CA2255880A1 - A relational database system containing a multidimensional hierarchical model of interrelated subject categories with recognition capabilities - Google Patents
A relational database system containing a multidimensional hierarchical model of interrelated subject categories with recognition capabilities Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CA2255880A1 CA2255880A1 CA002255880A CA2255880A CA2255880A1 CA 2255880 A1 CA2255880 A1 CA 2255880A1 CA 002255880 A CA002255880 A CA 002255880A CA 2255880 A CA2255880 A CA 2255880A CA 2255880 A1 CA2255880 A1 CA 2255880A1
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- technical
- patents
- database
- scientific
- documents
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F16/00—Information retrieval; Database structures therefor; File system structures therefor
- G06F16/30—Information retrieval; Database structures therefor; File system structures therefor of unstructured textual data
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/912—Applications of a database
- Y10S707/923—Intellectual property
- Y10S707/924—Patent procedure
- Y10S707/929—Docketing
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/953—Organization of data
- Y10S707/954—Relational
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/953—Organization of data
- Y10S707/956—Hierarchical
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/953—Organization of data
- Y10S707/957—Multidimensional
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/99941—Database schema or data structure
- Y10S707/99944—Object-oriented database structure
- Y10S707/99945—Object-oriented database structure processing
Abstract
The present invention is a database and a method of producing that database which can be used to determine the meaning of scientific or technical documents, such as patents and/or technical or scientific publications and/or abstracts of these patents or publications, and to assign the technical documents to one or more scientific or technical categories within a multidimensional hierarchical model which reflects the business, scientific or technical interests of a business, scientific or technical entity or specialty.
Description
A RELATIONAL DATABASE SYSTEM CON'rATNlNG A MULTIDIMENSIONAL HII~RARCHICAL
MODEL OFINTERRELATED SUBIECT CATEGORIES WlTH R~'COGNITION CAPABlLlTlES
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention is a database. In particular, the present invention is multi-dimensional database that models a business or scientific or technical body of work. Relational databases are well known and have been used to manipulate discrete numerical values. There are many comrnercial databases available which permit the user to build relationships between tables and some of ~ese databases allow large text ~lelds to be stored and manipulated.
However, the prior art does not disclose a database system that can:
1) import and parse complex technical documents containing complex fields;
MODEL OFINTERRELATED SUBIECT CATEGORIES WlTH R~'COGNITION CAPABlLlTlES
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention is a database. In particular, the present invention is multi-dimensional database that models a business or scientific or technical body of work. Relational databases are well known and have been used to manipulate discrete numerical values. There are many comrnercial databases available which permit the user to build relationships between tables and some of ~ese databases allow large text ~lelds to be stored and manipulated.
However, the prior art does not disclose a database system that can:
1) import and parse complex technical documents containing complex fields;
2) analyze the technical content of the documents in order to extract the meaning and assign these documents to one or more categories within a multidimensional hierarchy;
3) utilize mathematical formula to intenelate the different levels of the multidimensional hierarchy and derive higher (more abstract) me~nin~
4) manipulate the parsed fields, the text fields and/or the categorizations to produce graphical and spreadsheet-like displays which allow the user to readily discern an overall pattern in the intensity of patent and/or research activity across a span of years;
~) manipulate the parsed fields, the text fields andlor the categolizations to produce graphical and spreadsheet-like displays which allow the user to readily identify trends and discontinuities in the overall pattern in the intensity of patent and/or research activity across a span of years, 6) allow the categorization to be easily verified l)y displaying the technical documents and/or abstracts of those documents and/or patent claims within one or more categories to which it was described in 2);
7) allow engineers or scientists to evaluate the technical details of individual patents andlor scientific or technical literature and to capture this CA 022~880 1998-11-18 evaluation into subject-specific tables which capture the essence of the document into soltable discrete fields;
8) link the relational database containing some or all of the above capabilities to an electronic source of the full text or abstracts of US
patents and/or foreign patents and/or foreign patent applications. The full text of these patents and/or applications may be stored in a database, on a CD-ROM, on a LAN, on a WAN or on the Internet.
Mathematical methods similar to weighted sum have been used against numerical measurements based on physical phenomena to measure contributions to gross mechanical properties. An example is a weight average of polymer concentrations of a particular molecular weight and their contributions to the overall gross physical properties of the polymer.
These methods have not been suggested as a means of capturing the technical content of complex documents such as patents or technical documents and calculating the contribution of each patent or technical document to an abstract scientific or business discipline by taking into account the wei~hting factors which represent the stored cumulative expertise of a tearn of experts in the scientii~lc or business discipline. In palticular, there has been no suggestion of using this method to identify pattems of research efforts as reflected in the patents or technical publications obtained by a scientific or business entity. More particularly, there l~as been no suggestion of using such methods to identify trends and discontinuities in the overall pattems of research efforts as reflected in the patents obtained by a scienti~lc or business entity.These types of mathematical relationships are most easily determined by the use of electronic databases.
SUMMARY OF THE IN~IENTION
The present invention is a database system and a method of producing that database which can be used to assign scientific or technical docurnents, such as patents and/or technical or scientific publications and/or abstracts of these patents or publications, to one or more scienti~lc or technical categories within a multidimensional hierarchical model which reflects the business, scientific or technical interests of a business, scientific or technical entity or specialty. Lower level categories which reflect scientific concepts and technology may be recognized and ~ ned by use of a set of expert technical searches (ETS). Higher level, more abstract, concepts may be recognized and assigned by mathematically manipulating the matrix of lower level scientific andtechnology concepts, in combination with a matrix of contributions to hi~her level concepts, which reflects the stored cllm~ tive expertise of a team of technical or scientific experts. The population of each category, within the multidimensional hierarchy may be used to prepare graphical and/or tabular overviews which reflect the research activity within a business or technical entity or specialty over a span of years and across an lmlimited number of ~imen~ions.
The graphical and/or tabular overviews allow trends and discontinuities to be readily identified. The ~parelll trends and discontinuities may be verified by e~mining the individual documents and/or abstracts and/or patent clairns, and/orall associated fields which contribute to both the overall trends and any specific trends within a business entity or technical specialty. Specific detail on individual documents and/or abstracts and/or claims may also be captured in discrete fields and linked to the categories within the hierarchical model and the technical documents and/or abs~acts and/or claims. All of the above data may also be linked to full-text sources of the documents.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
Figure 1 shows a schematic diagram of the database.
Figwe 2 shows one type of graphical display using the database of the present invention.
Figure 3 shows the graphical display for Example 3.
Figure 4 shows the graphical display of Table 6.
DESCRIPTl:ON OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
The present invention is a database system which contains a hierarchical model of a complex business, scientific or technical entity or specialty and the associated technical docllment.~, such as patents or scientific or CA 022~880 1998-11-18 WO 97146958 PCT/US97/o9i2g technical publications, or abstracts of those patents or publications, which reflect each aspect of that model. Each technical document may be assigned to one or more categories within the hierarchical model. The model and associated technical documents and/or abstracts andlor technical indexing may be used to d~ l~ine trends and disco~ ;es within the bounds of the model and may also be used to project unanticipated trends and discontinuities beyond the bounds of ~e model. The individual documents and/or abstracts within one or more categories or subsets of categories, may be displayed along with the corresponding US claims and/or European granted or application claims by use of a relational database which is viewed through a computerized graphical interface.
This database disaggregates a set of patents and/or technical docurnents into discrete technical categories by use of a set of pre-de~med search protocols which match the scientific or technical concepts within the model. Thepre-defined search strategies automatically categorize the set of technical documents to f1t the multidimensional hierarchical model of a scienti~lc or business discipline. The pre-defined search strategies may be conducted on a commercial database system and the results of these searches stored in a local electronic database. Alternatively, the pre-defined search strategies may be conducted in a local electronic database c~ nt~inin~ records captured from a commercial database system or by a combination of these two methods. The categorization may then be used by the relational database to identify trends and discn~ ;es in the research efforts represented by the technology in the underlying technical documents and/or patents. The categorization may also be used to allow the technical experts to drill-down and examine the underlying documents and/or abstracts and/or claims which contribute to these trends and discontinllities.
The overall goal of this method is to use this model to identify unanticipated trends and discontinuities in the pattern of research effort in a technical, scientif1c or business entity or discipline as reflected by the technical documents and/or patents obtained by that scientific or business entity or discipline, where the overall pattem itself has been previously hidden due to both the complexity of the individual documents and the large number of docnment~
being considered. ln addition, this method of analysis may be used to conf rm W O 97146958 PCT~US97/09729 anticipated trends and discontinuifies in the pattern of researc~t effort in a technical, scientific or business entity or discipline as reflected by the technical documents and/or patents obtained by that scientific or business entity or discipline, where the overall pattern itself has been previously hidden due to both the complexity of the individual documents and the large number of documents being considered.
