Top

Electronic Commerce Research

Published in:

22-03-2021

A knowledge graph approach for recommending patents to companies

Authors: Weiwei Deng, Jian Ma

Published in: Electronic Commerce Research | Issue 4/2022

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Online platforms have emerged to facilitate patent transfer between academia and industry, but a recommendation method that matches patents with company needs is missing in the literature. Previous patent recommendation methods were designed mainly for query-driven patent search contexts, where user needs are given. However, company needs are implicit in the patent transfer context. The problem of profiling the needs and recommending patents accordingly remains unsolved. This research proposes a knowledge graph approach to address the problem. The proposed approach defines and constructs a patent knowledge graph to capture the semantic information between keywords in the patent domain. Then, it profiles patents and companies as weighted graphs based on the patent knowledge graph. Finally, it generates recommendations by comparing the weighted graphs based on the graph edit distance measure. During the recommendation process, three recommendation strategies (i.e., supplementary, complementary, and hybrid recommendation strategies) are proposed to profile different company needs and make recommendations accordingly. The proposed approach has been implemented and tested on a knowledge transfer platform in Jiangxi province, R.P. China. A pretest experiment shows that the proposed approach outperforms several baseline methods in terms of precision, recall, F-score, and mean average precision. User feedback from an online experiment further demonstrates the usability and the effectiveness of the proposed approach for recommending patents to companies.

previous article How Citizen Demand Affects the Process of M-Government Adoption: An Empirical Study in China

next article Exploitative or explorative innovation? An event study of cloud computing business value

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

http://cgjy.jxstc.gov.cn/onlineweb/innovation/patentinfozs?menuId=40000

Lee, J.-S., Park, J.-H., & Bae, Z.-T. (2017). The effects of licensing-in on innovative performance in different technological regimes. Research Policy., 46, 485–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.12.002CrossRef

Parker, D. D., & Zilberman, D. (1993). University technology transfers: Impacts on local and US economies, Contemporary Policy Issues. Huntington Beach, 11, 87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7287.1993.tb00382.xCrossRef

McDevitt, V. L., Mendez-Hinds, J., Winwood, D., Nijhawan, V., Sherer, T., Ritter, J. F., & Sanberg, P. R. (2014). More than money: The exponential impact of academic technology transfer. Technology & Innovation., 16, 75–84. https://doi.org/10.3727/194982414X13971392823479CrossRef

Roessner, D., Bond, J., Okubo, S., & Planting, M. (2013). The economic impact of licensed commercialized inventions originating in university research. Research Policy, 42, 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.04.015CrossRef

Gambardella, A., Giuri, P., & Luzzi, A. (2007). The market for patents in Europe. Research Policy., 36, 1163–1183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.07.006CrossRef

Caviggioli, F., & Ughetto, E. (2013). The drivers of patent transactions: Corporate views on the market for patents. R&D Management, 43, 318–332. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12016CrossRef

Kani, M., & Motohashi, K. (2012). Understanding the technology market for patents: New insights from a licensing survey of Japanese firms. Research Policy, 41, 226–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.08.002CrossRef

Muscio, A. (2010). What drives the university use of technology transfer offices? Evidence from Italy. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35, 181–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-009-9121-7CrossRef

Trappey, A. J. C., Trappey, C. V., Wu, C.-Y., Fan, C. Y., & Lin, Y.-L. (2013). Intelligent patent recommendation system for innovative design collaboration. Journal of Network and Computer Applications., 36, 1441–1450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2013.02.035CrossRef

10.

Lu, J., Wu, D., Mao, M., Wang, W., & Zhang, G. (2015). Recommender system application developments: A survey. Decision Support Systems., 74, 12–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2015.03.008CrossRef

11.

Ji, X., Gu, X., Dai, F., Chen, J., & Le, C. (2011). Patent collaborative filtering recommendation approach based on patent similarity. In 2011 eighth international conference on fuzzy systems and knowledge discovery (FSKD), pp. 1699–1703. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/FSKD.2011.6019821.

