Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Technological evolution seen from the USPC reclassifications

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate technological evolution from the perspective of the US Patent Classification (USPC) reclassification. Similar to the revisions of the Dewey Decimal Classification, a commonly used library classification scheme, USPC reclassification takes the forms of creating, abolishing or modifying USPC class schedules. The results showed that there exist significant differences among five types of patents based on the USPC reclassification: Patents reclassified to Class 001 (classification undetermined), Patents with Technological Inter-field Mobilised Codes, Patents with Technological Intra-field Mobilised Codes, Patents with Abolished Codes, and Patents with Original Codes. Patents reclassified to Class 001, mostly related to the topic of “Data processing”, performed better than other patents in novelty, linkage to science, technological complexity and innovative scope. Patents with Inter-field Mobilised Codes, related to the topics of “Data processing: measuring, calibrating, or testing” and “Optical communications”, involved broader technology topics but had a low speed of innovation. Patents with Intra-field Mobilised Codes, mostly in the Computers & Communications and Drugs & Medical fields, tended to have little novelty and a small innovative scope. Patents with Abolished Codes and patents with Original Codes performed similarly—their values of patent indicators were low. It is suggested that future research extend the patent sample to subclasses or reclassified secondary USPCs in order to understand the technological evolution within a field in greater detail.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. According to the USPTO (2012b), US PGPub documents classified in the USPC are assigned one, and only one, principal mandatory classification, known as the Primary Classification (PR).

References

  • Chan, L. M. (2011). Cataloguing and classification: An introduction (3rd ed.). Maryland: The Scarecrow Press Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeHart, F. E., & Meder, M. D. (1987). Structure in computer science: DDC reflections. Technical Services Quarterly, 4(3), 41–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunnett, C. W. (1980). Pairwise multiple comparisons in the homogeneous variance, unequal sample size case. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 75(732), 789–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, V. K. (2006). References to literature in patent documents: A case study of CSIR in India. Scientometrics, 68(1), 29–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools (No. w8498). National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Howell, D. (2002). Statistical methods for psychology (5th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury/Thomson Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maltby, A. (1975). Sayer’s manual of classification for librarians (5th ed.). London: Andre Deutsch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narin, F. (2000). Tech-line® background paper. In J. Tidd (Ed.), From knowledge management to strategic competence (pp. 155–195). London: Imperial College Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • New, G. R. (1998). Custer and the modernisation of Dewey. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 25(2–3), 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Online Computer Library Center. (2013). New features in DDC Edition 23. https://www.oclc.org/content/dam/oclc/dewey/versions/print/new_features.pdf. Accessed April 10 2015

  • Pantros IP. (2013). Patent factor reports. http://admin.patentcafe.com/reports/pantrosip_reports/patentfactor_terms.pdf. Accessed Jan 7 2015

  • Scott, M. L. (1998). Dewey decimal classification, 21st edition: A study manual and number building guide. Westport, Connecticut: Libraries Unlimited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strumsky, D., Lobo, J., & van der Leeuw, S. (2012). Using patent technology codes to study technological change. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 21(3), 267–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sung, H., Wang, C., & Huang, M. (2015). A preliminary study of technological evolution: From the perspective of the USPC reclassification. In The 15th international society of scientometrics and informetrics conference, 2015 (pp. 847–858)

  • Sung, H., Wang, C., Huang, M., & Chen, D. (2015b). Measuring science-based science linkage and non-science-based linkage of patents through non-patent references. Journal of Informetrics, 9(3), 488–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, A. G. (2006a). Teaching the Dewey decimal classification system. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 42(3/4), 97–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, A. G. (2006b). Introduction to cataloging and classification (10th ed.). Westport, Connecticut: Libraries Unlimited.

    Google Scholar 

  • USPTO. (2012a). Classification Orders Index (COI). http://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/classification/orders/coi.jsp. Accessed Jan 10 2015

  • USPTO. (2012b). Overview of the US patent classification system (USPC). http://beta.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/patents/resources/classification/overview.pdf. Accessed Jan 7 2015

  • USPTO. (2013a). Access classification information by symbol. http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/classification/index.htm. Accessed Jan 7 2015

  • USPTO. (2013b). Classification order archival report. http://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/classification/archiverpt.pdf. Accessed Jan 7 2015

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Bio-Industry Communication and Development, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Chun-Chieh Wang

  2. Graduate Institute of Library and Information Science, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan

    Hui-Yun Sung

  3. Department of Library and Information Science, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Mu-Hsuan Huang

Authors
  1. Chun-Chieh Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hui-Yun Sung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mu-Hsuan Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mu-Hsuan Huang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, CC., Sung, HY. & Huang, MH. Technological evolution seen from the USPC reclassifications. Scientometrics 107, 537–553 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1851-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1851-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation