uses patent bibliometric analysis and patent network analysis to monitor the technological trends in the field of CNT-FED. These results firstly reveal the different aspects of patenting activities in the field of CNT-FED. Then, patent network analysis indicates the developing tendency of worldwide FED production based on the synthesis of CNT materials. Furthermore, key technologies of three clusters can be identified as the depositing CNT on substrate, coating phosphor on screen and assembling process for whole device. Finally, emitter material is taken for the key factor in R&D work to improve the efficacy in CNT-FED technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Pao-Long Chang & Chao-Chan Wu & Hoang-Jyh Leu, 2010. "Using patent analyses to monitor the technological trends in an emerging field of technology: a case of carbon nanotube field emission display," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(1), pages 5-19, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:82:y:2010:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-009-0033-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-009-0033-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-009-0033-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    ---><---

    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. Angela Hullmann, 2007. "Measuring and assessing the development of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 739-758, March.
    2. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    3. Meyer, Martin, 2006. "Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1646-1662, December.
    4. Martin Meyer, 2000. "Patent Citations in a Novel Field of Technology — What Can They Tell about Interactions between Emerging Communities of Science and Technology?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 48(2), pages 151-178, September.
    5. Gupta, V. K. & Pangannaya, N. B., 2000. "Carbon nanotubes: bibliometric analysis of patents," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 185-189, September.
    6. Martin S. Meyer, 2001. "Patent citation analysis in a novel field of technology:An exploration of nano-science and nano-technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 163-183, April.
    7. Haupt, Reinhard & Kloyer, Martin & Lange, Marcus, 2007. "Patent indicators for the technology life cycle development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 387-398, April.
    8. Osmo Kuusi & Martin Meyer, 2007. "Anticipating technological breakthroughs: Using bibliographic coupling to explore the nanotubes paradigm," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 759-777, March.
    9. Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Thoma, Grid, 2007. "Institutional complementarity and inventive performance in nano science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 813-831, July.
    10. Corrocher, Nicoletta & Malerba, Franco & Montobbio, Fabio, 2007. "Schumpeterian patterns of innovative activity in the ICT field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 418-432, April.
    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. Porter, Alan L. & Garner, Jon & Carley, Stephen F. & Newman, Nils C., 2019. "Emergence scoring to identify frontier R&D topics and key players," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 628-643.
    2. Comins, Jordan A. & Carmack, Stephanie A. & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2018. "Patent citation spectroscopy (PCS): Online retrieval of landmark patents based on an algorithmic approach," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1223-1231.
    3. Srigowtham Arunagiri & Mary Mathew, 2017. "Exploring Technology Evolution Using Patent Classification: A Case of Cochlear Implant Technology Patents," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(01), pages 1-19, February.
    4. Jia-Yen Huang & Hung-Tu Hsu, 2017. "Technology–function matrix based network analysis of cloud computing," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 17-44, October.
    5. Jiancheng Guan & Yuan Shi, 2012. "Transnational citation, technological diversity and small world in global nanotechnology patenting," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 609-633, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Zhou, Yuan & Dong, Fang & Kong, Dejing & Liu, Yufei, 2019. "Unfolding the convergence process of scientific knowledge for the early identification of emerging technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 205-220.
    8. Su Jin Seo & Eun Jin Han & So Young Sohn, 2015. "Trend analysis of academic research and technical development pertaining to gas hydrates," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 905-920, November.
    9. Xiao Zhou & Yi Zhang & Alan L. Porter & Ying Guo & Donghua Zhu, 2014. "A patent analysis method to trace technology evolutionary pathways," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(3), pages 705-721, September.
    10. Ahmad Barirani & Bruno Agard & Catherine Beaudry, 2013. "Discovering and assessing fields of expertise in nanomedicine: a patent co-citation network perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1111-1136, March.
    11. Yuan Zhou & Fang Dong & Yufei Liu & Zhaofu Li & JunFei Du & Li Zhang, 2020. "Forecasting emerging technologies using data augmentation and deep learning," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 1-29, April.
    12. Porter, Alan L. & Chiavetta, Denise & Newman, Nils C., 2020. "Measuring tech emergence: A contest," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    13. Li, Xin & Xie, Qianqian & Daim, Tugrul & Huang, Lucheng, 2019. "Forecasting technology trends using text mining of the gaps between science and technology: The case of perovskite solar cell technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 432-449.
    14. Janghyeok Yoon & Sungchul Choi & Kwangsoo Kim, 2011. "Invention property-function network analysis of patents: a case of silicon-based thin film solar cells," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 687-703, March.
    15. Byunghoon Kim & Gianluca Gazzola & Jaekyung Yang & Jae-Min Lee & Byoung-Youl Coh & Myong K. Jeong & Young-Seon Jeong, 2017. "Two-phase edge outlier detection method for technology opportunity discovery," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 1-16, October.
    16. Erzurumlu, S. Sinan & Pachamanova, Dessislava, 2020. "Topic modeling and technology forecasting for assessing the commercial viability of healthcare innovations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    17. Parraguez, Pedro & Škec, Stanko & e Carmo, Duarte Oliveira & Maier, Anja, 2020. "Quantifying technological change as a combinatorial process," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    18. Christian Mühlroth & Michael Grottke, 2018. "A systematic literature review of mining weak signals and trends for corporate foresight," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(5), pages 643-687, July.
    19. Huang, Hung-Chun & Su, Hsin-Ning, 2019. "The innovative fulcrums of technological interdisciplinarity: An analysis of technology fields in patents," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 84, pages 59-70.
    20. Ehsan Mohammadi, 2012. "Knowledge mapping of the Iranian nanoscience and technology: a text mining approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 593-608, September.