12.

Krestel, R., & Smyth, P. (2013). Recommending patents based on latent topics. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on recommender systems, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 395–398. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/2507157.2507232.

13.

Mahdabi, P., & Crestani, F. (2014). Query-driven mining of citation networks for patent citation retrieval and recommendation. In Proceedings of the 23rd ACM international conference on conference on information and knowledge management, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 1659–1668. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/2661829.2661899.

14.

Oh, S., Lei, Z., Lee, W., & Yen, J. (2014). Recommending missing citations for newly granted patents. In 2014 international conference on data science and advanced analytics (DSAA), pp. 442–448. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/DSAA.2014.7058110.

15.

Oh, S., Lei, Z., Lee, W.-C., Mitra, P., & Yen, J. (2013). CV-PCR: a context-guided value-driven framework for patent citation recommendation. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on conference on information and knowledge management, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 2291–2296. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/2505515.2505659.

16.

Friesl, M. (2012). Knowledge acquisition strategies and company performance in young high technology companies. British Journal of Management., 23, 325–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2011.00742.xCrossRef

17.

Knudsen, M. P. (2007). The relative importance of interfirm relationships and knowledge transfer for new product development success*. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24, 117–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00238.xCrossRef

18.

Yang, M. C., Su, F., Chang, Y.-H., Lai, K. K., Lin, C. Y., & Chang, H. Y. (2016). “Expand/offense” and “deepen/defense” strategy of patent acquisition for leader and follower: Evidence from drug-eluting stent. In 2016 Portland international conference on management of engineering and technology (PICMET), pp. 1560–1566. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/PICMET.2016.7806630.

19.

Chang, P., Chang, Y., Su, F., Chen, S., & Lai, K. K. (2014). The study on patent acquisition from complementarity and supplementarity: Evidence from Smartphones of Apple and Samsung. In Proceedings of PICMET ’14 conference: Portland international center for management of engineering and technology; Infrastructure and Service Integration, pp. 2996–3003.

20.

Buckley, P. J., Glaister, K. W., Klijn, E., & Tan, H. (2009). Knowledge accession and knowledge acquisition in strategic alliances: The impact of supplementary and complementary dimensions. British Journal of Management, 20, 598–609. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2008.00607.xCrossRef

21.

Makri, M., Hitt, M. A., & Lane, P. J. (2010). Complementary technologies, knowledge relatedness, and invention outcomes in high technology mergers and acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 31, 602–628.

22.

Wang, Q., Yu, J., & Deng, W. (2019). An adjustable re-ranking approach for improving the individual and aggregate diversities of product recommendations. Electronic Commerce Research, 19, 59–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-018-09325-4CrossRef

23.

Jing, N., Jiang, T., Du, J., & Sugumaran, V. (2018). Personalized recommendation based on customer preference mining and sentiment assessment from a Chinese e-commerce website. Electronic Commerce Research, 18, 159–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-017-9275-6CrossRef

24.

Wang, Q., Ma, J., Liao, X., & Du, W. (2017). A context-aware researcher recommendation system for university-industry collaboration on R&D projects. Decision Support Systems, 103, 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2017.09.001CrossRef

25.

Xu, Y., Zhou, D., & Ma, J. (2019). Scholar-friend recommendation in online academic communities: An approach based on heterogeneous network. Decision Support Systems, 119, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2019.01.004CrossRef

26.

Jeong, H. J., & Kim, M. H. (2019). HGGC: A hybrid group recommendation model considering group cohesion. Expert Systems with Applications, 136, 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.05.054CrossRef

27.

Feng, S., Zhang, H., Wang, L., Liu, L., & Xu, Y. (2019). Detecting the latent associations hidden in multi-source information for better group recommendation. Knowledge-Based Systems, 171, 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2019.02.002CrossRef

28.

