Visual Analysis of Patent Data Through Global Maps and Overlays
Chapter
First Online:
Abstract
Visual analytics has been increasingly used to help to better grasp the complexity and evolution of scientific and technological activities over time, across science and technological areas and in organisations. This chapter presents general insights into some important fields of expertise such as mapping, network analysis and visual analytics applied to patent information retrieval and analysis. We also present a new global patent map and overlay technique and illustrative examples of its application. The concluding remarks offer considerations for future patent analysis and visualisation.
Keywords
Visual analysis Global maps Overlay mapsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Kay L, Newman N, Youtie J, Porter AL, Rafols I (2014) Patent overlay mapping: visualizing technological distance. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 65(12):2432–2443. doi: 10.1002/asi.23146 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Rafols I, Porter AL, Leydesdorff L (2010) Science overlay maps: a newtool for research policy and library management. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 61(9):1871–1887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Porter AL, Newman NC (2005) Patent profiling for competitive advantage: deducing who is doing what, where, and when. In: Moed JF, Glanzel W, Schmoch U (eds) Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- 4.Trippe A (2003) Patinformatics: tasks to tools. World Patent Inf 25:211–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Dunphy SM, Herbig PR, Howes ME (1996) The innovation funnel. Technol Forecast Social Change 53:279–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Souder WE (1987) Managing new product innovations. Lexington Books, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
- 7.Watts RJ, Porter AL (1997) Innovation forecasting. Technol Forecast Social Change 56:25–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Balconi M, Breschi S, Lissoni F (2004) Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data. Res Policy 33(1):127–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Schoen A, Villard L, Laurens P, Cointet J-P, Heimeriks G, Alkemade F (2012) The network structure of technological developments; Technological distance as a walk on the technology map. Presented at the STI Indicators Conference 2012, Montréal. http://sticonference.org/Proceedings/vol2/Schoen_Network_733.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2013
- 10.Ernst H (2003) Patent information for strategic technology management. World Patent Inf 25(3):233–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Leydesdorff L, Kushnir D, Rafols I (2012) Interactive overlay maps for US patent (USPTO) data based on International Patent Classification (IPC). Scientometrics 1–17. doi: 10.1007/s11192-012-0923-2.
- 12.Leydesdorff L, Alkemade F, Heimeriks G, Hoekstra R (2015) Patents as instruments for exploring innovation dynamics: geographic and technological perspectives on “photovoltaic cells”. Scientometrics 102:629–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Chen C (2003) Mapping scientific frontiers: the quest for knowledge visualization. Springer, LondonCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 14.Boyack KW (2003) An indicator-based characterization of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. Paper presented at the NAS Sackler Colloquium on Mapping Knowledge DomainsGoogle Scholar
- 15.Archibugi D, Pianta M (1996) Measuring technological change through patents and innovation surveys. Technovation 16(9):451–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Huang Y, Ma J, Porter AL, Kwon S, Zhu D (2015) Analyzing collaboration networks and developmental patterns of nano-enabled drug delivery (NEDD) for brain cancer. J Nanotechnol 6:1666–1676Google Scholar
- 17.Hinze S, Reiss T, Schmoch U (1997) Statistical analysis on the distance between fields of technology. Paper presented at the Innovation Systems and European Integration (ISE), Targeted Socio-Economic Research Program, 4th Framework Program of the European Commission (DGXII), Karlsruhe, GermanyGoogle Scholar
- 18.Small H (1973) Co-citation in the scientific literature: a new measure of the relationship between two documents. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 24(4):265–269MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Klavans R, Boyack KW (2009) Toward a consensus map of science. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 60(3):455–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Bollen J, Van de Sompel H, Hagberg A, Bettencourt L, Chute R, Rodriguez MA et al (2009) Clickstream data yields high-resolution maps of science. PLoS One 4(3), e4803. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004803 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Boyack KW, Börner K, Klavans R (2009) Mapping the structure and evolution of chemistry research. Scientometrics 79(1):45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Boyack KW, Klavans R, Börner K (2005) Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics 64:351–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Janssens F, Zhang L, Moor BD, Glänzel W (2009) Hybrid clustering for validation and improvement of subject-classification schemes. Inf Process Manag 45(6):683–702. doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2009.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Leydesdorff L, Rafols I (2009) A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 60(2):348–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Moya-Anegón F, Vargas-Quesada B, Chinchilla-Rodríguez Z, Corera-Álvarez E, Herrero-Solana V (2007) Visualizing the marrow of science. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 58(14):2167–2179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Moya-Anegon F, Vargas-Quesada B, Herrero-Solana V, Chinchilla-Rodriguez Z, Corera-Alvarez E, Munoz-Fernandez FJ (2004) A new technique for building maps of large scientific domains based on the cocitation of classes and categories. Scientometrics 61(1):129–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Rosvall M, Bergstrom CT (2010) Mapping change in large networks. PLoS One 5(1), e8694. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008694 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Van den Besselaar P, Leydesdorff L (1996) Mapping change in scientific specialties: a scientometric reconstruction of the development of artificial intelligence. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 46(6):415–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Breschi S, Lissoni F, Malerba F (2003) Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification. Res Policy 32:69–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Jaffe A (1986) Technological opportunities and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firms’ patents, profits, and market value. Am Econ Rev 76(5):984–1001Google Scholar
- 31.Kauffman S, Lobo J, Macready WG (2000) Optimal search on a technology landscape. J Econ Behav Organ 43:141–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Rafols I, Leydesdorff L (2009) Content-based and algorithmic classifications of journals: perspectives on the dynamics of scientific communication and indexer effects. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 60(9):1823–1835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Boyack KW, Klavans R (2008) Measuring science–technology interaction using rare inventor–author names. J Informet 2:173–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Olsson O (2004) Technological opportunity and growth. J Econ Growth 10(1):35–57zbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 35.Arthur WB (2010) The nature of technology. Penguin, LondonGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017