The documents and/or abstracts and/or claims and/or technical in~ in~ may be electronically stored in a relational database and linked to the categorization which reflects the overall hierarchical model. The documents and/or abstracts and/or claims and/or technical indexing may be displayed on a colllpul~,ized graphical interface. All of the documents may be displayed or only those documents within one or more categories may be displayed or only those documents within a subset of one or more categories may be displayed.
Subsets of all of the docl.ment~ and/or subsets of one or more of the categoriesmay be selected by further searching of any of the stored data. These subsets ofdocuments and/or abstracts and/or claims may be displayed on a computerized graphical interface.
The relational database can also contain subject-specific tables of technical details such as catalyst precursors, cocatalysts, reaction conditions,reactor types, or product characteristics, which are captured in a discrete form by scientists evaluating the underlying patents or technical documents.
The relational database can also contain links to full-text sources of patents or technical documents either in a database, on a CD-ROM, a local LAN, a Wide-Area-LAN or on the Internet. The ret~-ieved full-text patents may include the full text of US and/or foreign patents or published patent applications and may also include images of the full patents or a combination of text and images. The retrieved full text technical documents may also include the full text and or images of scientific or technical publications.
The present database can be used to answer a number of questions.
The database can be used to identify the overall pattern of research activity, as reflected in the number of patents or technical documents. The database can alsobe used to identify trends and discontim-ities across the multidimensional CA 022~880 1998-11-18 WO 97/469~8 PCT/US97109729 hierarchy which is needed to model complex scientific, technical and business disciplines. Specifically this database can pose questions such as:
"What are the interesting areas within the boundaries of this model?"
"What change has occurred in the area of catalytic cracking?"
"Where have competitor companies concentrated their research efforts as reflected in the number of patent applications or technical publications over the past lO years?"
"To what areas have competitor companies moved their top researchers?"
"Which patents have used a particular catalyst in combination with a particular cocatalyst with a particular solvent for a polymerization of a particular monomer?"
"Which companies are the top 15 most active in the area of biopolymers and what sub-specialties have they pursued over the last 10 years?"
In order to create a colllpulel system which can answer higher level questions such as these, the computer system must have a pre-def~ed model of the overall scientific or business discipline and the computer system must have already analyzed the technical content of each patent or technical document withrespect to that model. The system of sophisticated technical searches and the method of applying those searches to a set of technical documents, such as patents, to categorize those documents to match a multidimensional hierarchy which models a scientific or business entity or discipline is the subject of this patent memo.
The relational database can also contain subject-speci~c tables of technical details such as catalyst precursors, cocatalysts, reaction conditions,reactor types, product characteristics, which are captured in a discrete form byscientists evaluating the underlying patents. The original classification serves to group similar patents together. An individual scientist or engineer may then evaluate each patent in a particular group and capture the essential details of each invention into a subject-specific table which can be linked back to the original documents and/or abstracts and to the original categorization. The expert analysis can also feed back into the categori~ation of the patents to enhance the categorization achievable by sophisticated technical searches.
Figure 1 shows a high-level overview of the ~l~t~b~e design covered by this invention, with increasing levels of abstraction. Stage I is theleast abstract and Stage VI is the most abstract.
Stages I and II represent well known methods of ~le~lin~ with collections of full-text patents and semi-or~ni7e~1 analyses of those collections of patents in the form of spreadsheets or small databases. Stage III through VI
represent the subject of this invention whereby increasingly abstract concepts and overviews can be derived from a collection of electronically available patent abstracts, andlor technical document~, technical in-l~xing, and patent claims.
Stage I represents the actual patents or technical documents, whether in a stack of paper copies or in an electronic collection on a CD-ROM, in a database, on a LAN or on the Internet.
Stage II represents commonly used methods of analyzing full-text patents and/or technical documents and storing that patent-by-patent analysis inthe form of subject-specific spreadsheets, and small databases. An enhancement represented by the current invention is that these detailed analyses can then beelectronically linked to a given patent and/or patent family and electronically displayed along with the Patent Abstracts and/or Patent Claims and/or technical documents.
Stages III through VI represent the database design of this invention. Stage III represents the electronic capture of Patent Abstracts, and/or technical documents and the parsing of the complex, multi-entity data fields which usually accompany these Patent Abstracts, such as the Patent Inventors, Patent Numbers, Patent Companies (Assignees), Patent Legal Status and Patent Priority data. For example, the Parsed Patent Number Record would capture a separate record for each patent equivalent including the patent number, publication date and patent status. Similar levels of detail are captured for each parsed field. Also represented at this level is the electronic capture of the USClaims and the European Claims ~granted patent and published applications~ and associated information such as inventor and assignee. All of these fields are electronically linked and may be electronically displayed as a set of info~nation pertinent to one particular patent and/or patent family on a coln~ul~lized CA 022~880 1998-11-18 graphical interface. Technical Documents may be similarly captured and the associated complex fields parsed to yield norrn~li7.ed data.
Stage IV represents the design of a Customized Technical Subject Hierarchy which models the specific interests of a business entity or technical or scientific specialty and the many facets of that entity or specialty. The hierarchical model consists of two or more levels, each level con~i~tin~ of sets of categories which de~me the concepts being modeled. For example, this method models business, scientific, or technical entities andlor specialties at two levels in the same sense as a Genus-Species relationship. The higher level terms would correspond to a broader, more abstract genus and the lower level categories would correspond to a more specific set of sub-categories corresponding to the species. A multiplicity of levels can be employed to capture complex topics which require more than two levels of abstraction.
This Technical Subject lIierarchy is used to create a set of sophisticated expert technical searches (ETS), using the best chemical and technical indexing available along with the text of the patent abstracts and/or the patent clairns and/or the technical document. An expelt search is created to identify patents or technical documents that are pertinent to each individual category within the Customized Technical Subject Hierarchy and the results of these searches are electronically stored in tables represented by Stage V. The stored results are electronically linked to the colTesponding patent and/or patent farnily. Stage IV Automatically feeds into Stage V.
The set of expelt searches represented by Stage IV can be om~tically executed against a new set of patents and/or technical documents.
This new set of patents and/or technical documents may represent either recentlypublished patents or technical documents and/or recently identified patents or technical documents and/or older collections of patents or technical documents which are now being captured with the methods of this invention.
Stage V represents the stored assignment of each patent to one or more of the categolies in the Customized Technical Subject Hierarchy of Stage IV. By this approach, each category is populated with records that match the search criteria. The automatic execution of expelt technical searches analyze the CA 022~880 1998-11-18 WO 97146958 PCT/US97/~9729 _ g _ in~lexin~, abstract, text and/or claims for each patent and assign each patent and/or technical document to one or more categories in the Customized Technical Subject Hierarchy of Stage IV. Additionally, Stage V includes one or more Fractional Contribution Matrices which may be used to derive more abstract concepts from the exi~ting categorization. The Fractional Contribution Matrices are created by collecting the combined expertise of acknowledged experts in a technical or scientific field and representing this expertise in a stored matrix. This Fractional Contribution Matrix represents the cllm~ tive expertise of a set of technical experts as to how much a lower level scientific or technology category will contribute to a higher-level, more abstract concept.
The database system allows patents and/or technical documents to be electronically captured and analyzed at a convenient time. This set of analyzed patents and/or technical documents may then be used to identify trends and disco~ ies in the overall pattern of research efforts represented by the set of patents or technical documents. These trends and discontinuities may be identified any time following the analysis of the set of patents and/or technical documents. The stored analysis may be used minutes, days, months or years later.
Stage V and the Parsed data from Stage III feed into Stage VI.
Stage VI represents a high-level overview of a business, scientific or technicalentity or specialty and provides a method for grasping the pattern of research effort represented by a collection of patents or technical documents. These patterns are obscure at Levels I and II, and can only be clearly observed after pul~uillg the methods of this invention to achieve the higher level abstraction represented by Stages III through VI.
The dashed line fiom Stage V to Stage I represents the fact that the data stored in the database, and all associated analyses of Stages II through VI, may be used to identify patents and/or technical documents of particular interest for a particular application. The patent numbers for this set of patents may then be used as unique identifiers to electronically link to full text sources of patents and display the full text and associated graphic images of the set of patents. The electronic full text sources of these patents may be on a CD-ROM, in a database, CA 022~880 1998-11-18 a LAN or on the Internet. Uni~ue Identifiers may similarly be used to link to sources of full-text technical or scientific documents.
