name harmonization and classification issues · 9 koninklijke philips electronics n.v. netherlands...
TRANSCRIPT
Name harmonization and classification issues
Mosahid Khan Head, IP Statistics
Development and effective use of IP statistics Manila, December 17-19, 2013
Overview
Why do we need IP statistics by technology, institutional/industrial sectors, companies, etc.?
How to develop such data - methodologies
Future (methodological) work
Why do we need IP statistics broken-down by different criteria?
Institutional sectors
Method: algorithm/key-word search used to determine sectors
WIPO, OECD, Eurostat, etc.
Business sector share (%)
73.9 72.6 71.5 68.4 67.5 66.8 64.4 60.0 56.5 54.7 47.0 41.2 37.9 33.5 24.7
0
25
50
75
100
Dis
trib
utio
n o
f P
CT
ap
plica
tio
ns (
%)
Can
ada
New
Zea
land
Irela
nd
Aus
tralia
Rep
ublic
of K
orea
Isra
el
Turke
y
India
Spa
in
Singa
pore
Bra
zil
Sou
th A
frica
Mex
ico
Rus
sian
Fed
erat
ion
Malay
sia
Origin
Business Individual University Government/Research
WIPO: WIPO Statistics Database
Industrial sectors - patents
Squicciarini and Dernis (2013)
Method: concordance table / firm level data
Yale, MERIT, USPTO, Johnson/OECD, EC.
Industrial sectors - marks
0
5
10
15
20
Perc
enta
ge o
f to
tal C
lass C
ount
Agr
icul
ture
Bus
ines
s
Che
micals
Clo
thin
g
Con
stru
ctio
n
Hea
lth
Hou
seho
ld e
quipm
ent
Leisur
e & E
duca
tion
Res
earc
h & T
echn
olog
y
Trans
porta
tion
Class group
India - Office
Resident Non-resident
0
5
10
15
20
Perc
enta
ge o
f to
tal C
lass C
oun
t
Agr
icul
ture
Bus
ines
s
Che
micals
Clo
thin
g
Con
stru
ctio
n
Hea
lth
Hou
seho
ld e
quipm
ent
Leisur
e & E
duca
tion
Res
earc
h & T
echn
olog
y
Trans
porta
tion
Class group
China - Office
Resident Non-resident
WIPO Statistics Database
Technological fields - I
WIPO Statistics Database
Method: concordance table / firm level data / Key-word search, etc.
WIPO IPC-Technology
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
Ap
plica
tio
ns
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Publication year
Solar energy Fuel cell technology Wind energy technology Geothermal energy
Technological fields - II
WIPO Statistics Database
-0.453
-0.442
-0.372
-0.163
-0.159
-0.111
-0.091
-0.085
-0.025
-0.020
-0.006
0.103
0.149
0.199
0.231
0.289
Switzerland
Germany
Others
Australia
France
United Kingdom
Sweden
Netherlands
Japan
Republic of Korea
China
India
Canada
United States of America
Finland
Israel
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Computer technology
-0.371
-0.233
-0.081
-0.067
-0.009
0.023
0.061
0.079
0.116
0.154
0.254
0.290
0.307
0.444
0.490
0.787
Republic of Korea
Japan
Canada
China
Others
Sweden
Netherlands
United States of America
Germany
Italy
United Kingdom
Spain
France
Switzerland
Belgium
India
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Organic fine chemistry
Name harmonization
Method: algorithm
WIPO, EPO, OECD, USPTO, Eurostat, etc.
Thoma et al. (NBER WP), Magerman et al. (2006), etc. KONINKIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. PHILIPS ELECTRONICS, N.V.
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS, N. V.
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS NV KONINKLIJEKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V.
KONINLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTZRONICS N.V.
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS, N.V. KONINKLIJKE PHILIPPS ELECTRONICS N.V.
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N. V. KONINKLIJKJE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V.
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V., KONINKLIJKE PHILLIPS ELECTRONICS N.V.
KONINKLIKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. KONINKLIJKE PHLIPS ELECTRONICS N.V.
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECRONICS N.V. KONINGLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V.
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONIQUE N.V. KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONIC NV
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS PHILIPS ELECTRONIC N.V.
KONINKLIGKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONIC N. V.
KONINKLIJKC PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. KRONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS
KONINKLIIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS NV KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRPMOCS. N.V.
NINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS NV KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS B.V.
KNONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS, N. V. KONINKLIJKE, PHILIPS
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N V KONLNKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V.
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS, NV KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTTRONICS N.V.
PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V.
PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.
Name harmonization – WIPO method PCT name cleaning:
1. Formatting:
a. Capitalizing.
b. Removing special characters, such as “.”, “-“ etc.
c. Removing common words, such as “the”, “of”, “and” etc.
d. Standardizing company type, such as “ltd” to “limited” etc.
e. Reversing some names, such as “university of xxx” to “xxx university”.
f. Calculating similarity between all name pairs (Levenshtein distance)
g. Calculating similarity between all address pairs (Levenshtein distance)
2. Matching:
a. Automatic matching by standard names.
b. Automatic matching by matched name variations.
c. Semi-automatic (user confirmation) matching by maximum similarity of names.
d. Semi-automatic matching by maximum similarity of addresses.
e. Semi-automatic matching by key words assigned to top applicants.
3. Issues:
a. Do not match names with different company type.
b. Check address before matching names with different entity names.
c. Do not set up similarity threshold and apply automatic matching according to
similarity.
Name harmonization – WIPO example PCT
2012
1 ZTE CORPORATION China 3,906
2 PANASONIC CORPORATION Japan 2,951
3 SHARP KABUSHIKI KAISHA Japan 2,001
4 HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD. China 1,801
5 ROBERT BOSCH CORPORATION Germany 1,775
6 TOYOTA JIDOSHA KABUSHIKI KAISHA Japan 1,652
7 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED United States of America 1,305
8 SIEMENS AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT Germany 1,272
9 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. Netherlands 1,230
10 TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON (PUBL) Sweden 1,197
11 LG ELECTRONICS INC. Republic of Korea 1,094
12 MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORPORATION Japan 1,042
13 NEC CORPORATION Japan 999
14 FUJIFILM CORPORATION Japan 891
15 HITACHI, LTD. Japan 745
16 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. Republic of Korea 683
17 FUJITSU LIMITED Japan 671
18 NOKIA CORPORATION Finland 670
19 BASF SE Germany 644
20 INTEL CORPORATION United States of America 640
21 HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P.United States of America 620
22 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY United States of America 586
23 SONY CORPORATION Japan 578
24 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. Japan 566
25 SUMITOMO CHEMICAL COMPANY, LIMITED Japan 558
26 SANYO ELECTRIC CO., LTD. Japan 537
27 MICROSOFT CORPORATION United States of America 531
28 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATIONUnited States of America 528
29 CANON KABUSHIKI KAISHA Japan 480
30 MURATA MANUFACTURING CO., LTD. Japan 462
Applicant's nameRanking Origin
Future methodological work
Most of the work has focused on patent
Need to further improve methodology for IP data by industry
Name consolidation is needed to improve IP data by companies
Construction of patent portfolio of companies
