Worldwide nanotechnology development: a comparative study of USPTO,EPO, and JPO patents (1976–2004)

To assess worldwide development of nanotechnology, this paper compares the numbers and contents of nanotechnology patents in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), European Patent Office (EPO), and Japan Patent Office (JPO). It uses the patent databases as indicators of nanotechnology trends via bibliographic analysis, content map analysis, and citation network analysis on nanotechnology patents per country, institution, and technology field. The numbers of nanotechnology patents published in USPTO and EPO have continued to increase quasi-exponentially since 1980, while those published in JPO stabilized after 1993. Institutions and individuals located in the same region as a repository’s patent office have a higher contribution to the nanotechnology patent publication in that repository (“home advantage” effect). The USPTO and EPO databases had similar high-productivity contributing countries and technology fields with large number of patents, but quite different high-impact countries and technology fields after the average number of received cites. Bibliographic analysis on USPTO and EPO patents shows that researchers in the United States and Japan published larger numbers of patents than other countries, and that their patents were more frequently cited by other patents. Nanotechnology patents covered physics research topics in all three repositories. In addition, USPTO showed the broadest representation in coverage in biomedical and electronics areas. The analysis of citations by technology field indicates that USPTO had a clear pattern of knowledge diffusion from highly cited fields to less cited fields, while EPO showed knowledge exchange mainly occurred among highly cited fields.     

Monitoring nanotechnology using patent classifications: an overview and comparison of nanotechnology classification schemes

Patents are an essential information source used to monitor, track, and analyze nanotechnology. When it comes to search nanotechnology-related patents, a keyword search is often incomplete and struggles to cover such an interdisciplinary discipline. Patent classification schemes can reveal far better results since they are assigned by experts who classify the patent documents according to their technology. In this paper, we present the most important classifications to search nanotechnology patents and analyze how nanotechnology is covered in the main patent classification systems used in search systems nowadays: the International Patent Classification (IPC), the United States Patent Classification (USPC), and the Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC). We conclude that nanotechnology has a significantly better patent coverage in the CPC since considerable more nanotechnology documents were retrieved than by using other classifications, and thus, recommend its use for all professionals involved in nanotechnology patent searches.     

Longitudinal study on patent citations to academic research articles in nanotechnology (1976–2004)

Academic nanoscale science and engineering (NSE) research provides a foundation for nanotechnology innovation reflected in patents. About 60% or about 50,000 of the NSE-related patents identified by “full-text” keyword searching between 1976 and 2004 at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) have an average of approximately 18 academic citations. The most cited academic journals, individual researchers, and research articles have been evaluated as sources of technology innovation in the NSE area over the 28-year period. Each of the most influential articles was cited about 90 times on the average, while the most influential author was cited more than 700 times by the NSE-related patents. Thirteen mainstream journals accounted for about 20% of all citations. Science, Nature and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) have consistently been the top three most cited journals, with each article being cited three times on average. There is another kind of influential journals, represented by Biosystems and Origin of Life, which have very few articles cited but with exceptionally high frequencies. The number of academic citations per year from ten most cited journals has increased by over 17 times in the interval (1990–1999) as compared to (1976–1989), and again over 3 times in the interval (2000–2004) as compared to (1990–1999). This is an indication of increased used of academic knowledge creation in the NSE-related patents.     

Longitudinal Nanotechnology Development (1991--2002): National Science Foundation Funding and its Impact on Patents

Nanotechnology holds the promise to revolutionize a wide range of products, processes and applications. It is recognized by over sixty countries as critical for their development at the beginning of the 21st century. A significant public investment of over $1 billion annually is devoted to nanotechnology research in the United States. This paper provides an analysis of the National Science Foundation (NSF) funding of nanoscale science and engineering (NSE) and its relationship to the innovation as reflected in the United States Patent and Trade Office (USPTO) patent data. Using a combination of bibliometric analysis and visualization tools, we have identified several general trends, the key players, and the evolution of technology topics in the NSF funding and commercial patenting activities. This study documents the rapid growth of innovation in the field of nanotechnology and its correlation to funding. Statistical analysis shows that the NSF-funded researchers and their patents have higher impact factors than other private and publicly funded reference groups. This suggests the importance of fundamental research on nanotechnology development. The number of cites per NSF-funded inventor is about 10 as compared to 2 for all inventors of NSE-related patents recorded at USPTO, and the corresponding Authority Score is 20 as compared to 1.8.     

