-
DPMA: Änderungen internationale Klassifikation von Waren und Dienstleistungen (2007)
0.20
0.20479645 = product of:
0.3413274 = sum of:
0.10021281 = weight(_text_:patent in 776) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10021281 = score(doc=776,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.41269606 = fieldWeight in 776, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=776)
0.022580625 = weight(_text_:und in 776) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022580625 = score(doc=776,freq=16.0), product of:
0.08150501 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.27704588 = fieldWeight in 776, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=776)
0.21853396 = weight(_text_:markenamt in 776) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.21853396 = score(doc=776,freq=4.0), product of:
0.3585839 = queryWeight, product of:
9.7509775 = idf(docFreq=6, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.6094361 = fieldWeight in 776, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
9.7509775 = idf(docFreq=6, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=776)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Content
- "Das Deutsche Patent- und Markenamt informiert auf seiner Website unter www.dpma.de/veroeffentlichungen/mit teilungen/anlage_mittlg_16.pdf. (5 Seiten PDF-Format) über die zum 1. Januar 2007 in Kraft getretenen Änderungen der Internationalen Klassifikation von Waren und Dienstleistungen für die Eintragung von Marken (Klassifikation von Nizza). Änderungen für Dienstleistungen des Groß- und Einzelhandels in Klasse 35 waren bereits vorher erfolgt. Auf Basis des Urteils des EuGH vom 7. Juli 2005 C-418/02 ("Praktiker") (www. dpma.de/infos/einsteiger/einsteiger_ marke03b.html) ergaben sich einige Veränderungen bezüglich akzeptierter Formulierungen bei Markenanmeldungen in der Klasse 35. Was ist jetzt zulässig? Neben der vom EuGH ausdrücklich entschiedenen Formulierung wird das Deutsche Patent- und Markenamt im Vorgriff auf die am 1. Januar 2007 in Kraft tretende 9. Ausgabe der Klassifikation von Nizza eine Reihe weiterer Dienstleistungsbezeichnungen zulassen, die sachlich Bleichgelagert sind und nicht anders behandelt werden können als die Einzelhandelsdienstleistungen. Dazu gehören etwa - Großhandelsdienstleistungen mit ... - Einzelhandelsdienstleistungen für den Versandhandel mit ... - Dienstleistungen des Einzel-/Großhandels über das Internet mit ... - Einzelhandelsdienstleistungen mittels Teleshopping-Sendungen mit ... Was ist nach wie vor nicht zulässig? Alle Beteiligte in dem Verfahren vor dem EuGH sind davon ausgegangen, dass der reine "Verkauf" keine Dienstleistung darstellt, sondern mit der Warenmarke umfasst ist. Für Formulierungen wie "Verkauf", "Vertrieb", "Handel" kann daher nach wie vor keine Dienstleistungsmarke in Klasse 35 erlangt werden. Auch ist deutlich zu machen, dass Dienstleistungen für Dritte erbracht werden, deshalb sind Formulierungen wie "Betrieb eines Verkaufsgeschäfts...", "Betreiben eines Versandhandels..." nicht zulässig. In der Klasse 35 betreffen wesentliche Neuerungen die Klassen 14 und 42. Gebrauchsgegenstände "aus Edelmetall" werden künftig nicht mehr in der Klasse 14, sondern in der Klasse der Funktion klassifiziert; der Zusatz "aus Edelmetall/nicht aus Edelmetall" wird dadurch überflüssig. Die erstmals in der 9. Ausgabe so genannten "Juristischen Dienstleistungen" werden der Klasse 45 anstatt wie bisher der Klasse 42 zugeordnet."