I. l~educin~ Unstructured Text to Fit a Multidimensional Database The unstructured text in technical documents is reduced to fit a multidimensional hierarchy which models a complex system of scientific or business information, such as that represented by the body of patents pertinent to a particular scienti~lc or business discipline. This method lltili7es sophisticated expert technical searches (ETS) to automatically categorize technical documents,such as patents or scientific publications. This method disaggregates a set of patents or technical documents into discrete technical categories by use of a set of pre-de~lned search protocols to assign each document to one or more categories. A complex set of technical and/or scientific search strategies may be produced to identify and automatically categorize documents to fit a pre-definedmatrix of technical categories. The matrix of technical categories models a scientific, engineering or business area and may consist of hundreds of categories on one or more levels of abstraction.
Each category has a uni(lue set of characteristic terrns associated with it. For each category a predefined set of search parameters would be created comprised of technical search terms such as US Patent Classification Tntçrn~tional Patent Classification Technical Indexing Terms Chemical Structures Chemical Formulas Registry Numbers Chemical Codes Polymer Codes Database-Specific Codes and Descriptors Title Text Abstract Text Full Text of original documents and/or patents The expert technical and/or scientific searches (ETS) use all the expertise of a skilled technical searcher and capture that expertise in a set of pre-defined search strategies. These pre-defined search strategies may be run against one or more sets of technical documents, such as patents assigned to a particular business or scientific entity or in a particular technical specialty. The pre-def'med search strategies automatically categorize the set of technical documents to fit the multi~limen.cional hierarchical model of a scientific or business discipline. The pre-defmed search strategies may be conducted on a commercial database system and the results stored in a local electronic database or the pre-defined search strategies may be stored and executed in a local electronic d~t~b~ee COilL~ records captured fi-om a commercial database system. The categorization may then be used to identify trends and discontinuities in the research efforts represented by the technology in the underlying technical documents and/or patents. Furthermore, mathematical relationships may be applied against the matrix of technical categories to extract hidden details andpatterns and to generate additional levels of abstraction.
Example 1 shows the logic for automatically assigning patents to a pre-defined subject-specif1c-hierarchy, using a series of expert technical searches (ETS).
Similar methods could also be used to automatically categorize scientific and/ortechnical publications.
Example I - ~lltc)m~tically Assigning Patents to Categories Within a Hierarchical Model of a Business or Technical Specialty Create a Subject Hierarchy which models a complex business or technical entity For each Subject in the Hierarchy Create an expert technical search (ETS) Apply the expert technical sea~ch against a set of patent data For each patent which matches the expelt technical search (ETS) criteria create a record in a table indicating the subject and the patent's unique identifier Example 2 shows a portion of a Subject Hierarchy which could be used to model a business or technical entity. For each cate~oly within the Subject Hierarchy, in Exarnple 2, an expert technical search (ETS) would be created which would use all the expertise of a skilled information specialist to capture patents or technical documents that ~lt that subject category. Note that the hierarchy in Example 2 makes no attempt to categorize all Biopolymers, but rather only categorizes those Biopolymers of interest to a particular business or technical specialty.
Example 2 A Partial Hierarchy representing the Interests of a Particular Business or Technical Specialty 1000 Biopolymers 1010 Phosphorus-Modif~led Biopolymers 1020 Polyester-type Biopolymers 1030 Biopolymers as Metal Supports Example 3 shows two sample expert technical searches (ETS) which could be created to identify those patents or technical documents which should be assigned to subjects within the Partial Subject Hierarchy of Example 2. Example 3 shows the expert technical searches needed to identify patents which should beassigned to category 1010 (Phosphorus-Modified Biopolymers) and to category 1020 (Polyester-type Biopolymers) within the Subject Hierarchy of Example 2.
~xample 3 Expelt Technical Searches Created to Achieve Optimum Recall and Specificity within the Limits of the Available Indexing System(s) 1010 Phosphorus-Modified Biopolymers 1: P0599/PI (S) M2460/PI
2: (2001/KS > 0201/KS) and (C08L-001:/IC or C08L-003:/lC or C08L-005:/IC or 1985/KS) 3: (BIOPOLYMER~LT or CELLULOSE/LT or CELLULOSIC RESIN/LT or NATURAL
RESIN/LT or POLYSACCHARIDE/LT or HYDROXYETHYL CELLULOSE/LT or HYDROXYPROPYL CELLULOSE/LT) LINK (PHOSPHORUS ORGANIC/LT or PHOSPHORUS CONTAINING ACID/LT) 1 or2Or3 WO 97/46958 PCTtUS97/09729 1020 Polyester-type Biopolymers 1: /LT biopolymer/p.polycster/p 2: (1291/KS or C08G-063/06/IC or polycster/p/LT) and (*biosynthesis/it or C12P-007/42/IC or C12P~07/62/IC) ~ lor2 The expert subject searches in E~xample 3 would be further modified and customized to fit the particular needs of a specific hierarchical model. For example, the overall database might be focused on oil well drilling additives or it might be focused on cosmetic formulations. The searches would be further refined to selectively retrieve one set of patents or technical documents for a database focused on fluid loss control additives, for use in oil well drilling fluid additives, and to selectively rehieve a different set of patents or technical documents for a database focused on cosmetic formulations.
II. Multidimensional Tabular and Graphical Display of Data In the preceding steps, each patent has l~een automatically assigned to one or more categories within the Subject-Specific-Hierarchy and linked to the parent patent record in the relational database. Also in preceding steps, the complex, multi-entity data fields have been parsed to multi-field tables and linked to the parent patent or technical document record in the relational database. Table 3 and Figure 2 show two of the simplest displays possible using these Subject-Categories.
Table 2 shows a portion of the table which stores the assigned Subject-Categories. These are the same Subject-Categoly assignments that are created by using stored expelt technical searches (ETS) to assign individual patents or technical documents to the categories within a Subject-Specific-Hierarchy. These stored categoly assignments may be used to create a tabular display of the subject-assignments over a span of years as shown in Table 3.
These categories may also be used to create a graphical display of the subject-assignment.~ over a span of years, as shown in Figure 2.
CA 022~880 1998-11-18 Table 2 Category Year Unique ID
104 Drill Bit Topology l9g2 12345678 104 Drill Bit Topology 1984 23456789 104 Drill Bit Topology l9gS 34567890 104 Drill Bit Topology 1986 45678901 104 Dr:l Bit Topology 1986 56789012 104 Dr: l BitTopology 198~ 67890123 104 Dr l B t Topology 1987 78901234 104 Dlill B t Topology 1987 89012345 104 Drill Bit Topology 1987 90123456 104 Drill Bit Topolo~y 1987 99123456 203 Drill Fluid Rheo ogy 1982 12345678 203 Drill Fluid Rheo ogy 1983 78123456 203 Drill Fluid Rheology 1983 67123456 203 Drill Fluid Rheology 1983 56123434 203 Drill Fluid Rheology 1983 45123345 203 Drill FluidRheology 1984 23456789 203 Drill Fluid Rheology 1984 23123435 Table 3 Counts of Patents per Category per Year Category 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 104 Drill Bit Topology 1 1 1 3 4 203 Drill FluidRheology 1 4 2 3 3 3 301 ProppingAgents 19 lS 4 18 31 Sl 320 Acidification Agents 10 10 17 20 14 7 350 Fungicides 15 23 19 11 6 3 There is no limit to the number of dimensions which can be displayed in this fashion. More complex tabular displays and graphical displays may be created by linking the category populations ~i.e. the count of patents assigned to each category) to the multi-entity data fields (e.g. patent number, patent status, patent publication date~ company data, inventor data) and creating multidimensional tabular and graphical displays. Example 3 shows the logic of creating a display by company, of the top 15 inventors, by inventor (one inventor per page), by subject-category (one subject-category per line), per year (one CA 022~880 1998-ll-18 count of patents per column) wi~ totals aCcllm~ ting the total number of patentsfiled by a particular inventor in a particular company across a span of years.
Example 3 .
For each Company For a selected set of Subject-Categories For a selected range of years Identify the 15 Inventors with the highest number of patents For the ~nventor with the highest number of patents Produce a tabular display by Subject C'atego~y by Year Produce a graphical display by Subject Category by ~ear For the Inventor with the next highest number of patents Produce a tabular display by Subject Category by Year Produce a graphical display by Subject Category by Year For the Inventor with the next highest number of patents Produce a tabular display by Subject Category by Year Produce a graphical display by Subject Category by Year etc.
The inventors may be sorted by the total number of patents filed within a selected set of subject-categories, within a selected range of years, within a particular company and displayed in a series of tabular and graphical displays.
As shown in Figure 3, the first page would display a tabular or graphical overview of the number of patents filed by the most active inventor, in each category, within company XYZ, over a span of years. The next page would display a tabular or graphical overview of the number of patents filed by the next most active inventor, in each categoly, within company XYZ, over a span of years and so on for the top 15 inventors. A display of this type could be used to identify trends and discontinuities in the research activity of the most prolific inventors within a company. Similar methods could be used to display the activities of authors of technical and/or scientific documents.
