IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/35499.html

Spreading Out Across Expanding Idea Space

Author

Listed:
  • Ina Ganguli
  • Jeffrey Lin
  • Vitaly Meursault
  • Nicholas F. Reynolds

Abstract

Over nearly two centuries, US inventions have become increasingly dissimilar: not just fewer head-to-head collisions between inventors, but growing distance between neighboring inventions. We document this secular decline in similarity using validated neural language models applied to the full text of claims in over 11 million US patents (1836–2023), corroborated by a 98% decline in patent interference rates, a measure of independent simultaneous invention. Measuring this correctly requires validation, since different representations of the same patent text can yield opposite conclusions about whether inventions are converging or spreading out. Our validation framework, the first systematic comparison for patent text, selects among these representations. We develop a spatial competition model in which inventors choose locations in idea space. The model explains spreading out and connects it to several independently documented patterns — rising R&D investment per inventor, increasing patent values, weakening knowledge spillovers, and declining research productivity. The mechanism is spatial; as inventors spread out to capture new territory, inventions become more valuable but also more costly for others to absorb. In doing so, the model turns spillover intensity, innovation step size, and research productivity from fixed primitives into outcomes of inventor positioning. A calibrated decomposition attributes roughly 40% of the long-run decline in US research productivity to these spatial forces, alongside traditional explanations such as fishing out and the burden of knowledge. Where inventors stand relative to each other in idea space matters as much for growth as how many of them there are.

Suggested Citation

  • Ina Ganguli & Jeffrey Lin & Vitaly Meursault & Nicholas F. Reynolds, 2026. "Spreading Out Across Expanding Idea Space," NBER Working Papers 35499, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:35499
    Note: PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w35499.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text is generally limited to series subscribers, however if the top level domain of the client browser is in a developing country or transition economy free access is provided. More information about subscriptions and free access is available at http://www.nber.org/wwphelp.html. Free access is also available to older working papers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert J. Gordon, 2016. "The Rise and Fall of American Growth: The U.S. Standard of Living since the Civil War," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10544, December.
    2. Bernardo Ribeiro, 2026. "Growth with New and Old Technologies," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2515, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    3. Champsaur, Paul & Rochet, Jean-Charles, 1989. "Multiproduct Duopolists," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 533-557, May.
    4. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    5. Yasusada Murata & Ryo Nakajima & Ryosuke Okamoto & Ryuichi Tamura, 2014. "Localized Knowledge Spillovers and Patent Citations: A Distance-Based Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(5), pages 967-985, December.
    6. Michael Park & Erin Leahey & Russell J. Funk, 2023. "Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time," Nature, Nature, vol. 613(7942), pages 138-144, January.
    7. Ali Goli & Amandeep Singh, 2024. "Frontiers: Can Large Language Models Capture Human Preferences?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 709-722, July.
    8. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Nicholas Bloom & Mark Schankerman & John Van Reenen, 2013. "Identifying Technology Spillovers and Product Market Rivalry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(4), pages 1347-1393, July.
    10. Bernardo Ribeiro, 2026. "Growth With New And Old Technologies," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2515R2, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Jun 2026.
    11. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Lia Sheer, 2021. "Knowledge Spillovers and Corporate Investment in Scientific Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(3), pages 871-898, March.
    12. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    13. David J. Teece, 2008. "Technology Transfer By Multinational Firms: The Resource Cost Of Transferring Technological Know-How," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 1, pages 1-22, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    14. Sam Arts & Nicola Melluso & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2023. "Beyond Citations: Measuring Novel Scientific Ideas and their Impact in Publication Text," Papers 2309.16437, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2024.
    15. Brian Lucking & Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen, 2019. "Have R&D Spillovers Declined in the 21st Century?," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 561-590, December.
    16. Steven C. Salop, 1979. "Monopolistic Competition with Outside Goods," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 141-156, Spring.
    17. Nicholas Bloom & Charles I. Jones & John Van Reenen & Michael Webb, 2020. "Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1104-1144, April.
    18. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    19. Peretto, Pietro F, 1998. "Technological Change and Population Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 283-311, December.
    20. Ola Olsson, 2005. "Technological Opportunity and Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 31-53, January.
    21. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1993. "Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262570971, December.
    22. Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-128, Spring.
    23. Monroe, Burt L. & Colaresi, Michael P. & Quinn, Kevin M., 2008. "Fightin' Words: Lexical Feature Selection and Evaluation for Identifying the Content of Political Conflict," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 372-403.
    24. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2009. "Business And Financial Method Patents, Innovation, And Policy," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 56(4), pages 443-473, September.
    25. Bryan Kelly & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Matt Taddy, 2021. "Measuring Technological Innovation over the Long Run," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 303-320, September.
    26. Clancy, Matthew S., 2018. "Inventing by combining pre-existing technologies: Patent evidence on learning and fishing out," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 252-265.
    27. Lauren Cohen & Umit G. Gurun & Scott Duke Kominers, 2019. "Patent Trolls: Evidence from Targeted Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(12), pages 5461-5486, December.
    28. Irem Guceri & Li Liu, 2019. "Effectiveness of Fiscal Incentives for R&D: Quasi-experimental Evidence," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 11(1), pages 266-291, February.
    29. Ina Ganguli & Jeffrey Lin & Nicholas Reynolds, 2020. "The Paper Trail of Knowledge Spillovers: Evidence from Patent Interferences," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 278-302, April.
    30. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    31. Benjamin F. Jones, 2009. "The Burden of Knowledge and the "Death of the Renaissance Man": Is Innovation Getting Harder?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 283-317.
    32. Jones, Charles I, 1995. "R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 759-784, August.
    33. 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.
    34. Elliott Ash & Stephen Hansen, 2023. "Text Algorithms in Economics," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 15(1), pages 659-688, September.
    35. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    36. Bryan, Kevin A. & Lemus, Jorge, 2017. "The direction of innovation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 247-272.
    37. Samuel S. Kortum, 1997. "Research, Patenting, and Technological Change," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(6), pages 1389-1420, November.
    38. Peter Thompson & Melanie Fox-Kean, 2005. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 465-466, March.
    39. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    40. Shawn Kantor & Alexander Whalley, 2014. "Knowledge Spillovers from Research Universities: Evidence from Endowment Value Shocks," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(1), pages 171-188, March.
    41. Bisbee, James & Clinton, Joshua D. & Dorff, Cassy & Kenkel, Brenton & Larson, Jennifer M., 2024. "Synthetic Replacements for Human Survey Data? The Perils of Large Language Models," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(4), pages 401-416, October.
    42. Peter Howitt, 1999. "Steady Endogenous Growth with Population and R & D Inputs Growing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(4), pages 715-730, August.
    43. Sijie Feng, 2020. "The proximity of ideas: An analysis of patent text using machine learning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, July.
    44. Peter Thompson & Melanie Fox-Kean, 2005. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 450-460, March.
    45. Fabio Lamantia & Mario Pezzino, 2016. "R&D Spillovers on a Salop Circle," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(7), pages 485-494, October.
    46. Bernardo Ribeiro, 2026. "Growth With New And Old Technologies," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2515R1, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    47. Hugo Hopenhayn & Francesco Squintani, 2021. "On the Direction of Innovation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(7), pages 1991-2022.
    48. Peretto, Pietro F., 2018. "Robust endogenous growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 49-77.
    49. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    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. Carvalho, V. M. & Freund, L. B., 2026. "Firms as Foragers," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2659, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.