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 58(2007) H.1, S.4
-
Adams, A.: Using the International Patent Classification in an online environment (2000)
0.17
0.16831233 = product of:
0.4207808 = sum of:
0.40085125 = weight(_text_:patent in 7380) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.40085125 = score(doc=7380,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.6507843 = fieldWeight in 7380, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7380)
0.019929558 = product of:
0.07971823 = sum of:
0.07971823 = weight(_text_:22 in 7380) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07971823 = score(doc=7380,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 7380, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7380)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- World patent information. 22(2000), S.291-300
-
Rademaker, C.A.: ¬The classification of plants in the United States Patent Classification System (2000)
0.17
0.16831233 = product of:
0.4207808 = sum of:
0.40085125 = weight(_text_:patent in 6200) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.40085125 = score(doc=6200,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.6507843 = fieldWeight in 6200, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6200)
0.019929558 = product of:
0.07971823 = sum of:
0.07971823 = weight(_text_:22 in 6200) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07971823 = score(doc=6200,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6200, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6200)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- World patent information. 22(2000), S.301-307
-
Rademaker, C.A.: ¬The classification of ornamental designs in the United States Patent Classification System (2000)
0.17
0.16831233 = product of:
0.4207808 = sum of:
0.40085125 = weight(_text_:patent in 6308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.40085125 = score(doc=6308,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.6507843 = fieldWeight in 6308, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6308)
0.019929558 = product of:
0.07971823 = sum of:
0.07971823 = weight(_text_:22 in 6308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07971823 = score(doc=6308,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6308, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6308)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- World patent information. 22(2000), S.123-133
-
Liu, D.-R.; Shih, M.-J.: Hybrid-patent classification based on patent-network analysis (2011)
0.15
0.14922068 = product of:
0.37305167 = sum of:
0.35430577 = weight(_text_:patent in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.35430577 = score(doc=4189,freq=32.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.4591008 = fieldWeight in 4189, product of:
5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
32.0 = termFreq=32.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4189)
0.018745892 = product of:
0.037491783 = sum of:
0.012579837 = weight(_text_:m in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012579837 = score(doc=4189,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09151058 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.13746867 = fieldWeight in 4189, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4189)
0.024911948 = weight(_text_:22 in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024911948 = score(doc=4189,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4189, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4189)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Effective patent management is essential for organizations to maintain their competitive advantage. The classification of patents is a critical part of patent management and industrial analysis. This study proposes a hybrid-patent-classification approach that combines a novel patent-network-based classification method with three conventional classification methods to analyze query patents and predict their classes. The novel patent network contains various types of nodes that represent different features extracted from patent documents. The nodes are connected based on the relationship metrics derived from the patent metadata. The proposed classification method predicts a query patent's class by analyzing all reachable nodes in the patent network and calculating their relevance to the query patent. It then classifies the query patent with a modified k-nearest neighbor classifier. To further improve the approach, we combine it with content-based, citation-based, and metadata-based classification methods to develop a hybrid-classification approach. We evaluate the performance of the hybrid approach on a test dataset of patent documents obtained from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and compare its performance with that of the three conventional methods. The results demonstrate that the proposed patent-network-based approach yields more accurate class predictions than the patent network-based approach.
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:04:21
-
Adams, S.: Comparing the IPC and the US classification systems for the patent searcher (2001)
0.15
0.14727329 = product of:
0.3681832 = sum of:
0.35074484 = weight(_text_:patent in 4030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.35074484 = score(doc=4030,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.4444362 = fieldWeight in 4030, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4030)
0.017438363 = product of:
0.06975345 = sum of:
0.06975345 = weight(_text_:22 in 4030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06975345 = score(doc=4030,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4030, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4030)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 27. 3.2002 15:22:31
- Source
- World patent information. 23(2001) no.1, S.15-23
-
Makarov, M.: ¬The seventh edition of the IPC (2000)
0.14
0.1373726 = product of:
0.34343147 = sum of:
0.2834446 = weight(_text_:patent in 1995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2834446 = score(doc=1995,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.1672807 = fieldWeight in 1995, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1995)
0.059986852 = product of:
0.119973704 = sum of:
0.040255476 = weight(_text_:m in 1995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040255476 = score(doc=1995,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09151058 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.4398997 = fieldWeight in 1995, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1995)
0.07971823 = weight(_text_:22 in 1995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07971823 = score(doc=1995,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 1995, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1995)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- World patent information. 22(2000) no.1, S.53-58
-
Nishikawa, M.: Usefulness of hybrid systems in computerised searches (1990)
0.13
0.1252511 = product of:
0.31312776 = sum of:
0.30683783 = weight(_text_:patent in 4063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.30683783 = score(doc=4063,freq=6.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.2636185 = fieldWeight in 4063, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4063)
0.0062899184 = product of:
0.025159674 = sum of:
0.025159674 = weight(_text_:m in 4063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025159674 = score(doc=4063,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09151058 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.27493733 = fieldWeight in 4063, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4063)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Describes the development of hybrid classification systems associated with the International Patent Classification (IPC) in the Japanese Patent Office and examines the effectiveness of search in a computerised system based on the IPC hybrid system in the lubrication field (subclasses C10M, C10N)
- Source
- World patent information. 12(1990), no.4, S.212-215
-
Hull, D.; Ait-Mokhtar, S.; Chuat, M.; Eisele, A.; Gaussier, E.; Grefenstette, G.; Isabelle, P.; Samulesson, C.; Segand, F.: Language technologies and patent search and classification (2001)
0.12
0.12327453 = product of:
0.30818632 = sum of:
0.3006384 = weight(_text_:patent in 6318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.3006384 = score(doc=6318,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.2380881 = fieldWeight in 6318, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6318)
0.0075479024 = product of:
0.03019161 = sum of:
0.03019161 = weight(_text_:m in 6318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03019161 = score(doc=6318,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09151058 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.3299248 = fieldWeight in 6318, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6318)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- World patent information. 23(2001), S.265-268
-
Su, F.P.; Lai, K.K.; Sharma, R.R.K.; Kuo, T.H.: Patent priority network : linking patent portfolio to strategic goals (2009)
0.12
0.1232448 = product of:
0.308112 = sum of:
0.3006384 = weight(_text_:patent in 3170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.3006384 = score(doc=3170,freq=16.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.2380881 = fieldWeight in 3170, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3170)
0.007473584 = product of:
0.029894335 = sum of:
0.029894335 = weight(_text_:22 in 3170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029894335 = score(doc=3170,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3170, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3170)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- When applying for patents, companies should consider performing patent portfolios as a means of integrating their patent strategy to shape their overall business strategy. This is an important issue for any company in pursuit of enhanced operational performance because the whole raison d'être behind the application of patents is the anticipation of achieving maximum competitive advantage. A prerequisite for such a company is a decision analysis model of patent portfolios because this has the added advantage of being readily applicable to the evaluation of the quality of its competitors' portfolios; thus, by understanding both itself and its competitors, a company can attain a superior position. To demonstrate this, we examine patent priority networks (PPNs) formed through patent family members and claimed priority patents, performing a model of patent portfolio analysis and then going on to determine the algorithms. We suggest that information retrieved from this network can provide a useful reference tool for decision-making by company CEOs, CTOs, R&D managers, and intellectual property managers.
- Date
- 5.11.2009 20:35:22
-
Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: Patent citation analysis with Google (2017)
0.12
0.11876793 = product of:
0.29691982 = sum of:
0.29377487 = weight(_text_:patent in 3317) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.29377487 = score(doc=3317,freq=22.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.2098227 = fieldWeight in 3317, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3317)
0.0031449592 = product of:
0.012579837 = sum of:
0.012579837 = weight(_text_:m in 3317) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012579837 = score(doc=3317,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09151058 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.13746867 = fieldWeight in 3317, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3317)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Citations from patents to scientific publications provide useful evidence about the commercial impact of academic research, but automatically searchable databases are needed to exploit this connection for large-scale patent citation evaluations. Google covers multiple different international patent office databases but does not index patent citations or allow automatic searches. In response, this article introduces a semiautomatic indirect method via Bing to extract and filter patent citations from Google to academic papers with an overall precision of 98%. The method was evaluated with 322,192 science and engineering Scopus articles from every second year for the period 1996-2012. Although manual Google Patent searches give more results, especially for articles with many patent citations, the difference is not large enough to be a major problem. Within Biomedical Engineering, Biotechnology, and Pharmacology & Pharmaceutics, 7% to 10% of Scopus articles had at least one patent citation but other fields had far fewer, so patent citation analysis is only relevant for a minority of publications. Low but positive correlations between Google Patent citations and Scopus citations across all fields suggest that traditional citation counts cannot substitute for patent citations when evaluating research.
-
Stock, M.; Stock, W.G.: Intellectual property information : A comparative analysis of main information providers (2006)
0.11
0.113998175 = product of:
0.28499544 = sum of:
0.28122148 = weight(_text_:patent in 210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.28122148 = score(doc=210,freq=14.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.1581254 = fieldWeight in 210, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=210)
0.0037739512 = product of:
0.015095805 = sum of:
0.015095805 = weight(_text_:m in 210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015095805 = score(doc=210,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09151058 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.1649624 = fieldWeight in 210, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=210)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- After modeling expert user needs with regard to intellectual property information, we analyze and compare the main providers in this specific information area (Thomson DIALOG, Esp@cenet by the European Patent Office, Questel-Orbit, and STN International) in terms of system content and system functionality. The key question is whether the main providers are able to satisfy these expert user needs. For patent information, some special retrieval features such as chemical structure search (including Markush search), patent family references and citations search, biosequence search, and basic informetric functionality such as ranking, mapping, and visualization of information flows are realized. Considering the results of information science research, the practice of patent information shows unexhausted improvement opportunities (e.g., the application of bibliographic patent coupling and co-patent-citation for mapping patents, patent assignees, and technology specialties). For trademark search, users need multiple truncated search (realized) as well as phonetic search and image retrieval (not realized yet).
