Automatics Tools and Methods for Patents Analysis: Efficient Methodology for Patent Document Clustering

  • Ayoub El Khammal
  • El Mokhtar En-Naimi
  • Mohamed Kanas
  • Jaber El Bouhdidi
  • Anass El Haddadi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems book series (LNNS, volume 37)


Patents have become a potentially powerful data sources and a wealth of information for companies and organizations that tend to analyze and exploit them for a variety of purposes and interests. However, with the ever-increasing volume of patents filed year after year and the multiplicity of patent global data bases, the task of patent research and analysis is becoming increasingly complicated and traditional analytical approaches have shown their limitations and have become costly in terms of time and labor. Thus, various techniques and approaches have been proposed to help specialists in their tasks of patent collection, analysis and results visualization. Document Clustering is one of these common technics widely used in patent analysis. Over time, several powerful clustering techniques and algorithms have emerged, but they often require modifications and adaptations depending on the fields of application and the target data. In view of this, we propose in this paper a methodology for obtaining an efficient clustering for patent documents based on the k-means, k-means ++ algorithm and various data-mining and text-mining techniques. Commons issues often faced during the analysis of patents such as the manipulation and representation of textual data or the curse of dimension will also be addressed in this study.


Patent Patent metadata IPC Unstructured data Clustering K-means K-means ++ High dimensional problem PCA Data extraction Text extraction 


  1. 1.
    Zhang, L.: Identifying key technologies in Saskatchewan, Canada: evidence from patent information. World Pat. Inf. 33(4), 364–370 (2011). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pilkington, A., Lee, L.L., Chan, C.K., Ramakrishna, S.: Defining keyinventors: a comparison of fuel cell and nanotechnology industries. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 76(1), 118–127 (2009). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thorleuchter, D., Poel, D.V., Prinzie, A.: A compared R&D-based and patent-based cross impact analysis for identifying relationships between technologies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 77(7), 1037–1050 (2010). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang, Y.L., Huang, S., Wu, Y.C.J.: Information technology innovation in India: the top 100 IT firms. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 79(4), 700–708 (2012). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abraham, B.P., Moitra, S.D.: Innovation assessment through patent analysis. Technovation 21(4), 245–252 (2001). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Trappey, A.J.C., Trappey, C.V., Wu, C.Y., Lin, C.W.: A patent quality analysis for innovative technology and product development. Adv. Eng. Inform. 26(1), 26–34 (2012). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Porter, A.L., Cunningham, S.W.: Tech Mining: Exploiting New Technologies for Competitive Advantage. Wiley, Hoboken (2005). ISBN 978-0-471-47567-5Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Allison, J., Lemley, M., Moore, K., Trunkey, R.: Valuable Patents. Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics Working Paper Series (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Allison, J., Lemley, M., Walker, J.: Extreme value or trolls on top? The characteristics of the most litigated patents. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 158(1), 1–37 (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kukolj, D., Tekic, Z., Nikolic, L.J., Panjkov, Z., Pokric M., Drazic, M., Vitas, M., Nemet, D.: Comparison of algorithms for patent documents clusterization. In: Proceedings of 35th MIPRO, Opatija, MIPRO 2012, pp. 1176–1178 (2012). ISBN: 978-953-233-068-7Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kim, Y.G., Suh, J.H., Park, S.C.: Visualization of patent analysis for emerging technology. Expert Syst. Appl. Int. J. 34, 1804–1812 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jun, S., Park, S.-S., Jang, D.-S.: Document clustering method using dimension reduction and support vector clustering to overcome sparseness. Expert Syst. Appl. 41, 3204–3212 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Salton, G., McGill, M.J.: Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval. McGraw-Hill Inc., New York (1986)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aizawa, A.: An information-theoretic perspective of tf–idf measures. Inf. Process. Manage. Int. J. 39, 45–65 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Salton, G., Buckley, C.: Weighting approaches in automatic text retrieval. Inf. Process. Manage. 24(5), 513–523 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    WIPO - International Patent Classification:
  17. 17.
    Arthur, D., Vassilvitskii, S.: K-means ++: the advantages of careful seeding. In: Proceedings of the 18th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2007, pp. 1027–1035. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Huang, Z.: Clustering Large datasets with mixed Numeric and Categorical Values. CSIRO Mathematical and Information Sciences, Australia (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LIST Laboratory, Department of Computer Science, The Faculty of Sciences and TechnologiesUAETangierMorocco
  2. 2.The National School of Applied SciencesTétouanMorocco
  3. 3.The National School of Applied SciencesAl-HoceimaMorocco

Personalised recommendations