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.     

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.     

Toward the responsible innovation with nanotechnology in Japan: our scope

The societal impacts of nanotechnology have attracted growing attention in the United States and Europe in recent years. In Japan, the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (Technology Information Department) has played a central role in promoting discussions on this topic by collecting information from Japan and overseas, creating a network of the interested parties, and providing a forum for discussion. This paper presents a summary of recent activities in Japan relating to the societal impacts of nanotechnology, fro the launch of the “Nanotechnology and Society” open forum (August 2004) until the “Nanotechnology Debate” discussion forum (February 2007), and outlines the policy recommendations that came out of a project entitled “Research on Facilitation of Public Acceptance of Nanotechnology” (March 2006).     

Nanotechnology and society

Past experience has shown that the successful introduction of a new technology requires careful attention to the interactions between the technology and society. These interactions are bi-directional: on the one hand, technology changes and challenges social patterns and, on the other hand, the governance structures and values of the society affect progress in developing the technology. Nanotechnology is likely to be particularly affected by these kinds of interactions because of its great promise and the unusually early public attention it has received. Moreover, it represents a new kind of experiment in packaging a rather wide range of fundamental research activities under a single “mission-like” umbrella. Although this gives it more impetus as a field, it sets a higher bar for showing successful applications early on and because it links disparate fields, regulatory regimes reasonable for one kind of nanotechnology development may be inappropriately extended to others. There are a number of lessons to be gleaned from experience with the introduction of other technologies, which offer guidance with respect to what pitfalls to avoid and what issues to be sensitive to as we move forward with the development of nanotechnology applications. The problems encountered by nuclear power point out the dangers of over-promising and the role the need for the technology plays in ameliorating fears of risk. The public reaction to biomedical engineering and biotechnology highlights, in addition, the cultural factors that come into play when technologies raise questions about what is “natural” and what is “foreign” and what conceptions are involved in defining “personhood”. In all cases, it has been clear that a main task for those introducing new technology is building public trust–in the safety of the technologies and the integrity of those introducing it. The advocates of nanotechnology have already shown that they are generally aware of the need to consider the public’s reaction, and they have taken the first steps to act on that awareness. We have to build on those beginnings, not limiting our considerations simply to issues of safety. If we do so well, we have the opportunity to develop a new paradigm for technology introduction, which will serve society well in the future.     

Chemical action: what is it,and why does it really matter?

Nanotechnology, as with many technologies before it, places a strain on existing legislation and poses a challenge to all administrative agencies tasked with regulating technology-based products. It is easy to see how statutory schemes become outdated, as our ability to understand and affect the world progresses. In this article, we address the regulatory problems that nanotechnology posses for the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) classification structure for “drugs” and “devices.” The last major modification to these terms was in 1976, with the enactment of the Medical Device Amendments. There are serious practical differences for a classification as a drug or device in terms of time to market and research. Drugs are classified, primarily, as acting by “chemical action.” We lay out some legal, philosophic, and scientific tools that serve to provide a useful, as well as legally and scientifically faithful, distinction between drugs and devices for the purpose of regulatory classification. These issues we raise are worth the consideration of anyone who is interested in the regulation of nano-products or other novel technologies.     

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.     

The long view of nanotechnology development: the National Nanotechnology Initiative at 10 years

A global scientific and societal endeavor was set in motion by the nanotechnology vision formulated in 1999 that inspired the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) and other national and international R&D programs. Establishing foundational knowledge at the nanoscale has been the main focus of the nanotechnology research community in the first decade. As of 2009, this new knowledge underpinned about a quarter of a trillion dollars worldwide market, of which about $91 billion was in US products that incorporate nanoscale components. Nanotechnology is already evolving toward becoming a general-purpose technology by 2020, encompassing four generations of products with increasing structural and dynamic complexity: (1) passive nanostructures, (2) active nanostructures, (3) nanosystems, and (4) molecular nanosystems. By 2020, the increasing integration of nanoscale science and engineering knowledge and of nanosystems promises mass applications of nanotechnology in industry, medicine, and computing, and in better comprehension and conservation of nature. Nanotechnology’s rapid development worldwide is a testimony to the transformative power of identifying a concept or trend and laying out a vision at the synergistic confluence of diverse scientific research areas. This chapter provides a brief perspective on the development of the NNI since 2000 in the international context, the main outcomes of the R&D programs after 10 years, the governance aspects specific to this emerging field, lessons learned, and most importantly, how the nanotechnology community should prepare for the future.     