-
Lawson, M.: Automatic extraction of citations from the text of English-language patents : an example of template mining (1996)
0.11
0.11314223 = product of:
0.28285557 = sum of:
0.2603605 = weight(_text_:patent in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2603605 = score(doc=2654,freq=12.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.0722158 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
0.02249507 = product of:
0.04499014 = sum of:
0.015095805 = weight(_text_:m in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015095805 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09151058 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.1649624 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
0.029894335 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029894335 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Describes and evaluates methods for automatically isolating and extracting biliographic references from the full texts of patents, designed to facilitate the work of patent examiners who currently perform this task manually. These references include citations both to patents and to other bibliographic sources. Notes that patents are unusual as citing documents in that the citations occur maily in the body of the text, rather than as footnotes or in separate sections. Describes the natural language processing technique of template mining used to extract data directly from the text where either the data or the text surrounding the data form recognizable patterns. When text matches a template, the system extracts data according to instructions associated with that template. Examines the sub languages of citations and the development of templates for the extraction of citations to patent. Reports results of running 2 reference extraction systems against a sample of 100 European Patent Office patent documents, with recall and prescision data for patent and non patent citations, and concludes with suggestions for future improvements
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.6, S.423-436
-
Fujii, A.; Iwayama, M.; Kando, N.: Introduction to the special issue on patent processing (2007)
0.11
0.112676434 = product of:
0.28169107 = sum of:
0.27728814 = weight(_text_:patent in 929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.27728814 = score(doc=929,freq=10.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.1419271 = fieldWeight in 929, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=929)
0.004402943 = product of:
0.017611772 = sum of:
0.017611772 = weight(_text_:m in 929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017611772 = score(doc=929,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09151058 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.19245613 = fieldWeight in 929, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=929)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- The processing of intellectual property documents, such as patents, has been important to the industry, business, and law communities. Recently, the importance of patent processing has also been recognized in academic research communities, particularly by information retrieval and natural language processing researchers. In addition, large test collections that include patents have recently become available, to enable the systematic evaluation of methodologies from a scientific point of view. In the light of these activities, this special issue is intended to collect advanced research papers on patent processing. As an introduction to the special issue on patent processing, this paper surveys the relevant literature and outlines the papers selected for the special issue.
- Footnote
- Einführung in einen Themenschwerpunkt "patent processing"
-
Gore, B.: Model schemes for DWPI access in PATLIB libraries (2000)
0.11
0.106180966 = product of:
0.2654524 = sum of:
0.24801406 = weight(_text_:patent in 6317) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.24801406 = score(doc=6317,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.0213706 = fieldWeight in 6317, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6317)
0.017438363 = product of:
0.06975345 = sum of:
0.06975345 = weight(_text_:22 in 6317) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06975345 = score(doc=6317,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6317, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6317)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- World patent information. 22(2000) no.1, S.13-18
-
Lambert, N.: ORBIT'S PowerSearch : what's great, what's missing (1994)
0.11
0.1051952 = product of:
0.262988 = sum of:
0.25053203 = weight(_text_:patent in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.25053203 = score(doc=2700,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
1.0317402 = fieldWeight in 2700, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2700)
0.012455974 = product of:
0.049823895 = sum of:
0.049823895 = weight(_text_:22 in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049823895 = score(doc=2700,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2700, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2700)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Reviews the PowerSearch multifile searching software introduced by ORBIT Search Service as it is used for searching patent databases. Looks at its useful features: deduping, patent family grouping, merge, and virtual file merging. Looks at some possible improvements to both PowerSearch itself and to the ORBIT system to accomodate PowerSearch
- Source
- Searcher. 2(1994) no.5, S.18-22
-
Huang, M.-H.; Huang, W.-T.; Chang, C.-C.; Chen, D. Z.; Lin, C.-P.: The greater scattering phenomenon beyond Bradford's law in patent citation (2014)
0.10
0.10406826 = product of:
0.26017064 = sum of:
0.23767556 = weight(_text_:patent in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.23767556 = score(doc=1352,freq=10.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.9787947 = fieldWeight in 1352, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1352)