Patent citation network in nanotechnology (1976–2004)

The patent citation networks are described using critical node, core network, and network topological analysis. The main objective is understanding of the knowledge transfer processes between technical fields, institutions and countries. This includes identifying key influential players and subfields, the knowledge transfer patterns among them, and the overall knowledge transfer efficiency. The proposed framework is applied to the field of nanoscale science and engineering (NSE), including the citation networks of patent documents, submitting institutions, technology fields, and countries. The NSE patents were identified by keywords “full-text” searching of patents at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The analysis shows that the United States is the most important citation center in NSE research. The institution citation network illustrates a more efficient knowledge transfer between institutions than a random network. The country citation network displays a knowledge transfer capability as efficient as a random network. The technology field citation network and the patent document citation network exhibit a␣less efficient knowledge diffusion capability than a random network. All four citation networks show a tendency to form local citation clusters.     

Measuring science–technology interactions using patent citations and author-inventor links: an exploration analysis from Chinese nanotechnology

This article contributes to the growing study on the interactions between science and technology with China’s evidence in the field of nanotechnology, based on the database of United States Patent and Trademark Office. The analysis is focused during the period of 1991–2008, a rapid increasing period for the development of nanotechnology. Using the non-patent references cited by patents, we first investigate the science–technology connections in the context of Chinese nanotechnology, especially in institutional sectors and its application fields. Those patents, produced by academic researchers and directed towards basic scientific knowledge, generally cite more scientific references with a higher proportion of self-citations. It is interesting to find that patents contributed by collaborations between public organizations and corporations seldom contain scientific references. Following an interesting path on matching the data of publications and patents, we establish the author-inventor links in this emerging field. Author-inventors, who are co-active in publishing and patenting, are at the very top of the most prolific and highly cited researchers. Finally, we employ social network analysis to explore the characteristics of scientific and technological networks generated by co-authorship and co-invention data, to investigate the position and the role of patenting–publishing scientists in these research networks.     

Connecting NSF funding to patent innovation in nanotechnology (2001–2004)

Nanotechnology research has experienced growth rapid in knowledge and innovations; it also attracted significant public funding in recent years. Several countries have recognized nanotechnology as a critical research domain that promises to revolutionize a wide range of fields of applications. In this paper, we present an analysis of the funding for nanoscale science and engineering (NSE) at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and its implications on technological innovation (number of patents) in this field from 2001 to 2004. Using a combination of basic bibliometric analysis and content visualization tools, we identify growth trends, research topic distribution, and the evolution in NSF funding and commercial patenting activities recorded at the United States Patent Office (USPTO). The patent citations are used to compare the impact of the NSF-funded research on nanotechnology development with research supported by other sources in the United States and abroad. The analysis shows that the NSF-funded researchers and patents authored by them have significantly higher impact based on patent citation measures in the four-year period than other comparison groups. The NSF-authored patent impact is growing faster with the lifetime of a patent, indicating the long-term importance of fundamental research.     

International perspective on nanotechnology papers,patents, and NSF awards (2000–2016)

This paper presents the development of nanotechnology between 2000 and 2016 as reflected in the Web of Science papers, United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), World International Property Organization (WIPO) patents, and National Science Foundation (NSF) awards, with a special reference to the United States (US), European Union (EU27), P.R. China, Japan, and South Korea. The field of nanotechnology is branching out into novel scientific and technology platforms, and it is increasingly difficult to separate foundational nanoscale components from divergent application areas. The average global growth rate has been sustained at about 15% for both papers and patents in the selected interval. The growth rates among regions are non-uniform. P.R. China and South Korea have increased faster in both the numbers and quality of their scientific publications, and currently P.R. China has the largest volume of nanotechnology publications and South Korea the most publications per capita in the field of nanotechnology. The US, EU27, and Japan are maintaining leadership in the upstream, better cited, conceptual components of nanotechnology research and development.     

Trends for nanotechnology development in China, Russia, and India

China, Russia, and India are playing an increasingly important role in global nanotechnology research and development (R&D). This paper comparatively inspects the paper and patent publications by these three countries in the Thomson Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI) database and United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) database (1976–2007). Bibliographic, content map, and citation network analyses are used to evaluate country productivity, dominant research topics, and knowledge diffusion patterns. Significant and consistent growth in nanotechnology papers are noted in the three countries. Between 2000 and 2007, the average annual growth rate was 31.43% in China, 11.88% in Russia, and 33.51% in India. During the same time, the growth patterns were less consistent in patent publications: the corresponding average rates are 31.13, 10.41, and 5.96%. The three countries’ paper impact measured by the average number of citations has been lower than the world average. However, from 2000 to 2007, it experienced rapid increases of about 12.8 times in China, 8 times in India, and 1.6 times in Russia. The Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), and the Indian Institutes of Technology (IIT) were the most productive institutions in paper publication, with 12,334, 6,773, and 1,831 papers, respectively. The three countries emphasized some common research topics such as “Quantum dots,” “Carbon nanotubes,” “Atomic force microscopy,” and “Scanning electron microscopy,” while Russia and India reported more research on nano-devices as compared with China. CAS, RAS, and IIT played key roles in the respective domestic knowledge diffusion.     