CA 022~880 1998-11-18 WO 97/469~i8 PCT/US97/09729 III. Multidimensional Hierarchy of Interrelated Subject Cate~ories This invention further includes the method of deriving more abstract concepts from the set of stored category assignments, by applying m~them~tical methods to extract these more abstract concepts. These more abstract concepts can not be readily identified by the application of expert technical searches alone. However, a method of quantifying the research effort expended in the areas defined by each of these more abstract concepts is of great value. These more abstract concepts can be identified by the use of both the matrix of technical and/or scientific concepts, identified by the application ofexpert technical searches, and a matrix of stored expelt opinion. The matrix of stored expert opinion represents the cllm~ tive opinion of a group of expert technical staff and/or scientists, on the fractional contribution of each technical and/or scientific concept to each of the higher-level, more abstract concepts.
The present database includes a multidimensional hierarchy of subject categories wherein the different levels of the hierarchy are interrelated by a mathematical formula. The mathematical formula which interrelates the different levels takes the form of a sum of an aggregate count of unique items in a category multiplied by weighting factors for each category in the next higher (more abstract) level. ~ach higher (more abstract) level of the hierarchy is therefore a weighted sum of contributions from each category in the previous level. The aggregate count of unique items is arrived by modeling a scientific or business discipline based on the technical content of patents and/or technical documents in that scientific or business discipline. The weighting factors are derived by the cumulative knowledge of experts in that scientific or business discipline to reflect the impact of each technical category on the next the higher level of the hierarchy.
f(xl)=sum((attribute-l*weighting-factor-l)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-1)+...)f(x2)=sum((attribute- 1 *weighting-factor-2)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-2)+. ..) f(x3)=sum((affribute- 1 *weighting-factor-3)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-3)+. . .) In particular, these weighted averages may also be calculated across a span of years to reflect a multidimensional representation of research efforts across a span of technologies and across a span of years.
The Higher Level ~ubject Categories may be derived by matrix manipulation of two matrices, one representing the known subject category s~c~i~nment~ in a hierarchical model of a business or technical specialty, and the other matrix, representing the cllm~ tive knowledge of technical experts in a given b-l~iness or technical entil~ or specialty. Table 4 shows a two ~limçnsional matrix which represents the number of patents assigned to selected subject categories across a selected span of years. Table 4 may represent the patents filed by an entire company, or the patents filed in a palticular business ~;nl~lyl;se, or the patents filed by a particular inventor within a particular company or business enl~l~lise, as examples.
Table 4 Counts of 'atents per Cate rory per Year Category 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 104 Dr ll Bit Topology 1 0 1 1 3 4 203 Dr ll Fluid Rheology 1 4 2 3 3 3 301 ProppingAgents 19 15 4 18 31 51 320 Acidification Agents 10 10 17 20 14 7 350 Fungicides 15 23 19 l l 6 3 Table 5 represents the cllmlllAtive knowledge of a group of technical experts in a given business or technical entity. For example, Tal)le S may represent the collective opinion of a group of technical experts on the contribution of a patent in Drill Bit Topology to a series of higher level concepts. For example the cllm~ tive knowledge may say that a single patent in Drill Bit Topology would contribute .22 patent-units toward a theoretical patent in Orill Bit Deposition, .24 patent-units toward a theoretical patent in Drill Bit ColTosion, and .27 patent-units toward a theoretical patent in Fonnation Penetration.
Table 5 Fractional Contribution Matrix of Each Category to a Higher-Level Concept A Environ. E~nviron.
Drill Bit Drill Bit Fonnation Fonnation Impact of ~npact of Categ~ry Deposition Corrosion p~n~tr~ti~n Stability Fluid Trailings 104DrillBitTopolo~v 0.22 0.24 0.27 0.11 0.07 0.09 203Dri11FluidRheology 0.33 0.12 0.19 0.02 0.23 0.11 301 ProppingAgents 0.09 0.07 0.22 0.5 0.05 0.07 320~ri~1ifirnti~-nAgellts 0.12 0.33 0.19 0.06 0.22 0.08 350 Fungicides 0.05 0.04 0.21 O.OG 0.32 0.32 Table 6 represents the s~lmm~tion of the matrix multiplication of these two matrices leading to the estimate of the number of theoretical patents in ~ese higher level subjects. For example, the number of theoretical patents in Drill Bit Deposition would be derived by multiplying column A, which represents the cumulative opinion of a group of technical experts (Table 5), by ~e number of patents in each category for each year (Table 4) and surnming the contribution of each categor~ to the theoretical number of patents in Drill Bit Deposition. Table 6 displays the derived count of patents in each of these higher-level, more abstract concepts, across a span of years.
Table 6 Theoretical Count of Patents in a Higher-Level Concept Category 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 Drill Bit Deposition 4.21 5.02 4.23 5.78 6.42 7.45 Drill Bit Corrosion 5.59 5.75 7.13 8.9 8.11 7.32 Formation Penetration 9.69 10.79 8.75 10.91 12.12 14.83 l~ormation Stability 11.13 9.56 4.31 11.03 17.09 26.6 Environ. Irnpact of Fluid 8.25 .11.23 10.55 9.58 7.45 6.02 Environ. Impact of 7.13 9.65 8.03 6.8 5.81 5.78 Trailings Table 7 represents the calculation of the theoretical number of patents in Drill Bit Deposition which would be represented by a set of patents.
For each subject category from Table 4, the number of patents would be multiplied by the fiactional contribution of that subject category, from Table 5, Drill Bit Deposition in year 1982. The theoretical number of patents contributedby each category would be summed to arrive at a theoretica~ number of patents in Drill Bit Deposition in 1982.
Table 7 Sample Calculation of Drill Bit Deposition Patents in 1982 Fractional Theoretical Category 1982ContributionNumber of Patents 104 Drill Bit Topology 1 0.22 0.22 203 Drill Fluid Rheology 1 0.33 0.33 301 ProppingAgents 19 0.09 1.71 320 Acidification Agents 10 0.12 1.2 350 Fungicides 15 0.0~ 0.75 4.21 Figure 4 displays the data from Table 6 in a graphical display which allows the trends and discontinllities in the research patterns, represented by the count of theoretical patents, in the highel level, more abstract subjects in Table 6, to be observed. These trends and discontinuities were previously hidden due to both the complexity and length of each patent and/or technical document in the set of documents under review, and also due to the complexity of the higher level concepts themselves. These higher level concepts can not be searched by use of an expelt technical search (ETS) but rather must be derived from lower level concepts which can be searched using an expert technical search (ETS), using the methods of this invention.
~) manipulate the parsed fields, the text fields andlor the categolizations to produce graphical and spreadsheet-like displays which allow the user to readily identify trends and discontinuities in the overall pattern in the intensity of patent and/or research activity across a span of years, 6) allow the categorization to be easily verified l)y displaying the technical documents and/or abstracts of those documents and/or patent claims within one or more categories to which it was described in 2);
7) allow engineers or scientists to evaluate the technical details of individual patents andlor scientific or technical literature and to capture this CA 022~880 1998-11-18 evaluation into subject-specific tables which capture the essence of the document into soltable discrete fields;
8) link the relational database containing some or all of the above capabilities to an electronic source of the full text or abstracts of US
patents and/or foreign patents and/or foreign patent applications. The full text of these patents and/or applications may be stored in a database, on a CD-ROM, on a LAN, on a WAN or on the Internet.
Mathematical methods similar to weighted sum have been used against numerical measurements based on physical phenomena to measure contributions to gross mechanical properties. An example is a weight average of polymer concentrations of a particular molecular weight and their contributions to the overall gross physical properties of the polymer.
These methods have not been suggested as a means of capturing the technical content of complex documents such as patents or technical documents and calculating the contribution of each patent or technical document to an abstract scientific or business discipline by taking into account the wei~hting factors which represent the stored cumulative expertise of a tearn of experts in the scientii~lc or business discipline. In palticular, there has been no suggestion of using this method to identify pattems of research efforts as reflected in the patents or technical publications obtained by a scientific or business entity. More particularly, there l~as been no suggestion of using such methods to identify trends and discontinuities in the overall pattems of research efforts as reflected in the patents obtained by a scienti~lc or business entity.These types of mathematical relationships are most easily determined by the use of electronic databases.
SUMMARY OF THE IN~IENTION
The present invention is a database system and a method of producing that database which can be used to assign scientific or technical docurnents, such as patents and/or technical or scientific publications and/or abstracts of these patents or publications, to one or more scienti~lc or technical categories within a multidimensional hierarchical model which reflects the business, scientific or technical interests of a business, scientific or technical entity or specialty. Lower level categories which reflect scientific concepts and technology may be recognized and ~ ned by use of a set of expert technical searches (ETS). Higher level, more abstract, concepts may be recognized and assigned by mathematically manipulating the matrix of lower level scientific andtechnology concepts, in combination with a matrix of contributions to hi~her level concepts, which reflects the stored cllm~ tive expertise of a team of technical or scientific experts. The population of each category, within the multidimensional hierarchy may be used to prepare graphical and/or tabular overviews which reflect the research activity within a business or technical entity or specialty over a span of years and across an lmlimited number of ~imen~ions.
The graphical and/or tabular overviews allow trends and discontinuities to be readily identified. The ~parelll trends and discontinuities may be verified by e~mining the individual documents and/or abstracts and/or patent clairns, and/orall associated fields which contribute to both the overall trends and any specific trends within a business entity or technical specialty. Specific detail on individual documents and/or abstracts and/or claims may also be captured in discrete fields and linked to the categories within the hierarchical model and the technical documents and/or abs~acts and/or claims. All of the above data may also be linked to full-text sources of the documents.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
Figure 1 shows a schematic diagram of the database.
Figwe 2 shows one type of graphical display using the database of the present invention.
Figure 3 shows the graphical display for Example 3.
Figure 4 shows the graphical display of Table 6.
DESCRIPTl:ON OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
The present invention is a database system which contains a hierarchical model of a complex business, scientific or technical entity or specialty and the associated technical docllment.~, such as patents or scientific or CA 022~880 1998-11-18 WO 97146958 PCT/US97/o9i2g technical publications, or abstracts of those patents or publications, which reflect each aspect of that model. Each technical document may be assigned to one or more categories within the hierarchical model. The model and associated technical documents and/or abstracts andlor technical indexing may be used to d~ l~ine trends and disco~ ;es within the bounds of the model and may also be used to project unanticipated trends and discontinuities beyond the bounds of ~e model. The individual documents and/or abstracts within one or more categories or subsets of categories, may be displayed along with the corresponding US claims and/or European granted or application claims by use of a relational database which is viewed through a computerized graphical interface.
This database disaggregates a set of patents and/or technical docurnents into discrete technical categories by use of a set of pre-de~med search protocols which match the scientific or technical concepts within the model. Thepre-defined search strategies automatically categorize the set of technical documents to f1t the multidimensional hierarchical model of a scienti~lc or business discipline. The pre-defined search strategies may be conducted on a commercial database system and the results of these searches stored in a local electronic database. Alternatively, the pre-defined search strategies may be conducted in a local electronic database c~ nt~inin~ records captured from a commercial database system or by a combination of these two methods. The categorization may then be used by the relational database to identify trends and discn~ ;es in the research efforts represented by the technology in the underlying technical documents and/or patents. The categorization may also be used to allow the technical experts to drill-down and examine the underlying documents and/or abstracts and/or claims which contribute to these trends and discontinllities.
The overall goal of this method is to use this model to identify unanticipated trends and discontinuities in the pattern of research effort in a technical, scientif1c or business entity or discipline as reflected by the technical documents and/or patents obtained by that scientific or business entity or discipline, where the overall pattem itself has been previously hidden due to both the complexity of the individual documents and the large number of docnment~
being considered. ln addition, this method of analysis may be used to conf rm W O 97146958 PCT~US97/09729 anticipated trends and discontinuifies in the pattern of researc~t effort in a technical, scientific or business entity or discipline as reflected by the technical documents and/or patents obtained by that scientific or business entity or discipline, where the overall pattern itself has been previously hidden due to both the complexity of the individual documents and the large number of documents being considered.
The documents and/or abstracts and/or claims and/or technical in~ in~ may be electronically stored in a relational database and linked to the categorization which reflects the overall hierarchical model. The documents and/or abstracts and/or claims and/or technical indexing may be displayed on a colllpul~,ized graphical interface. All of the documents may be displayed or only those documents within one or more categories may be displayed or only those documents within a subset of one or more categories may be displayed.
Subsets of all of the docl.ment~ and/or subsets of one or more of the categoriesmay be selected by further searching of any of the stored data. These subsets ofdocuments and/or abstracts and/or claims may be displayed on a computerized graphical interface.
The relational database can also contain subject-specific tables of technical details such as catalyst precursors, cocatalysts, reaction conditions,reactor types, or product characteristics, which are captured in a discrete form by scientists evaluating the underlying patents or technical documents.
The relational database can also contain links to full-text sources of patents or technical documents either in a database, on a CD-ROM, a local LAN, a Wide-Area-LAN or on the Internet. The ret~-ieved full-text patents may include the full text of US and/or foreign patents or published patent applications and may also include images of the full patents or a combination of text and images. The retrieved full text technical documents may also include the full text and or images of scientific or technical publications.
The present database can be used to answer a number of questions.
The database can be used to identify the overall pattern of research activity, as reflected in the number of patents or technical documents. The database can alsobe used to identify trends and discontim-ities across the multidimensional CA 022~880 1998-11-18 WO 97/469~8 PCT/US97109729 hierarchy which is needed to model complex scientific, technical and business disciplines. Specifically this database can pose questions such as:
"What are the interesting areas within the boundaries of this model?"
"What change has occurred in the area of catalytic cracking?"
"Where have competitor companies concentrated their research efforts as reflected in the number of patent applications or technical publications over the past lO years?"
"To what areas have competitor companies moved their top researchers?"
"Which patents have used a particular catalyst in combination with a particular cocatalyst with a particular solvent for a polymerization of a particular monomer?"
"Which companies are the top 15 most active in the area of biopolymers and what sub-specialties have they pursued over the last 10 years?"
In order to create a colllpulel system which can answer higher level questions such as these, the computer system must have a pre-def~ed model of the overall scientific or business discipline and the computer system must have already analyzed the technical content of each patent or technical document withrespect to that model. The system of sophisticated technical searches and the method of applying those searches to a set of technical documents, such as patents, to categorize those documents to match a multidimensional hierarchy which models a scientific or business entity or discipline is the subject of this patent memo.
The relational database can also contain subject-speci~c tables of technical details such as catalyst precursors, cocatalysts, reaction conditions,reactor types, product characteristics, which are captured in a discrete form byscientists evaluating the underlying patents. The original classification serves to group similar patents together. An individual scientist or engineer may then evaluate each patent in a particular group and capture the essential details of each invention into a subject-specific table which can be linked back to the original documents and/or abstracts and to the original categorization. The expert analysis can also feed back into the categori~ation of the patents to enhance the categorization achievable by sophisticated technical searches.
Figure 1 shows a high-level overview of the ~l~t~b~e design covered by this invention, with increasing levels of abstraction. Stage I is theleast abstract and Stage VI is the most abstract.
Stages I and II represent well known methods of ~le~lin~ with collections of full-text patents and semi-or~ni7e~1 analyses of those collections of patents in the form of spreadsheets or small databases. Stage III through VI
represent the subject of this invention whereby increasingly abstract concepts and overviews can be derived from a collection of electronically available patent abstracts, andlor technical document~, technical in-l~xing, and patent claims.
Stage I represents the actual patents or technical documents, whether in a stack of paper copies or in an electronic collection on a CD-ROM, in a database, on a LAN or on the Internet.
Stage II represents commonly used methods of analyzing full-text patents and/or technical documents and storing that patent-by-patent analysis inthe form of subject-specific spreadsheets, and small databases. An enhancement represented by the current invention is that these detailed analyses can then beelectronically linked to a given patent and/or patent family and electronically displayed along with the Patent Abstracts and/or Patent Claims and/or technical documents.
Stages III through VI represent the database design of this invention. Stage III represents the electronic capture of Patent Abstracts, and/or technical documents and the parsing of the complex, multi-entity data fields which usually accompany these Patent Abstracts, such as the Patent Inventors, Patent Numbers, Patent Companies (Assignees), Patent Legal Status and Patent Priority data. For example, the Parsed Patent Number Record would capture a separate record for each patent equivalent including the patent number, publication date and patent status. Similar levels of detail are captured for each parsed field. Also represented at this level is the electronic capture of the USClaims and the European Claims ~granted patent and published applications~ and associated information such as inventor and assignee. All of these fields are electronically linked and may be electronically displayed as a set of info~nation pertinent to one particular patent and/or patent family on a coln~ul~lized CA 022~880 1998-11-18 graphical interface. Technical Documents may be similarly captured and the associated complex fields parsed to yield norrn~li7.ed data.
Stage IV represents the design of a Customized Technical Subject Hierarchy which models the specific interests of a business entity or technical or scientific specialty and the many facets of that entity or specialty. The hierarchical model consists of two or more levels, each level con~i~tin~ of sets of categories which de~me the concepts being modeled. For example, this method models business, scientific, or technical entities andlor specialties at two levels in the same sense as a Genus-Species relationship. The higher level terms would correspond to a broader, more abstract genus and the lower level categories would correspond to a more specific set of sub-categories corresponding to the species. A multiplicity of levels can be employed to capture complex topics which require more than two levels of abstraction.