Trappey, A. J. C., Trappey, C. V., Wu, C., Fan, C. Y., & Lin, Y. (2012). Intelligent recommendation methodology and system for patent search. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 16th international conference on computer supported cooperative work in design (CSCWD), pp. 172–178. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/CSCWD.2012.6221815.

29.

Wang, Q., Du, W., Ma, J., & Liao, X. (2019). Recommendation mechanism for patent trading empowered by heterogeneous information networks. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 23, 147–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.2018.1564549CrossRef

30.

He, Q., Spangler, W. S., He, B., Chen, Y., & Kato, L. (2012). Prospective client driven technology recommendation. In 2012 annual SRII global conference, pp. 110–119. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/SRII.2012.23.

31.

Fu, T., Lei, Z., & Lee, W. (2015). Patent citation recommendation for examiners. In 2015 IEEE international conference on data mining, pp. 751–756. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDM.2015.151.

32.

Deng, N., Chen, X., & Li, D. (2017). Intelligent recommendation of chinese traditional medicine patents supporting new medicine’s R&D. Journal of Computational and Theoretical Nanoscience, 13(9), 5907–5913. https://doi.org/10.1166/jctn.2016.5505CrossRef

33.

Chen, Y.-L., & Chiu, Y.-T. (2011). An IPC-based vector space model for patent retrieval. Information Processing & Management, 47, 309–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2010.06.001CrossRef

34.

Helmers, L., Horn, F., Biegler, F., Oppermann, T., & Müller, K.-R. (2019). Automating the search for a patent’s prior art with a full text similarity search. PLoS ONE, 14, e0212103. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212103CrossRef

35.

Liu, S.-H., Liao, H.-L., Pi, S.-M., & Hu, J.-W. (2011). Development of a patent retrieval and analysis platform—A hybrid approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 7864–7868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.12.114CrossRef

36.

Kim, D., Seo, D., Cho, S., & Kang, P. (2019). Multi-co-training for document classification using various document representations: TF–IDF, LDA, and Doc2Vec. Information Sciences, 477, 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2018.10.006CrossRef

37.

Schuhmacher, M., & Ponzetto, S. P. (2014). Knowledge-based graph document modeling. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM international conference on web search and data mining, association for computing machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp. 543–552. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/2556195.2556250.

38.

Manrique, R., & Mariño, O. (2018). Knowledge graph-based weighting strategies for a scholarly paper recommendation scenario. In KaRS@RecSys.

39.

Watford, S. M., Grashow, R. G., De La Rosa, V. Y., Rudel, R. A., Friedman, K. P., & Martin, M. T. (2018). Novel application of normalized pointwise mutual information (NPMI) to mine biomedical literature for gene sets associated with disease: Use case in breast carcinogenesis. Computational Toxicology, 7, 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comtox.2018.06.003CrossRef

40.

Manrique, R., Cueto-Ramirez, F., & Mariño, O. (2018). Comparing graph similarity measures for semantic representations of documents. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98998-3_13.

41.

Lin, C.-J. (2007). Projected gradient methods for nonnegative matrix factorization. Neural Computation, 19, 2756–2779. https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.2007.19.10.2756CrossRef

42.

Wang, D., Liang, Y., Xu, D., Feng, X., & Guan, R. (2018). A content-based recommender system for computer science publications. Knowledge-Based Systems, 157, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2018.05.001CrossRef

43.

Zheng, N., Song, S., & Bao, H. (2015). A temporal-topic model for friend recommendations in Chinese microblogging systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 45, 1245–1253. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2015.2391262CrossRef

44.

Kong, X., Mao, M., Wang, W., Liu, J., & Xu, B. (2019). VOPRec: Vector representation learning of papers with text information and structural identity for recommendation. IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing. https://doi.org/10.1109/TETC.2018.2830698CrossRef

45.