0.02249507 = product of:
0.04499014 = sum of:
0.015095805 = weight(_text_:m in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015095805 = score(doc=1352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09151058 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.1649624 = fieldWeight in 1352, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1352)
0.029894335 = weight(_text_:22 in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029894335 = score(doc=1352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1352, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1352)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Patent analysis has become important for management as it offers timely and valuable information to evaluate R&D performance and identify the prospects of patents. This study explores the scattering patterns of patent impact based on citations in 3 distinct technological areas, the liquid crystal, semiconductor, and drug technological areas, to identify the core patents in each area. The research follows the approach from Bradford's law, which equally divides total citations into 3 zones. While the result suggests that the scattering of patent citations corresponded with features of Bradford's law, the proportion of patents in the 3 zones did not match the proportion as proposed by the law. As a result, the study shows that the distributions of citations in all 3 areas were more concentrated than what Bradford's law proposed. The Groos (1967) droop was also presented by the scattering of patent citations, and the growth rate of cumulative citation decreased in the third zone.
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:11:29
-
Li, G.; Siddharth, L.; Luo, J.: Embedding knowledge graph of patent metadata to measure knowledge proximity (2023)
0.10
0.09805966 = product of:
0.24514915 = sum of:
0.23767556 = weight(_text_:patent in 920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.23767556 = score(doc=920,freq=10.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.9787947 = fieldWeight in 920, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=920)
0.007473584 = product of:
0.029894335 = sum of:
0.029894335 = weight(_text_:22 in 920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029894335 = score(doc=920,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 920, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=920)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Knowledge proximity refers to the strength of association between any two entities in a structural form that embodies certain aspects of a knowledge base. In this work, we operationalize knowledge proximity within the context of the US Patent Database (knowledge base) using a knowledge graph (structural form) named "PatNet" built using patent metadata, including citations, inventors, assignees, and domain classifications. We train various graph embedding models using PatNet to obtain the embeddings of entities and relations. The cosine similarity between the corresponding (or transformed) embeddings of entities denotes the knowledge proximity between these. We compare the embedding models in terms of their performances in predicting target entities and explaining domain expansion profiles of inventors and assignees. We then apply the embeddings of the best-preferred model to associate homogeneous (e.g., patent-patent) and heterogeneous (e.g., inventor-assignee) pairs of entities.
- Date
- 22. 3.2023 12:06:55
-
Wusteman, J.: Patently ridiculous (2004)
0.09
0.091012254 = product of:
0.22753063 = sum of:
0.21258347 = weight(_text_:patent in 2847) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.21258347 = score(doc=2847,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.8754605 = fieldWeight in 2847, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2847)
0.014947168 = product of:
0.05978867 = sum of:
0.05978867 = weight(_text_:22 in 2847) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05978867 = score(doc=2847,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1287768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2847, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2847)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- The Open Source Software movement has much to offer the library community. But can it survive the onslaught of patent applications?
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.231-237
-
Hansson, B.; Makarov, M.: ¬The sixth edition of the IPC (1995)
0.08
0.082183026 = product of:
0.20545755 = sum of:
0.20042562 = weight(_text_:patent in 1617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.20042562 = score(doc=1617,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24282473 = queryWeight, product of:
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.8253921 = fieldWeight in 1617, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.603137 = idf(docFreq=162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1617)
0.0050319345 = product of:
0.020127738 = sum of:
0.020127738 = weight(_text_:m in 1617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020127738 = score(doc=1617,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09151058 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.036774147 = queryNorm
0.21994986 = fieldWeight in 1617, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1617)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Describes the main features of the 6th ed. of the International Patent Classification (IPC) and its differences from the 5th ed. A substantial difference is the increased number of hybrid systems whose introduction into the Classification is becoming one of the leading trends in the revision of the IPC. Outlines the decisions of the Committee of Experts of the IPC union concerning the terminology used in the IPC, the presentation of notes and the application of indexing schemes. Considers the future developments of the IPC
- Source
- World patent information. 17(1995) no.1, S.5-8
