Advertisement

International Conference on Social Informatics

SocInfo 2014: Social Informatics pp 359-383 | Cite as

Mapping the (R-)Evolution of Technological Fields – A Semantic Network Approach

  • Roman Jurowetzki
  • Daniel S. Hain
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8851)

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to provide a framework and novel methodology geared towards mapping technological change in complex interdependent systems by using large amounts of unstructured data from various recent on- and offline sources. Combining techniques from the fields of natural language processing and network analysis, we are able to identify technological fields as overlapping communities of knowledge fragments. Over time persistence of these fragments allows to observe how these fields evolve into trajectories, which may change, split, merge and finally disappear. As empirical example we use the broad area of Technological Singularity, an umbrella term for different technologies ranging from neuroscience to machine learning and bioengineering, which are seen as main contributors to the development of artificial intelligence and human enhancement technologies. Using a socially enhanced search routine, we extract 1,398 documents for the years 2011-2013. Our analysis highlights the importance of generic interface that ease the recombination of technology to increase the pace of technological progress. While we can identify consistent technology fields in static document collections, more advanced ontology reconciliation is needed to be able to track a larger number of communities over time.

Keywords

Technological change transition technology forecasting natural language processing network analysis overlapping community detection dynamic community detection 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Dosi, G.: Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy 11(3), 147–162 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kuhn, T.S.: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press (1962)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Timothy, F.: Bresnahan and Manuel Trajtenberg. General purpose technologies engines of growth? Journal of econometrics 65(1), 83–108 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baldwin, C.Y., Clark, K.B.: Design Rules: The power of modularity. MIT Press (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schilling, M.A.: Toward a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Academy of Management Review (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davies, A.: Innovation in large technical systems: The case of telecommunications. Industrial and Corporate Change 5(4), 1143–1180 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hekkert, M.P., Negro, S.O.: Functions of innovation systems as a framework to understand sustainable technological change: Empirical evidence for earlier claims. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 76(4), 584–594 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Verspagen, B.: Mapping technological trajectories as patent citation networks: A study on the history of fuel cell research. Advances in Complex Systems 10(01), 93–115 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wagner, C.S., Leydesdorff, L.: Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy 34(10), 1608–1618 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dawid, H.: Agent-based models of innovation and technological change, vol. 2, ch. 25, pp. 1235–1272. Elsevier (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lopolito, A., Morone, P., Taylor, R.: Emerging innovation niches: An agent based model. Research Policy 42(6), 1225–1238 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaplan, S., Tripsas, M.: Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change. Research Policy 37(5), 790–805 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hain, D.S., Jurowetzki, R.: Incremental by design? on the role of incumbents in technology niches - an evolutionary network analysis. In: Conference Proceeding, 6th Academy of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Conference, Oxford, UK (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Perez, C.: Technological revolutions and techno-economic paradigms. Cambridge Journal of Economics, bep051 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schumpeter, J.A.: A Theory of Economic Development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1911)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kauffman, S.A.: The Origins of Order. Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution. Oxford University Press (1993)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fleming, L., Sorenson, O.: Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data. Research Policy 30(7), 1019–1039 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schumpeter, J.A.: Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Harper, New York (1942)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Simon, H.A.: The Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press (1969)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Frenken, K.: A fitness landscape approach to technological complexity, modularity, and vertical disintegration. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 17(3), 288–305 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ethiraj, S.K., Levinthal, D.: Modularity and innovation in complex systems. Management Science (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Langlois, R.N.: Modularity in technology and organization. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bijker, W.E., Hughes, T.P., Pinch, T., Douglas, D.G.: The Social Construction of Technological Systems. In: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. MIT Press (2012)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bijker, W.E.: Of Bicycles, Bakelites and Bulbs. In: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change. The MIT Press (1997)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hughes, T.P.: The Evolution of Large Technological Systems, pp. 51–82. The MIT Press (1987)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pavitt, K.: R&D, patenting and innovative activities: a statistical exploration. Research Policy 11(1), 33–51 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fontana, R., Nuvolari, A., Verspagen, B.: Mapping technological trajectories as patent citation networks. an application to data communication standards. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 18(4), 311–336 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fleming, L., Sorenson, O.: Science as a map in technological search. Strategic Management Journal 25(89), 909–928 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    von Wartburg, I., Teichert, T., Rost, K.: Inventive progress measured by multi-stage patent citation analysis. Research Policy 34(10), 1591–1607 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Griliches, Z.: Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey. In: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pp. 287–343. University of Chicago Press (1998)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pavitt, K.: Patent statistics as indicators of innovative activities: possibilities and problems. Scientometrics 7(1), 77–99 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mohr, J.W., Bogdanov, P.: Introduction – topic models: What they are and why they matter. Poetics 41(6), 545–569 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ramage, D., Rosen, E., Chuang, J., Manning, C.D., McFarland, D.A.: Topic modeling for the social sciences. In: NIPS 2009 Workshop on Applications for Topic Models: Text and Beyond, vol. 5 (2009)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    McFarland, D.A., Ramage, D., Chuang, J., Heer, J., Manning, C.D., Jurafsky, D.: Differentiating language usage through topic models. Poetics 41(6), 607–625 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    DiMaggio, P., Nag, M., Blei, D.: Exploiting affinities between topic modeling and the sociological perspective on culture: Application to newspaper coverage of us government arts funding. Poetics 41(6), 570–606 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chen, S.-H., Huang, M.-H., Chen, D.-Z., Lin, S.-Z.: Technological Forecasting & Social Change 79(9), 1705–1719 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hall, D., Jurafsky, D., Manning, C.D.: Studying the history of ideas using topic models. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 363–371. Association for Computational Linguistics (2008)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ramage, D., Manning, C.D., McFarland, D.A.: Which universities lead and lag? toward university rankings based on scholarly output. In: Proc. of NIPS Workshop on Computational Social Science and the Wisdom of the Crowds (2010)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Nallapati, R., Shi, X., McFarland, D.A., Leskovec, J., Jurafsky, D.: Leadlag LDA: Estimating topic specific leads and lags of information outlets. In: ICWSM (2011)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hughes, T.P.: The evolution of large technological systems. The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology, pp. 51–82 (1987)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Newman, M., Barabási, A.-L., Watts, D.J.: The Structure and Dynamics of Networks: Princeton University Press (2006)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Deerwester, S.: Improving information retrieval with latent semantic indexing. In: Proceedings of the 51st ASIS Annual Meeting (ASIS 1988), vol. 25 (1988)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Deerwester, S.C., Dumais, S.T., Landauer, T.K., Furnas, G.W., Harshman, R.A.: Indexing by latent semantic analysis. JASIS 41(6), 391–407 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Newman, M.: Scientific collaboration networks. ii. shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. Physical Review 64(1), 16132 (2001)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Opsahl, T.: Triadic closure in two-mode networks: Redefining the global and local clustering coefficients. Social Networks 35(2), 159–167 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Radicchi, F., Castellano, C., Cecconi, F., Loreto, V., Parisi, D.: Defining and identifying communities in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101(9), 2658–2663 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kivelä, M., Arenas, A., Barthelemy, M., Gleeson, J.P., Moreno, Y., Porter, M.A.: Multilayer networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1309.7233 (2013)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ahn, Y.-Y., Bagrow, J.P., Lehmann, S.: Link communities reveal multiscale complexity in networks. Nature 466(7307), 761–764 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Mucha, P.J., Richardson, T., Macon, K., Porter, M.A., Onnela, J.-P.: Community structure in time-dependent, multiscale, and multiplex networks. Science 328(5980), 876–878 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Greene, D., Doyle, D., Cunningham, P.: Tracking the evolution of communities in dynamic social networks. In: Proc. International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining, ASONAM 2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kurzweil, R.: The Singularity Is Near. When Humans Transcend Biology. Penguin (2005)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Rizzo, G., Troncy, R.: NERD: evaluating named entity recognition tools in the web of data. In: Workshop on Web Scale Knowledge Extraction, WEKEX 2011 (2011)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Vincent, D.: Blondel, Jean-Loup Guillaume, Renaud Lambiotte, and Etienne Lefebvre. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2008(10), P10008 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Řehůřek, R., Sojka, P.: Software framework for topic modelling with large corpora. In: Proceedings of the LREC 2010 Workshop on New Challenges for NLP Frameworks (2010)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Bradford, R.B.: An empirical study of required dimensionality for large-scale latent semantic indexing applications. In: Proceeding of the 17th ACM Conference, p. 153. ACM Press, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kalinka, A.T., Tomancak, P.: linkcomm: an r package for the generation, visualization, and analysis of link communities in networks of arbitrary size and type. Bioinformatics 27(14) (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roman Jurowetzki
    • 1
  • Daniel S. Hain
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Business and Management, IKEAalborg UniversityAalborgDenmark

Personalised recommendations