International nanotechnology development in 2003: Country,institution, and technology field analysis based on USPTO patent database

Nanoscale science and engineering (NSE) have seen rapid growth and expansion in new areas in recent years. This paper provides an international patent analysis using the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) data searched by keywords of the entire text: title, abstract, claims, and specifications. A fraction of these patents fully satisfy the National Nanotechnology Initiative definition of nanotechnology (which requires exploiting specific phenomena and direct manipulation at the nanoscale), while others only make use of NSE tools and methods of investigation. In previous work we proposed an integrated patent analysis and visualization framework of patent content mapping for the NSE field and of knowledge flow pattern identification until 2002. In this paper, the results are updated for 2003, and the new trends are presented.     

The North American opinion climate for nanotechnology and its products: Opportunities and challenges

A January 2005 telephone survey of 1200 people in the U.S. and 2000 Canadians provides a snapshot of current North American opinion regarding nanotechnology at this crucial early point in its emergence from the laboratory to the arena of public discourse and public understanding. Using a typology of “publics” developed through analysis of a previous comparative survey (Priest, S., 2006) and subsequently tested against these newer data (Priest, S., 2005) this article describes the opinion climate for nanotechnology across North America. The comparison of key results from the two countries helps illustrate how social and cultural differences contribute to reactions to new technologies, including nanotech. The article also discusses implications for nanotechnology-related public outreach and risk communication efforts.     

Technical structure of the global nanoscience and nanotechnology literature

Text mining was used to extract technical intelligence from the open source global nanotechnology and nanoscience research literature. An extensive nanotechnology/nanoscience-focused query was applied to the Science Citation Index/Social Science Citation Index (SCI/SSCI) databases. The nanotechnology/nanoscience research literature technical structure (taxonomy) was obtained using computational linguistics/document clustering and factor analysis. The infrastructure (prolific authors, key journals/institutions/countries, most cited authors/journals/documents) for each of the clusters generated by the document clustering algorithm was obtained using bibliometrics. Another novel addition was the use of phrase auto-correlation maps to show technical thrust areas based on phrase co-occurrence in Abstracts, and the use of phrase–phrase cross-correlation maps to show technical thrust areas based on phrase relations due to the sharing of common co-occurring phrases. The ∼400 most cited nanotechnology papers since 1991 were grouped, and their characteristics generated. Whereas the main analysis provided technical thrusts of all nanotechnology papers retrieved, analysis of the most cited papers allowed their characteristics to be displayed. Finally, most cited papers from selected time periods were extracted, along with all publications from those time periods, and the institutions and countries were compared based on their representation in the most cited documents list relative to their representation in the most publications list.     

International Perspective on Government Nanotechnology Funding in 2005

The worldwide investment in nanotechnology research and development (R&D) reported by national government organizations and EC has increased approximately 9-fold in the last 8 years – from $432 million in 1997 to about $4,100 million in 2005. The proportion of national government investments for: academic R&D and education are between 20% (Korea, Taiwan) and 65% (US), industrial R&D – between 5% (US) and 60% (Korea, Taiwan), and core facilities and government laboratories – about 20–25% in all major contributing economies. This evaluation uses the NNI definition of nanotechnology (that excludes MEMS or microelectronics), and is based on direct information and analysis with managers of nanotechnology R&D programs in the respective countries.     

Trends in worldwide nanotechnology patent applications: 1991 to 2008

Nanotechnology patent applications published during 1991–2008 have been examined using the “title–abstract” keyword search on esp@cenet “worldwide” database. The longitudinal evolution of the number of patent applications, their topics, and their respective patent families have been evaluated for 15 national patent offices covering 98% of the total global activity. The patent offices of the United States (USA), People’s Republic of China (PRC), Japan, and South Korea have published the largest number of nanotechnology patent applications, and experienced significant but different growth rates after 2000. In most repositories, the largest numbers of nanotechnology patent applications originated from their own countries/regions, indicating a significant “home advantage.” The top applicant institutions are from different sectors in different countries (e.g., from industry in the US and Canada patent offices, and from academe or government agencies at the PRC office). As compared to 2000, the year before the establishment of the US National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), numerous new invention topics appeared in 2008, in all 15 patent repositories. This is more pronounced in the USA and PRC. Patent families have increased among the 15 patent offices, particularly after 2005. Overlapping patent applications increased from none in 1991 to about 4% in 2000 and to about 27% in 2008. The largest share of equivalent nanotechnology patent applications (1,258) between two repositories was identified between the US and Japan patent offices.     

