Journal of the Korea Safety Management & Science (대한안전경영과학회지)

Korea Safety Management & Science (대한안전경영과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A patent analysis method for identifying core technologies: Data mining and multi-criteria decision making approach

핵심 기술 파악을 위한 특허 분석 방법: 데이터 마이닝 및 다기준 의사결정 접근법

  • Kim, Chul-Hyun (Dept. of Technology & Systems Management, Induk University)
  • 김철현 (인덕대학교 테크노경영학과)
  • Received : 2014.01.20
  • Accepted : 2014.03.19
  • Published : 2014.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study suggests new approach to identify core technologies through patent analysis. Specially, the approach applied data mining technique and multi-criteria decision making method to the co-classification information of registered patents. First, technological interrelationship matrices of intensity, relatedness, and cross-impact perspectives are constructed with support, lift and confidence values calculated by conducting an association rule mining on the co-classification information of patent data. Second, the analytic network process is applied to the constructed technological interrelationship matrices in order to produce the importance values of technologies from each perspective. Finally, data envelopment analysis is employed to the derived importance values in order to identify priorities of technologies, putting three perspectives together. It is expected that suggested approach could help technology planners to formulate strategy and policy for technological innovation.

Keywords

References

  1. Acosta, M., Coronado, D., and Fernandez, A. (2009), "Exploring the quality of environmental technology in Europe: Evidence from patentcitations", Scientometrics, 80(1), 131-152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2057-0
  2. Banker, R.D., Charnes, A., and Cooper, W.W. (1984), "Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis", Management Science, 30(9), 1078-1092. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078
  3. Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., and Maleraba, F. (2003), "Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification", Research Policy, 32(1), 69-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00004-5
  4. Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., and Rhodes, E. (1978), "Measuring efficiency of decision making units", European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429-444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8
  5. Choi, C., Kim, S., and Park, Y. (2007), "A patent-based cross impact analysis for quantitative estimation of technology impact: The case of information and communication technology", Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 74(8), 1296-1314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2006.10.008
  6. EIRMA (2000), "Technology monitoring for business success", European Industrial Research Management Association, Working Group 55 Report.
  7. Englesman, E.E. and van Rann, A.F.J. (1992), "A paten-based cartography of technology", Research Policy, 23(1), 1-26.
  8. Geum, Y., Lee, S., Yoon, B., and Park, Y. (2013), "Identifying and evaluating strategic partners for collaborative R&D: Index-based approach using patents and publications", Technovation, 33(6-7), 211-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2013.03.012
  9. Han, J. and Kamber, M. (2001), "Datamining: Concepts and techniques", Academic Press, SanDiego.
  10. Jaffe, A.B. (1989), "Characterising the technological position of firms, with application to quantifying technological opportunity and research spillovers", Research Policy, 18(2), 87-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(89)90007-3
  11. Lee, H., Seol, H., Sung N., Hong, Y.S., and Park, Y. (2010), "An analytic network process approach to measuring design change impacts in modular products", Journal of Engineering Design, 21(1), 75-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820802232517
  12. Lee, L.T.S. (2010), "On efficiency of integrative strategies among companies in US high-tech industry", International Journal of Management and Enterprise, 9(3), 311-323. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMED.2010.037069
  13. Saaty, T. (1996), "Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process", RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
  14. Seol, H., Lee, S., and Kim, C. (2011), "Identifying new business areas using patent information: A DEA and text mining approach", Expert Systems with Applications, 38(4), 2933-2941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.06.083
  15. Shen, Y.C., Lin, G.T.R., and Tzeng, G.H. (2011), "Combined DEMATEL techniques with novel MCDM for the organic light emitting diode technology selection", Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 1468-1481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.056
  16. Shih, M.J., Liu, D.R., and Hsu, M.L. (2010), "Discovering competitive intelligence by mining changes in patent trends", Expert Systems with Applications, 37(4), 2882-2890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.09.001
  17. Trajtenberg, M. (1990), "A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of inventions", The RAND Journal of Economics, 21(1), 172-187. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555502
  18. Wang, M.Y. (2012), "Exploring potential R&D collaborators with complementary technologies: The case of biosensors", Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 79(5), 862-874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2011.11.002

Cited by

  1. Developing a Methodology of Structuring and Layering Technological Information in Patent Documents through Natural Language Processing vol.9, pp.11, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/su9112117
  2. 공통특허분류 분석을 활용한 안전기술융합분야 탐색 : Association Rule Mining(ARM) 접근법 vol.32, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.14346/jkosos.2017.32.5.88
  3. CPC 기반 특허 기술 분류 분석 모델 vol.18, pp.10, 2014, https://doi.org/10.5392/jkca.2018.18.10.443
  4. Technology opportunity discovery by structuring user needs based on natural language processing and machine learning vol.14, pp.10, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223404