Interactive overlay maps for US patent (USPTO) data based on International Patent Classification (IPC)

We report on the development of an interface to the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) that allows for the mapping of patent portfolios as overlays to basemaps constructed from citation relations among all patents contained in this database during the period 1976–2011. Both the interface and the data are in the public domain; the freeware programs VOSViewer and/or Pajek can be used for the visualization. These basemaps and overlays can be generated at both the 3-digit and 4-digit levels of the International Patent Classification (IPC) of the world intellectual property organization (WIPO). The basemaps can provide a stable mental framework for analysts to follow developments over searches for different years, which can be animated. The full flexibility of the advanced search engines of USPTO are available for generating sets of patents and/or patent applications which can thus be visualized and compared. This instrument allows for addressing questions about technological distance, diversity in portfolios, and animating the developments of both technologies and technological capacities of organizations over time.

[1]  F. Malerba,et al.  Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification , 2003 .

[2]  C. R. Rao,et al.  Diversity: its measurement, decomposition, apportionment and analysis , 1982 .

[3]  Rommert Dekker,et al.  A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[4]  Ludo Waltman,et al.  Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping , 2009, Scientometrics.

[5]  A. Jaffe.  Real Effects of Academic Research , 1989 .

[6]  A. Stirling.  A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society , 2007, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[7]  Rainer Frietsch,et al.  Linking Technology Areas to Industrial Sectors Final Report to the European Commission, DG Research , 2003 .

[8]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Local emergence and global diffusion of research technologies: An exploration of patterns of network formation , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[9]  Daniele Rotolo,et al.  Innovation as a nonlinear process, the scientometric perspective, and the specification of an ‘innovation opportunities explorer’ , 2012, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[10]  魏屹东,et al.  Scientometrics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Big Data.

[11]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[12]  P. Thompson,et al.  Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment , 2005 .

[13]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Patent classifications as indicators of intellectual organization , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[14]  Bart Verspagen,et al.  Does it matter where patent citations come from? Inventor versus examiner citations in European patents , 2005 .

[15]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Which cities produce more excellent papers than can be expected? A new mapping approach, using Google Maps, based on statistical significance testing , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[16]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The decline of university patenting and the end of the Bayh–Dole effect , 2009, Scientometrics.

[17]  Ed C. M. Noyons,et al.  A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[18]  K. Pavitt,et al.  The technological competencies of the world''s largest firms , 1997 .

[19]  Ronald Rousseau,et al.  Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[20]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Interactive overlays: A new method for generating global journal maps from Web-of-Science data , 2011, J. Informetrics.

[21]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Publish or Patent: Bibliometric evidence for empirical trade-offs in national funding strategies , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[22]  Nathan Rosenberg,et al.  An Overview of Innovation , 2009 .

[23]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Which cities produce excellent papers worldwide more than can be expected? A new mapping approach--using Google Maps--based on statistical significance testing , 2011, ArXiv.

[24]  Rommert Dekker,et al.  A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS , 2010 .

[25]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Mapping (USPTO) Patent Data using Overlays to Google Maps , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[26]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  R&D, Patents, and Productivity , 1981 .

[27]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy , 2002 .

[28]  Paola Criscuolo,et al.  The 'home advantage' effect and patent families. A comparison of OECD triadic patents, the USPTO and the EPO , 2006, Scientometrics.

[29]  Kevin W. Boyack,et al.  Toward a consensus map of science , 2009 .

[30]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Citation Analysis using the Medline Database at the Web of Knowledge: Searching "Times Cited" with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) , 2012 .

[31]  M E J Newman,et al.  Fast algorithm for detecting community structure in networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[32]  Z. Griliches.  Productivity, R&D, and the Data Constraint , 1998 .

[33]  Kevin W. Boyack,et al.  Mapping the structure and evolution of chemistry research , 2009, Scientometrics.

[34]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience , 2009, Scientometrics.

[35]  M. Gittelman,et al.  Applicant and Examiner Citations in US Patents: An Overview and Analysis , 2008 .

[36]  Derek deS. Price,et al.  The Science/Technology Relationship, the Craft of Experimental Science, and Policy for the Improvement of High Technology Innovation : Research Policy , 1987 .

[37]  Jean-Loup Guillaume,et al.  Fast unfolding of communities in large networks , 2008, 0803.0476.

[38]  A. Jaffe.  Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms&Apos; Patents, Profits and Market Value , 1986 .

[39]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Mapping the geography of science: Distribution patterns and networks of relations among cities and institutes , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[40]  Dirk Helbing,et al.  How to create an innovation accelerator , 2010, ArXiv.

[41]  Harsha Aturupane.  Poverty, human development and growth : an emerging consensus? , 1994 .

[42]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek , 2005 .

[43]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinarity. The case of innovation studies in business and management , 2011, ArXiv.

[44]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  How Do Emerging Technologies Conquer the World? An Exploration of Patterns of Diffusion and Network Formation , 2010, ArXiv.

[45]  Kevin W. Boyack,et al.  Toward a consensus map of science , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[46]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Indicators of the interdisciplinarity of journals: Diversity, centrality, and citations , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[47]  László Papp,et al.  Application of the quadratic entropy indices for diversity studies of drosophilid assemblages , 2004, Environmental and Ecological Statistics.

[48]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Citation Analysis with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) using the Web of Knowledge: A new routine , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[49]  Satoru Kawai,et al.  An Algorithm for Drawing General Undirected Graphs , 1989, Inf. Process. Lett..

[50]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek. - 2nd ed. , 2011 .

[51]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Stud , 2012 .

[52]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Patent overlay mapping: Visualizing technological distance , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[53]  John J. Siegfried.  Minutes of the Annual Meeting Philadelphia, PA January 8, 2005 , 2005 .

[54]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science , 1997 .

[55]  Gaston Heimeriks,et al.  The Network Structure of Technological Developments; Technological Distance as a Walk on the Technology Map , 2012 .

[56]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Innovation systems as patent networks: The Netherlands, India and nanotech , 2011, 1108.0381.

[57]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The structure of the Arts & Humanities Citation Index: A mapping on the basis of aggregated citations among 1,157 journals , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[58]  Adam B. Jaffe,et al.  Characterizing the “technological position” of firms, with application to quantifying technological opportunity and research spillovers☆ , 1989 .

[59]  R. Nelson,et al.  American Universities and Technical Advance in Industry , 1994 .

[60]  J. Kruskal.  Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis , 1964 .

[61]  E. von Hippel,et al.  Sources of Innovation , 2016 .

[62]  Daniele Rotolo,et al.  Bibliometric perspectives on medical innovation using the medical subject Headings of PubMed , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[63]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The university-industry knowledge relationship: Analyzing patents and the science base of technologies , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[64]  Kevin W. Boyack,et al.  Measuring science-technology interaction using rare inventor-author names , 2008, J. Informetrics.