The structure and infrastructure of the global nanotechnology literature

Text mining is the extraction of useful information from large volumes of text. A text mining analysis of the global open nanotechnology literature was performed. Records from the Science Citation Index (SCI)/Social SCI were analyzed to provide the infrastructure of the global nanotechnology literature (prolific authors/journals/institutions/countries, most cited authors/papers/journals) and the thematic structure (taxonomy) of the global nanotechnology literature, from a science perspective. Records from the Engineering Compendex (EC) were analyzed to provide a taxonomy from a technology perspective.

• The Far Eastern countries have expanded nanotechnology publication output dramatically in the past decade.
• The Peoples Republic of China ranks second to the USA (2004 results) in nanotechnology papers published in the SCI, and has increased its nanotechnology publication output by a factor of 21 in a decade.
• Of the six most prolific (publications) nanotechnology countries, the three from the Western group (USA, Germany, France) have about eight percent more nanotechnology publications (for 2004) than the three from the Far Eastern group (China, Japan, South Korea).
• While most of the high nanotechnology publication-producing countries are also high nanotechnology patent producers in the US Patent Office (as of 2003), China is a major exception. China ranks 20th as a nanotechnology patent-producing country in the US Patent Office.

     

Applications of deuterium oxide in human health

The main aim goal of this review was to gather information about recent publications related to deuterium oxide (D₂O), and its use as a scientific tool related to human health. Searches were made in electronic databases Pubmed, Scielo, Lilacs, Medline and Cochrane. Moreover, the following patent databases were consulted: EPO (Espacenet patent search), USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office) and Google Patents, which cover researches worldwide related to innovations using D₂O.     

The Public and Nanotechnology: How Citizens Make Sense of Emerging Technologies

We report findings from a national telephone survey on levels of knowledge about and attitudes toward nanotechnology that demonstrate how people make decisions about emerging technologies. Our findings confirm previous research that suggests that people form opinions and attitudes even in the absence of relevant scientific or policy-related information. In fact, our data show that cognitive shortcuts or heuristics – often provided by mass media – are currently a key factor in influencing how the public thinks about nanotechnology and about its risks and benefits, and in determining the level of support among the public for further funding for research in this area.     

Value chain of nanotechnology: a comparative study of some major players

The article provides a general overview for the landscapes of national nanotechnology development from 1991 to 2010. More than 230,000 unique patents are identified based on a composite search strategy in the Derwent innovation index database. According to the concordance between patent classification and industry technology, some main application areas are identified to compare the positions and specializations among the leading countries. By extracting the content of the “use” subfield in the abstracts and harvesting the keywords representing characteristics of life cycle, nanotechnology patents are grouped into four categories: nanomaterials, nanointermediates, nano-enabled products, and nanotools, which can be seen as four stages of nanotechnology’s value chain. These analyses enable us to identify the distributions of value chain and prolific research institutions among the leading countries. It is found that China is productive in nanomaterials and nanointermediates, rather than nano-enabled products and nanotools, which could be mainly explained by the fact that Chinese academia makes a main contribution to nanotechnology patenting. However, there is a big gap between university patenting and market demands, leading to a low rate of technology transfer or licensing.     

Longitudinal Patent Analysis for Nanoscale Science and Engineering: Country,Institution and Technology Field

Nanoscale science and engineering (NSE) and related areas have seen rapid growth in recent years. The speed and scope of development in the field have made it essential for researchers to be informed on the progress across different laboratories, companies, industries and countries. In this project, we experimented with several analysis and visualization techniques on NSE-related United States patent documents to support various knowledge tasks. This paper presents results on the basic analysis of nanotechnology patents between 1976 and 2002, content map analysis and citation network analysis. The data have been obtained on individual countries, institutions and technology fields. The top 10 countries with the largest number of nanotechnology patents are the United States, Japan, France, the United Kingdom, Taiwan, Korea, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Italy and Australia. The fastest growth in the last 5 years has been in chemical and pharmaceutical fields, followed by semiconductor devices. The results demonstrate potential of information-based discovery and visualization technologies to capture knowledge regarding nanotechnology performance, transfer of knowledge and trends of development through analyzing the patent documents.