This Technical Subject lIierarchy is used to create a set of sophisticated expert technical searches (ETS), using the best chemical and technical indexing available along with the text of the patent abstracts and/or the patent clairns and/or the technical document. An expelt search is created to identify patents or technical documents that are pertinent to each individual category within the Customized Technical Subject Hierarchy and the results of these searches are electronically stored in tables represented by Stage V. The stored results are electronically linked to the colTesponding patent and/or patent farnily. Stage IV Automatically feeds into Stage V.
The set of expelt searches represented by Stage IV can be om~tically executed against a new set of patents and/or technical documents.
This new set of patents and/or technical documents may represent either recentlypublished patents or technical documents and/or recently identified patents or technical documents and/or older collections of patents or technical documents which are now being captured with the methods of this invention.
Stage V represents the stored assignment of each patent to one or more of the categolies in the Customized Technical Subject Hierarchy of Stage IV. By this approach, each category is populated with records that match the search criteria. The automatic execution of expelt technical searches analyze the CA 022~880 1998-11-18 WO 97146958 PCT/US97/~9729 _ g _ in~lexin~, abstract, text and/or claims for each patent and assign each patent and/or technical document to one or more categories in the Customized Technical Subject Hierarchy of Stage IV. Additionally, Stage V includes one or more Fractional Contribution Matrices which may be used to derive more abstract concepts from the exi~ting categorization. The Fractional Contribution Matrices are created by collecting the combined expertise of acknowledged experts in a technical or scientific field and representing this expertise in a stored matrix. This Fractional Contribution Matrix represents the cllm~ tive expertise of a set of technical experts as to how much a lower level scientific or technology category will contribute to a higher-level, more abstract concept.
The database system allows patents and/or technical documents to be electronically captured and analyzed at a convenient time. This set of analyzed patents and/or technical documents may then be used to identify trends and disco~ ies in the overall pattern of research efforts represented by the set of patents or technical documents. These trends and discontinuities may be identified any time following the analysis of the set of patents and/or technical documents. The stored analysis may be used minutes, days, months or years later.
Stage V and the Parsed data from Stage III feed into Stage VI.
Stage VI represents a high-level overview of a business, scientific or technicalentity or specialty and provides a method for grasping the pattern of research effort represented by a collection of patents or technical documents. These patterns are obscure at Levels I and II, and can only be clearly observed after pul~uillg the methods of this invention to achieve the higher level abstraction represented by Stages III through VI.
The dashed line fiom Stage V to Stage I represents the fact that the data stored in the database, and all associated analyses of Stages II through VI, may be used to identify patents and/or technical documents of particular interest for a particular application. The patent numbers for this set of patents may then be used as unique identifiers to electronically link to full text sources of patents and display the full text and associated graphic images of the set of patents. The electronic full text sources of these patents may be on a CD-ROM, in a database, CA 022~880 1998-11-18 a LAN or on the Internet. Uni~ue Identifiers may similarly be used to link to sources of full-text technical or scientific documents.
I. l~educin~ Unstructured Text to Fit a Multidimensional Database The unstructured text in technical documents is reduced to fit a multidimensional hierarchy which models a complex system of scientific or business information, such as that represented by the body of patents pertinent to a particular scienti~lc or business discipline. This method lltili7es sophisticated expert technical searches (ETS) to automatically categorize technical documents,such as patents or scientific publications. This method disaggregates a set of patents or technical documents into discrete technical categories by use of a set of pre-de~lned search protocols to assign each document to one or more categories. A complex set of technical and/or scientific search strategies may be produced to identify and automatically categorize documents to fit a pre-definedmatrix of technical categories. The matrix of technical categories models a scientific, engineering or business area and may consist of hundreds of categories on one or more levels of abstraction.
Each category has a uni(lue set of characteristic terrns associated with it. For each category a predefined set of search parameters would be created comprised of technical search terms such as US Patent Classification Tntçrn~tional Patent Classification Technical Indexing Terms Chemical Structures Chemical Formulas Registry Numbers Chemical Codes Polymer Codes Database-Specific Codes and Descriptors Title Text Abstract Text Full Text of original documents and/or patents The expert technical and/or scientific searches (ETS) use all the expertise of a skilled technical searcher and capture that expertise in a set of pre-defined search strategies. These pre-defined search strategies may be run against one or more sets of technical documents, such as patents assigned to a particular business or scientific entity or in a particular technical specialty. The pre-def'med search strategies automatically categorize the set of technical documents to fit the multi~limen.cional hierarchical model of a scientific or business discipline. The pre-defmed search strategies may be conducted on a commercial database system and the results stored in a local electronic database or the pre-defined search strategies may be stored and executed in a local electronic d~t~b~ee COilL~ records captured fi-om a commercial database system. The categorization may then be used to identify trends and discontinuities in the research efforts represented by the technology in the underlying technical documents and/or patents. Furthermore, mathematical relationships may be applied against the matrix of technical categories to extract hidden details andpatterns and to generate additional levels of abstraction.
Example 1 shows the logic for automatically assigning patents to a pre-defined subject-specif1c-hierarchy, using a series of expert technical searches (ETS).
Similar methods could also be used to automatically categorize scientific and/ortechnical publications.
Example I - ~lltc)m~tically Assigning Patents to Categories Within a Hierarchical Model of a Business or Technical Specialty Create a Subject Hierarchy which models a complex business or technical entity For each Subject in the Hierarchy Create an expert technical search (ETS) Apply the expert technical sea~ch against a set of patent data For each patent which matches the expelt technical search (ETS) criteria create a record in a table indicating the subject and the patent's unique identifier Example 2 shows a portion of a Subject Hierarchy which could be used to model a business or technical entity. For each cate~oly within the Subject Hierarchy, in Exarnple 2, an expert technical search (ETS) would be created which would use all the expertise of a skilled information specialist to capture patents or technical documents that ~lt that subject category. Note that the hierarchy in Example 2 makes no attempt to categorize all Biopolymers, but rather only categorizes those Biopolymers of interest to a particular business or technical specialty.
Example 2 A Partial Hierarchy representing the Interests of a Particular Business or Technical Specialty 1000 Biopolymers 1010 Phosphorus-Modif~led Biopolymers 1020 Polyester-type Biopolymers 1030 Biopolymers as Metal Supports Example 3 shows two sample expert technical searches (ETS) which could be created to identify those patents or technical documents which should be assigned to subjects within the Partial Subject Hierarchy of Example 2. Example 3 shows the expert technical searches needed to identify patents which should beassigned to category 1010 (Phosphorus-Modified Biopolymers) and to category 1020 (Polyester-type Biopolymers) within the Subject Hierarchy of Example 2.
~xample 3 Expelt Technical Searches Created to Achieve Optimum Recall and Specificity within the Limits of the Available Indexing System(s) 1010 Phosphorus-Modified Biopolymers 1: P0599/PI (S) M2460/PI
2: (2001/KS > 0201/KS) and (C08L-001:/IC or C08L-003:/lC or C08L-005:/IC or 1985/KS) 3: (BIOPOLYMER~LT or CELLULOSE/LT or CELLULOSIC RESIN/LT or NATURAL
RESIN/LT or POLYSACCHARIDE/LT or HYDROXYETHYL CELLULOSE/LT or HYDROXYPROPYL CELLULOSE/LT) LINK (PHOSPHORUS ORGANIC/LT or PHOSPHORUS CONTAINING ACID/LT) 1 or2Or3 WO 97/46958 PCTtUS97/09729 1020 Polyester-type Biopolymers 1: /LT biopolymer/p.polycster/p 2: (1291/KS or C08G-063/06/IC or polycster/p/LT) and (*biosynthesis/it or C12P-007/42/IC or C12P~07/62/IC) ~ lor2 The expert subject searches in E~xample 3 would be further modified and customized to fit the particular needs of a specific hierarchical model. For example, the overall database might be focused on oil well drilling additives or it might be focused on cosmetic formulations. The searches would be further refined to selectively retrieve one set of patents or technical documents for a database focused on fluid loss control additives, for use in oil well drilling fluid additives, and to selectively rehieve a different set of patents or technical documents for a database focused on cosmetic formulations.
II. Multidimensional Tabular and Graphical Display of Data In the preceding steps, each patent has l~een automatically assigned to one or more categories within the Subject-Specific-Hierarchy and linked to the parent patent record in the relational database. Also in preceding steps, the complex, multi-entity data fields have been parsed to multi-field tables and linked to the parent patent or technical document record in the relational database. Table 3 and Figure 2 show two of the simplest displays possible using these Subject-Categories.
Table 2 shows a portion of the table which stores the assigned Subject-Categories. These are the same Subject-Categoly assignments that are created by using stored expelt technical searches (ETS) to assign individual patents or technical documents to the categories within a Subject-Specific-Hierarchy. These stored categoly assignments may be used to create a tabular display of the subject-assignments over a span of years as shown in Table 3.