A longitudinal analysis of nanotechnology literature: 1976–2004

Nanotechnology research and applications have experienced rapid growth in recent years. We assessed the status of nanotechnology research worldwide by applying bibliographic, content map, and citation network analysis to a data set of about 200,000 nanotechnology papers published in the Thomson Science Citation Index Expanded database (SCI) from 1976 to 2004. This longitudinal study shows a quasi-exponential growth of nanotechnology articles with an average annual growth rate of 20.7% after 1991. The United States had the largest contribution of nanotechnology research and China and Korea had the fastest growth rates. The largest institutional contributions were from the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Russian Academy of Sciences. The high-impact papers generally described tools, theories, technologies, perspectives, and overviews of nanotechnology. From the top 20 institutions, based on the average number of paper citations in 1976–2004, 17 were in the Unites States, 2 in France and 1 in Germany. Content map analysis identified the evolution of the major topics researched from 1976 to 2004, including investigative tools, physical phenomena, and experiment environments. Both the country citation network and the institution citation network had relatively high clustering, indicating the existence of citation communities in the two networks, and specific patterns in forming citation communities. The United States, Germany, Japan, and China were major citation centers in nanotechnology research with close inter-citation relationships.     

BioCores: identification of a drug/natural product-based privileged structural motif for small-molecule lead discovery

The analysis of known drugs (Comprehensive Medicinal Chemistry database (2008 version): ) and natural products (Koch et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:17272–17277, 2008) has led to the identification of privileged saturated and aromatic heterocyclic ring pairs that we have termed as “BioCores.” This article explains how the BioCores can be used for the design of novel lead-like scaffolds.     

The 11th International Symposium on Flow Visualization

The 11^th International Symposium on Flow Visualization (ISFV) was held at Notre Dame, IN, USA, August 8–12, 2004. The Symposium attracted 236 participants from around the world. The 52 Technical Sessions and two Poster Sessions covered a wide range of topics as indicated in the Keywords. Of the 182 submitted papers, 162 were presented. The presented papers included 8 invited lectures. Each morning and afternoon began with an invited lecture by an outstanding, recognized leader in the field. Toshio Kobayashi received the Leonardo da Vinci Award, an engraved plate, and presented the Leonardo da Vinci Memorial Lecture on “High-performance Computing and Visualization of Unsteady Turbulent Flows.” Toshio Kobayashi is very well known for his outstanding contributions in computational science and flow visualization as well as his leadership in organizing conferences, workshops, and symposia on flow visualization. Ronald J. Adrian discussed “Visualization in Extreme Environments,” Rolf H. Engler described “Pressure-sensitive Paints and Temperature-sensitive Paints in Quantitative Wind Tunnel Studies,” William K. Blake explained “Cavitation as Flow Visualization Seeding,” Giovanni M. Carlomagno discussed “The Use of Colors in Thermo-fluid Dynamic Studies,” Ajit Yoganathan presented “A Gallery of Cardiovascular Fluid Flow Fields: From Heart Valves to Congenital Heart Disease,” Richard B. Miles described “Flow Visualization by Filtered Molecular and Particular Scattering,” and Thomas C. Gruber Jr., displayed a technique for “Visualization of Foreign Gases in Atmospheric Air.” At the end of the last day, Jurgen Kompenhaus from DLR discussed the 12th ISFV to be held in Germany in 2006. After this presentation there was a tour of the Hessert Laboratory for Aerospace Research.     

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.     

Quantum condensates in nuclear matter: Problems

In connection with the contribution “Quantum Condensates in Nuclear Matter” some problems are given to become more familiar with the techniques of many-particle physics. The text was submitted by the authors in English. This paper relates to Part 4: “Problems and Solutions” of materials of the Conference “Helmholtz International Summer School (HISS) on Dense Matter in Heavy-Ion Collisions and Astrophysics,” Dubna, August, 21–September 1, 2006, which were published in the issue 7, 2008.     