    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. Capolupo, Rosa, 2009. "The New Growth Theories and Their Empirics after Twenty Years," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy, vol. 3, pages 1-72.
    2. Ufuk Akcigit & William R. Kerr, 2018. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1374-1443.
    3. Wang, Xiaoquan & Wu, Qi & Zhang, Hong, 2025. "The role of social ties in spreading innovation: Evidence from alien merchant guilds in China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    4. Carvalho, Vasco & Freund, Lukas B., 2026. "Firms as Foragers," CEPR Discussion Papers 21753, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    5. Ufuk Akcigit & William Kerr, 2015. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovation, Second Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 15-020, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 25 Mar 2015.
    6. Neves, Pedro Cunha & Sequeira, Tiago Neves, 2018. "Spillovers in the production of knowledge: A meta-regression analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 750-767.
    7. Maya M. Durvasula & Sabri Eyuboglu & David M. Ritzwoller, 2024. "Counting Clinical Trials: New Evidence on Pharmaceutical Sector Productivity," Papers 2405.08030, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2025.
    8. Ufuk Akcigit & William R. Kerr, 2018. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1374-1443.
    9. Crespi, Gustavo & Figal Garone, Lucas & Maffioli, Alessandro & Stein, Ernesto, 2020. "Public support to R&D, productivity, and spillover effects: Firm-level evidence from Chile," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    10. Attar, Mustafa A., 2008. "Science in the Third Dimension of R&D," MPRA Paper 9427, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," TSE Working Papers 14-469, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    12. Callaghan, Christian William, 2021. "Growth contributions of technological change: Is there a burden of knowledge effect?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    13. Hof, Franz X. & Prettner, Klaus, 2019. "The quest for status and R&D-based growth," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 290-307.
    14. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2024. "Inter-sectoral knowledge diffusion and scale effects in schumpeterian growth models," Post-Print hal-04723727, HAL.
    15. Holger Strulik & Klaus Prettner & Alexia Prskawetz, 2013. "The past and future of knowledge-based growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 411-437, December.
    16. Holger Strulik & Klaus Prettner & Alexia Prskawetz, 2010. "R&D-Based Growth in the Post-Modern Era," VID Working Papers 1009, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna.
    17. Nicholas Bloom & Charles I. Jones & John Van Reenen & Michael Webb, 2020. "Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1104-1144, April.
    18. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," IDEI Working Papers 821, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    19. Cozzi, Guido, 2023. "Semi-endogenous or fully endogenous growth? A unified theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    20. Minniti, Antonio & Venturini, Francesco, 2017. "The long-run growth effects of R&D policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 316-326.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C55 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Large Data Sets: Modeling and Analysis
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O41 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - One, Two, and Multisector Growth Models
    • O47 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:35499. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.