These categories may also be used to create a graphical display of the subject-assignment.~ over a span of years, as shown in Figure 2.
CA 022~880 1998-11-18 Table 2 Category Year Unique ID
104 Drill Bit Topology l9g2 12345678 104 Drill Bit Topology 1984 23456789 104 Drill Bit Topology l9gS 34567890 104 Drill Bit Topology 1986 45678901 104 Dr:l Bit Topology 1986 56789012 104 Dr: l BitTopology 198~ 67890123 104 Dr l B t Topology 1987 78901234 104 Dlill B t Topology 1987 89012345 104 Drill Bit Topology 1987 90123456 104 Drill Bit Topolo~y 1987 99123456 203 Drill Fluid Rheo ogy 1982 12345678 203 Drill Fluid Rheo ogy 1983 78123456 203 Drill Fluid Rheology 1983 67123456 203 Drill Fluid Rheology 1983 56123434 203 Drill Fluid Rheology 1983 45123345 203 Drill FluidRheology 1984 23456789 203 Drill Fluid Rheology 1984 23123435 Table 3 Counts of Patents per Category per Year Category 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 104 Drill Bit Topology 1 1 1 3 4 203 Drill FluidRheology 1 4 2 3 3 3 301 ProppingAgents 19 lS 4 18 31 Sl 320 Acidification Agents 10 10 17 20 14 7 350 Fungicides 15 23 19 11 6 3 There is no limit to the number of dimensions which can be displayed in this fashion. More complex tabular displays and graphical displays may be created by linking the category populations ~i.e. the count of patents assigned to each category) to the multi-entity data fields (e.g. patent number, patent status, patent publication date~ company data, inventor data) and creating multidimensional tabular and graphical displays. Example 3 shows the logic of creating a display by company, of the top 15 inventors, by inventor (one inventor per page), by subject-category (one subject-category per line), per year (one CA 022~880 1998-ll-18 count of patents per column) wi~ totals aCcllm~ ting the total number of patentsfiled by a particular inventor in a particular company across a span of years.
Example 3 .
For each Company For a selected set of Subject-Categories For a selected range of years Identify the 15 Inventors with the highest number of patents For the ~nventor with the highest number of patents Produce a tabular display by Subject C'atego~y by Year Produce a graphical display by Subject Category by ~ear For the Inventor with the next highest number of patents Produce a tabular display by Subject Category by Year Produce a graphical display by Subject Category by Year For the Inventor with the next highest number of patents Produce a tabular display by Subject Category by Year Produce a graphical display by Subject Category by Year etc.
The inventors may be sorted by the total number of patents filed within a selected set of subject-categories, within a selected range of years, within a particular company and displayed in a series of tabular and graphical displays.
As shown in Figure 3, the first page would display a tabular or graphical overview of the number of patents filed by the most active inventor, in each category, within company XYZ, over a span of years. The next page would display a tabular or graphical overview of the number of patents filed by the next most active inventor, in each categoly, within company XYZ, over a span of years and so on for the top 15 inventors. A display of this type could be used to identify trends and discontinuities in the research activity of the most prolific inventors within a company. Similar methods could be used to display the activities of authors of technical and/or scientific documents.
CA 022~880 1998-11-18 WO 97/469~i8 PCT/US97/09729 III. Multidimensional Hierarchy of Interrelated Subject Cate~ories This invention further includes the method of deriving more abstract concepts from the set of stored category assignments, by applying m~them~tical methods to extract these more abstract concepts. These more abstract concepts can not be readily identified by the application of expert technical searches alone. However, a method of quantifying the research effort expended in the areas defined by each of these more abstract concepts is of great value. These more abstract concepts can be identified by the use of both the matrix of technical and/or scientific concepts, identified by the application ofexpert technical searches, and a matrix of stored expelt opinion. The matrix of stored expert opinion represents the cllm~ tive opinion of a group of expert technical staff and/or scientists, on the fractional contribution of each technical and/or scientific concept to each of the higher-level, more abstract concepts.
The present database includes a multidimensional hierarchy of subject categories wherein the different levels of the hierarchy are interrelated by a mathematical formula. The mathematical formula which interrelates the different levels takes the form of a sum of an aggregate count of unique items in a category multiplied by weighting factors for each category in the next higher (more abstract) level. ~ach higher (more abstract) level of the hierarchy is therefore a weighted sum of contributions from each category in the previous level. The aggregate count of unique items is arrived by modeling a scientific or business discipline based on the technical content of patents and/or technical documents in that scientific or business discipline. The weighting factors are derived by the cumulative knowledge of experts in that scientific or business discipline to reflect the impact of each technical category on the next the higher level of the hierarchy.
f(xl)=sum((attribute-l*weighting-factor-l)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-1)+...)f(x2)=sum((attribute- 1 *weighting-factor-2)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-2)+. ..) f(x3)=sum((affribute- 1 *weighting-factor-3)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-3)+. . .) In particular, these weighted averages may also be calculated across a span of years to reflect a multidimensional representation of research efforts across a span of technologies and across a span of years.
The Higher Level ~ubject Categories may be derived by matrix manipulation of two matrices, one representing the known subject category s~c~i~nment~ in a hierarchical model of a business or technical specialty, and the other matrix, representing the cllm~ tive knowledge of technical experts in a given b-l~iness or technical entil~ or specialty. Table 4 shows a two ~limçnsional matrix which represents the number of patents assigned to selected subject categories across a selected span of years. Table 4 may represent the patents filed by an entire company, or the patents filed in a palticular business ~;nl~lyl;se, or the patents filed by a particular inventor within a particular company or business enl~l~lise, as examples.
Table 4 Counts of 'atents per Cate rory per Year Category 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 104 Dr ll Bit Topology 1 0 1 1 3 4 203 Dr ll Fluid Rheology 1 4 2 3 3 3 301 ProppingAgents 19 15 4 18 31 51 320 Acidification Agents 10 10 17 20 14 7 350 Fungicides 15 23 19 l l 6 3 Table 5 represents the cllmlllAtive knowledge of a group of technical experts in a given business or technical entity. For example, Tal)le S may represent the collective opinion of a group of technical experts on the contribution of a patent in Drill Bit Topology to a series of higher level concepts. For example the cllm~ tive knowledge may say that a single patent in Drill Bit Topology would contribute .22 patent-units toward a theoretical patent in Orill Bit Deposition, .24 patent-units toward a theoretical patent in Drill Bit ColTosion, and .27 patent-units toward a theoretical patent in Fonnation Penetration.
Table 5 Fractional Contribution Matrix of Each Category to a Higher-Level Concept A Environ. E~nviron.
Drill Bit Drill Bit Fonnation Fonnation Impact of ~npact of Categ~ry Deposition Corrosion p~n~tr~ti~n Stability Fluid Trailings 104DrillBitTopolo~v 0.22 0.24 0.27 0.11 0.07 0.09 203Dri11FluidRheology 0.33 0.12 0.19 0.02 0.23 0.11 301 ProppingAgents 0.09 0.07 0.22 0.5 0.05 0.07 320~ri~1ifirnti~-nAgellts 0.12 0.33 0.19 0.06 0.22 0.08 350 Fungicides 0.05 0.04 0.21 O.OG 0.32 0.32 Table 6 represents the s~lmm~tion of the matrix multiplication of these two matrices leading to the estimate of the number of theoretical patents in ~ese higher level subjects. For example, the number of theoretical patents in Drill Bit Deposition would be derived by multiplying column A, which represents the cumulative opinion of a group of technical experts (Table 5), by ~e number of patents in each category for each year (Table 4) and surnming the contribution of each categor~ to the theoretical number of patents in Drill Bit Deposition. Table 6 displays the derived count of patents in each of these higher-level, more abstract concepts, across a span of years.
Table 6 Theoretical Count of Patents in a Higher-Level Concept Category 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 Drill Bit Deposition 4.21 5.02 4.23 5.78 6.42 7.45 Drill Bit Corrosion 5.59 5.75 7.13 8.9 8.11 7.32 Formation Penetration 9.69 10.79 8.75 10.91 12.12 14.83 l~ormation Stability 11.13 9.56 4.31 11.03 17.09 26.6 Environ. Irnpact of Fluid 8.25 .11.23 10.55 9.58 7.45 6.02 Environ. Impact of 7.13 9.65 8.03 6.8 5.81 5.78 Trailings Table 7 represents the calculation of the theoretical number of patents in Drill Bit Deposition which would be represented by a set of patents.
For each subject category from Table 4, the number of patents would be multiplied by the fiactional contribution of that subject category, from Table 5, Drill Bit Deposition in year 1982. The theoretical number of patents contributedby each category would be summed to arrive at a theoretica~ number of patents in Drill Bit Deposition in 1982.