Dynamic oversight: implementation gaps and challenges

Nanotechnology is touted as a transformative technology in that it is predicted to improve many aspects of human life. There are hundreds of products in the market that utilize nanostructures in their design, such as composite materials made out of carbon or metal oxides. Potential risks to consumers, to the environment, and to workers from the most common passive nanomaterial—carbon nanotubes—are emerging through scientific research. Newer more active nanostructures—such as cancer therapies and targeted drug systems—are also increasing in use and are raising similar risk concerns. Governing the risks to workers is the subject of this commentary. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 grants the Occupational Safety and Health Administration the legal authority to set occupational health standards to insure that no worker suffers material impairment of health from work. However, setting a standard to protect workers from nanotechnology risks may occur some time in the future because the risks to workers have not been well characterized scientifically. Alternative risk governances—such as dynamic oversight through stakeholder partnerships, “soft law” approaches, and national adoption of international consensus standards—are evaluated in this article.     

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.     

Comparing nanoparticle risk perceptions to other known EHS risks

Over the last decade social scientific researchers have examined how the public perceives risks associated with nanotechnology. The body of literature that has emerged has been methodologically diverse. The findings have confirmed that some publics perceive nanotechnology as riskier than others, experts feel nanotechnology is less risky than the public does, and despite risks the public is optimistic about nanotechnology development. However, the extant literature on nanotechnology and risk suffers from sometimes widely divergent findings and has failed to provide a detailed picture of how the public actually feels about nanotechnology risks when compared to other risks. This study addresses the deficiencies in the literature by providing a comparative approach to gauging nanotechnology risks. The findings show that the public does not fear nanotechnology compared to other risks. Out of 24 risks presented to the participants, nanotechnology ranked 19th in terms of overall risk and 20th in terms of “high risk.”     

Nonlocal charges in susy integrable models

We study systematically the general properties of theB-extension of any integrable model and its properties as Hamiltonian structures etc. We clarify the origin of “exotic” changes in such models. We show that in such models there exist at least two sets of non-local conserved charges and that the “exotic” charges are part of this non-local charge hierarchy. Presented at the 9th Colloquium “Quantum Groups and Integrable Systems”, Prague, 22–24 June 2000.     

Nanotechnology and the public: Effectively communicating nanoscale science and engineering concepts

Researchers are faced with challenges when addressing the public on concepts and applications associated with nanotechnology. The goal of our work was to understand the public’s knowledge of nanotechnology in order to identify appropriate starting points for dialog. Survey results showed that people lack true understanding of concepts associated with atoms and the size of the nanoscale regime. Such gaps in understanding lead to a disappointing lack of communication between researchers and the public concerning fundamental concepts in nanoscale science and engineering. Strategies are offered on how scientists should present their research when engaging the public on nanotechnology topics. Since the time of writing, O.M. Castellini has relocated to the Department of Science and Technology, Museum of Science and Industry, 57th Street and Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.     

Using the “Sura” facility antenna for increasing the effective ionosonde power

We developed and tested a new method for increasing the effective ionosonde power by 20–40 dB, which uses the transceiving antenna of the “Sura” facility. Three sections of this antenna were employed as the receiving antenna of the ionosonde in the test experiments of July 2007. Fine features indiscernible in normal ionosonde mode are distinctly seen in the ionograms. Different variants of connection of the “Sura” antenna sections to the receiver and transmitter of the ionosonde are considered and the possibility of simultaneous operation of the “Sura” high-power transmitter and the ionosonde is analyzed. Translated from Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Radiofizika, Vol. 51, No. 10, pp. 830–836, October 2008.     

Cosmological models with rotation

Nonstationary and stationary cosmological models with rotation and the Bianchi IX metric are constructed within the general relativity theory. A comoving anisotropic liquid and non-comoving “dust-like liquid” are the sources of gravitation in one case, while a comoving anisotropic, non-comoving “dust-like liquid”, and pure radiation - in the other. Translated from Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Fizika, No. 8, pp. 33–37, August, 2008.