Identify technologically relevant papers for 3D printing: a comparison of indicators based on scientific and patent data

Cécile Fauconnet, Clément Sternberger () and Gabriel Vernhes ()
Additional contact information
Cécile Fauconnet: UEA - Unité d'Économie Appliquée - ENSTA Paris - École Nationale Supérieure de Techniques Avancées - IP Paris - Institut Polytechnique de Paris
Clément Sternberger: UEA - Unité d'Économie Appliquée - ENSTA Paris - École Nationale Supérieure de Techniques Avancées - IP Paris - Institut Polytechnique de Paris
Gabriel Vernhes: UEA - Unité d'Économie Appliquée - ENSTA Paris - École Nationale Supérieure de Techniques Avancées - IP Paris - Institut Polytechnique de Paris

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Identify which scientific advances support technological innovation is a very dynamic area of study. Recent literature on this subject proposes two heterogene methods in order to answer this issue. Yamashita (2020) proposes the analysis of references and tracks patent citation while Ogawa and Kajikawa (2015) use an other approach, they make cluster of scientific articles and extract keywords for match them with patent data. They refer to two distinct conceptions of science to technology flows. Yamashita (2020) relies on the idea that the potential contribution of a scientific article comes from the proximity between prior knowledge whereas Ogawa and Kajikawa (2015) highlight a semantic proximity that suggests a simultaneous development of science and technology. In order to better understand the mechanisms of knowledge transfer and to better define the blurring of the boundary between science and technology, this article proposes to compare the predictions of these two indicators. To do so, we focus on the case of 3D printing technologies and use original data from the LENS project which make possible to link scientific articles and patents both on the dimensions of citations and authors-inventors. We relied on the DWPI patent database in order to gather complementary patent data, including texts. Based on these data, we run regressions to compare the prediction of both indicators on the citations received from patents by articles and patent published by scientific authors. Our preliminary result shows that, in the case of 3D printing, passed citations brings to lower predicting performances than the semantic similarity approach.

Date: 2021-09-14
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in European Policy for Intellectual Property 2022 (EPIP), University of Cambridge, Sep 2021, Cambridge, United Kingdom

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03989062

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().