R&D Cluster Quality Measures and Technology Maturity

“Innovation indicators” strive to track the maturation of an emerging technology to help forecast its prospective development. One rich source of information is the changing content of discourse of R&D, as the technology progresses. We analyze the content of research paper abstracts obtained by searching large databases on a given topic. We then map the evolution of that topic's emphasis areas. The present research seeks to validate a process that creates factors (clusters) based on term usage in technical papers. Three composite quality measures—cohesion, entropy, and F measure—are computed. Using these measures, we create standard factor groupings that optimize the composite term sets and facilitate comparisons of the R&D emphasis areas (i.e., clusters) over time. The conceptual foundation for this approach lies in the presumption that domain knowledge expands and becomes more application specific in nature as a technology matures. We hypothesize implications for this knowledge expansion in terms of the three factor measures, then observe these empirically for the case of a particular technology—autonomous navigation. These metrics can provide indicators of technological maturation.

[1]  A. Pearson.  Managing New Product Innovations. , 1989 .

[2]  Robert J. Watts,et al.  INNOVATION FORECASTING USING BIBLIOMETRICS , 1998 .

[3]  Robert J. Watts,et al.  Functional Analysis: Deriving Systems Knowledge from Bibliographic Information Resources , 1999, Inf. Knowl. Syst. Manag..

[4]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Forecasting and Management of Technology , 1991 .

[5]  van Raan,et al.  Advanced bibliometric methods to assess research performance and scientific development: basic principles and recent practical applications , 1993 .

[6]  Douglas W. Oard,et al.  Textual Data Mining to Support Science and Technology Management , 2000, Journal of Intelligent Information Systems.

[7]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Related problems of knowledge discovery , 1999, Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers.

[8]  Timothy Cribbin,et al.  Visualizing and tracking the growth of competing paradigms: Two case studies , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[9]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Technology opportunities analysis , 1995 .

[10]  Richard A. Harshman,et al.  Indexing by Latent Semantic Analysis , 1990, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[11]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Innovation forecasting , 1997, Innovation in Technology Management. The Key to Global Leadership. PICMET '97.

[12]  M. Lynn.  Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences , 1996 .

[13]  Alan L. Porter.  Technology Opportunities Analysis: Integrating Technology Monitoring, Forecasting, and Assessment with Strategic Planning. , 1994 .

[14]  Jan Komorowski,et al.  Principles of Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery , 2001, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[15]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Research profiling: Improving the literature review , 2002, Scientometrics.

[16]  Chaomei Chen,et al.  Visualizing knowledge domains , 2005, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[17]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  A process for mining science & technology documents databases, illustrated for the case of "knowledge discovery and data mining" , 1999 .

[18]  George Karypis,et al.  A Comparison of Document Clustering Techniques , 2000 .