Shani, G., & Gunawardana, A. (2011). Evaluating recommendation systems. In F. Ricci, L. Rokach, B. Shapira, & P. B. Kantor (Eds.), Recommender systems handbook (pp. 257–297). Boston, MA: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85820-3_8CrossRef

46.

Satta, G., Parola, F., Penco, L., & de Falco, S. E. (2016). Insights to technological alliances and financial resources as antecedents of high-tech firms’ innovative performance. R&D Management, 46, 127–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12117CrossRef

47.

Caviggioli, F., De Marco, A., Scellato, G., & Ughetto, E. (2017). Corporate strategies for technology acquisition: Evidence from patent transactions. Management Decision, 55, 1163–1181. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-04-2016-0220CrossRef

48.

Liu, D., Lian, J., Wang, S., Qiao, Y., Chen, J.-H., Sun, G., & Xie, X. (2020) KRED: Knowledge-aware document representation for news recommendations. In Fourteenth ACM conference on recommender systems, association for computing machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp. 200–209. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/3383313.3412237.

49.

Gao, W., Peng, M., Wang, H., Zhang, Y., Xie, Q., & Tian, G. (2019). Incorporating word embeddings into topic modeling of short text. Knowledge and Information Systems, 61, 1123–1145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-018-1314-7CrossRef

50.

Dong, C., Jia, H., & Wang, C. (2018). Unsupervised leraning for sematic representation of short text. In 2018 5th IEEE international conference on cloud computing and intelligence systems (CCIS), pp. 475–478. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/CCIS.2018.8691363.

51.

Jipeng, Q., Zhenyu, Q., Yun, L., Yunhao, Y., & Xindong, W. (2019) Short text topic modeling techniques, applications, and performance: A survey, ArXiv:1904.07695 [Cs]. http://arxiv.org/abs/1904.07695. Accessed October 9, 2019.

52.

Huang, L., Wang, C., Chao, H., Lai, J., & Yu, P. S. (2019). A score prediction approach for optional course recommendation via cross-user-domain collaborative filtering. IEEE Access, 7, 19550–19563. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2897979CrossRef

53.

Maksai, A., Garcin, F., & Faltings, B. (2015). Predicting online performance of news recommender systems through richer evaluation metrics. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on recommender systems, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 179–186. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/2792838.2800184.

54.

Sauro, J., & Lewis, J. R. (2016). Chapter 9—Six enduring controversies in measurement and statistics. In J. Sauro & J. R. Lewis (Eds.), Quantifying the user experience (2nd edn) (pp. 249–276). Boston: Morgan Kaufmann. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802308-2.00009-6CrossRef

55.

Nonparametric statistics: An introduction. In Nonparametric statistics for non-statisticians. Wiley, 2009: pp. 1–11. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118165881.ch1.

56.

Porteous, I., Newman, D., Ihler, A., Asuncion, A., Smyth, P., & Welling, M. (2008). Fast collapsed Gibbs sampling for latent Dirichlet allocation. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 569–577. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/1401890.1401960.

57.

Yuan, H., Lau, R. Y. K., & Xu, W. (2016). The determinants of crowdfunding success: A semantic text analytics approach. Decision Support Systems, 91, 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2016.08.001CrossRef

Title: A knowledge graph approach for recommending patents to companies
Authors: Weiwei Deng
Jian Ma
Publication date: 22-03-2021
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Electronic Commerce Research / Issue 4/2022
Print ISSN: 1389-5753
Electronic ISSN: 1572-9362
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-021-09471-2

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 4/2022

Linear feedback shift register and integer theory: a state-of-art approach in security issues over e-commerce

Analyzing ICT-enabled agricultural advisory services in Pakistan: evidence from a marginalized region of Punjab province

The influence of community engagement on seller opportunistic behaviors in e-commerce platform

Monopoly or competition: strategic analysis of a retailing technology service provision

A service recommendation approach based on trusted user profiles and an enhanced similarity measure

Experiences in consumer flow in online supermarkets