    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. R. Karpagam & S. Gopalakrishnan & M. Natarajan & B. Ramesh Babu, 2011. "Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 501-522, November.
    2. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    3. Scott D. Bass & Lukasz A. Kurgan, 2010. "Discovery of factors influencing patent value based on machine learning in patents in the field of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 217-241, February.
    4. Can Huang & Ad Notten & Nico Rasters, 2011. "Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 145-172, April.
    5. Altuntas, Serkan & Dereli, Turkay & Kusiak, Andrew, 2015. "Analysis of patent documents with weighted association rules," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 249-262.
    6. Jan M. Gerken & Martin G. Moehrle, 2012. "A new instrument for technology monitoring: novelty in patents measured by semantic patent analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 645-670, June.
    7. Berna Beyhan & M. Teoman Pamukçu & Erkan Erdil, 2011. "Individual and Organizational Aspects of University-Industry Relations in Nanotechnology: The Turkish Case," STPS Working Papers 1106, STPS - Science and Technology Policy Studies Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Jun 2011.
    8. 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.
    9. Poh Kam Wong & Yuen Ping Ho & Casey K. Chan, 2007. "Internationalization and evolution of application areas of an emerging technology: The case of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 715-737, March.
    10. Boyack, Kevin W. & Klavans, Richard, 2008. "Measuring science–technology interaction using rare inventor–author names," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 173-182.
    11. Young-Don Cho & Hoo-Gon Choi, 2013. "Principal parameters affecting R&D exploitation of nanotechnology research: a case for Korea," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(3), pages 881-899, September.
    12. Julie Callaert & Maikel Pellens & Bart Looy, 2014. "Sources of inspiration? Making sense of scientific references in patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1617-1629, March.
    13. Beaudry, Catherine & Schiffauerova, Andrea, 2011. "Impacts of collaboration and network indicators on patent quality: The case of Canadian nanotechnology innovation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 362-376.
    14. Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli & Daniele Rotolo & Vito Albino, 2014. "Determinants of Patent Citations in Biotechnology: An Analysis of Patent Influence Across the Industrial and Organizational Boundaries," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-05, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    15. Ahmad Barirani & Bruno Agard & Catherine Beaudry, 2013. "Discovering and assessing fields of expertise in nanomedicine: a patent co-citation network perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1111-1136, March.
    16. Hajar Sotudeh & Nahid Khoshian, 2014. "Gender differences in science: the case of scientific productivity in Nano Science & Technology during 2005–2007," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 457-472, January.
    17. Joachim Schummer, 2004. "Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 425-465, March.
    18. Yuan Zhou & Fang Dong & Yufei Liu & Liang Ran, 2021. "A deep learning framework to early identify emerging technologies in large-scale outlier patents: an empirical study of CNC machine tool," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 969-994, February.
    19. Stéphane Maraut & Catalina Martínez, 2014. "Identifying author–inventors from Spain: methods and a first insight into results," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 445-476, October.
    20. 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).

    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:82:y:2010:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-009-0033-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.