Table 7 Sample Calculation of Drill Bit Deposition Patents in 1982 Fractional Theoretical Category 1982ContributionNumber of Patents 104 Drill Bit Topology 1 0.22 0.22 203 Drill Fluid Rheology 1 0.33 0.33 301 ProppingAgents 19 0.09 1.71 320 Acidification Agents 10 0.12 1.2 350 Fungicides 15 0.0~ 0.75 4.21 Figure 4 displays the data from Table 6 in a graphical display which allows the trends and discontinllities in the research patterns, represented by the count of theoretical patents, in the highel level, more abstract subjects in Table 6, to be observed. These trends and discontinuities were previously hidden due to both the complexity and length of each patent and/or technical document in the set of documents under review, and also due to the complexity of the higher level concepts themselves. These higher level concepts can not be searched by use of an expelt technical search (ETS) but rather must be derived from lower level concepts which can be searched using an expert technical search (ETS), using the methods of this invention.
Claims (22)
1. A computer readable medium comprising a database system, including stored data of scientific or technical documents, such as patents, technical or scientific publications, abstracts of these patents or publications, and associated bibliographic and technical classification data, or combinations thereof such that said scientific and technical documents are assigned to one ormore scientific or technical categories (category assignments) within a multidimensional hierarchical model of a business, scientific or technical entity or specialty, and said category assignments are stored in a relational database wherein said category assignments are used to identify one or more patterns, trends and/or discontinuities based on a population analysis of the categories.
2. The database system of claim 1 where the stored data and category assignments can be displayed on a computerized graphical device in the form of multidimensional tabular or graphical displays which permit the observation of trends and discontinuities within the business, scientific or technical entity or specialty being modeled.
3. The database of claim 1 wherein said stored data includes patent abstracts, patent identifiers, technical index terms, patent classifications, patent claims, graphic images, chemical structures, and all or portions of the text of the patent or published patent application.
4. The database of claim 1 wherein said stored data includes the technical abstracts, document identifiers, technical index terms, graphic images, chemical structures, and all or portions of the text of the scientific or technical publication.
5. The database of claim 1 wherein said stored data includes a fractional contribution matrix which stores the cumulative opinion of a team of technical or scientific experts on the fractional contribution of each category to a set of higher-level (more abstract) concepts within the hierarchical model.
6. The database of claim 5 wherein a set of higher-level (more abstract) concepts are related to each stored category by a mathematical relationship.
7. The database system of claim 1 where the database can also store the claims of the corresponding US patents and the claims of the corresponding European patents.
8. A method of creating a database for a collection of scientific or technical documents, such as patents and/or technical or scientific publicationsand/or abstracts of these patents or publications, by:
(a) creating a hierarchical model of subjects of potential interest (b) creating an expert technical search (ETS) for each subject-category within the hierarchical model (c) automatically applying the set of ETS's against a set of electronically stored patents, patent abstracts, patent identifiers, technical index terms, technical documents, and/or abstracts of these documents (d) using the results of the search strategies to electronically assign each patent or technical document to one or more subject-categories within the hierarchical model (e) Storing the set of subject-categories and unique patent identifiers or unique document identifiers in an electronic database table.
(a) creating a hierarchical model of subjects of potential interest (b) creating an expert technical search (ETS) for each subject-category within the hierarchical model (c) automatically applying the set of ETS's against a set of electronically stored patents, patent abstracts, patent identifiers, technical index terms, technical documents, and/or abstracts of these documents (d) using the results of the search strategies to electronically assign each patent or technical document to one or more subject-categories within the hierarchical model (e) Storing the set of subject-categories and unique patent identifiers or unique document identifiers in an electronic database table.
9. The method of claim 8 further comprising the step of electronically manipulating the stored subject-categories, the stored unique identifiers and the stored technical index terms to display tabular summaries and graphical summaries of the stored data.
10. The method of claim 8 further comprising the step of using the tabular summaries and the graphical summaries to identify trends and discontinuities.
11. A method as of claim 7 where multiple-entity fields are parsed to create normalized, single-entity fields in a separate table including a unique identifier for each patent or technical document.
12. A method as of claim 7 where the expert technical search strategies are stored in a database and are applied against technical index terms, text, and/or abstract stored in the same database or against technical index terms, text and/or abstracts stored in a different database.
13. A method as of claim 8 where the relational database used to store, categorize, and manipulate patent abstracts can also store electronic objects such as graphic images, spreadsheets, video images and chemical structures linked to specific patent or document records.
14. A method as of claim 8 where the relational database used to store the patent abstracts and the subject-categories can display the patent abstracts, the US claims, the European claims and the subject-categories on a single computer display screen by use of scrollable windows.
15. A method as of claim 8 where the database can also contain subject-specific tables of technical details such as catalyst precursors, cocatalysts, reaction conditions, reactor types, which are captured in a discrete form by scientists evaluating the underlying patents.
16. A method as of claims 8 where the database can also contain links to full-text sources of patents either in a local CD-ROM, a local LAN, a Wide-Area-LAN or on the Internet.
17. A method as of claim 8 wherein the set of technical searches are created, stored and executed on a commercial database system to identify thetechnology represented by each technical document or patent.
18. A method as of claim 8 wherein the set of technical searches are created and stored and executed on a local database system using documents captured from a commercial database system to identify the technology represented by each technical document or patent.
19. A method as of claim 8 wherein each technical search can automatically assign a set of technical documents or patents to one or more technical categories within a multidimensional hierarchy.
20. The method as in claim 8 further comprising the step of deriving each higher level of the multidimensional subject hierarchy from the sum of an aggregate count of unique items in each category multiplied by a weighting factors for each category in the next higher level, producing a higher(more abstract) level within the hierarchy.
f(x1)=sum((attribute-1*weighting-factor-1)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-1)+...)f(x2)=sum((attribute-1*weighting-factor-2)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-2)+...)f(x3)=sum((attribute-1*weighting-factor-3)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-3)+...)
f(x1)=sum((attribute-1*weighting-factor-1)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-1)+...)f(x2)=sum((attribute-1*weighting-factor-2)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-2)+...)f(x3)=sum((attribute-1*weighting-factor-3)+(attribute-2*weighting-factor-3)+...)
21. A method as in claim 8 wherein the aggregate count of unique items is determined by modeling a scientific or business discipline based on thetechnical content of patents or technical documents in that scientific or business discipline.
22. A method as in claim 8 wherein the weighting factors are derived by the cumulative knowledge of experts in that scientific or business discipline to reflect the impact of each technical category on the next higher level of the hierarchy.
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US08/655,262 US5721910A (en) | 1996-06-04 | 1996-06-04 | Relational database system containing a multidimensional hierachical model of interrelated subject categories with recognition capabilities |
| US08/655,262 | 1996-06-04 |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA2255880A1 true CA2255880A1 (en) | 1997-12-11 |
Family
ID=24628191
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA002255880A Abandoned CA2255880A1 (en) | 1996-06-04 | 1997-06-04 | A relational database system containing a multidimensional hierarchical model of interrelated subject categories with recognition capabilities |
Country Status (8)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| US (1) | US5721910A (en) |
| EP (1) | EP0979465A4 (en) |
| JP (1) | JP2000511668A (en) |
| AU (1) | AU715248B2 (en) |
| BR (1) | BR9710844A (en) |
| CA (1) | CA2255880A1 (en) |
| NO (1) | NO985649L (en) |
| WO (1) | WO1997046958A1 (en) |
Families Citing this family (136)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US6963920B1 (en) * | 1993-11-19 | 2005-11-08 | Rose Blush Software Llc | Intellectual asset protocol for defining data exchange rules and formats for universal intellectual asset documents, and systems, methods, and computer program products related to same |
| US6339767B1 (en) * | 1997-06-02 | 2002-01-15 | Aurigin Systems, Inc. | Using hyperbolic trees to visualize data generated by patent-centric and group-oriented data processing |
| US5991751A (en) * | 1997-06-02 | 1999-11-23 | Smartpatents, Inc. | System, method, and computer program product for patent-centric and group-oriented data processing |
| US6807558B1 (en) * | 1995-06-12 | 2004-10-19 | Pointcast, Inc. | Utilization of information “push” technology |
| US6112201A (en) * | 1995-08-29 | 2000-08-29 | Oracle Corporation | Virtual bookshelf |
| US6510435B2 (en) * | 1996-09-02 | 2003-01-21 | Rudolf Bayer | Database system and method of organizing an n-dimensional data set |
| US6918096B2 (en) * | 1996-11-07 | 2005-07-12 | Thebrain Technologies, Corp. | Method and apparatus for displaying a network of thoughts from a thought's perspective |
| US6037944A (en) * | 1996-11-07 | 2000-03-14 | Natrificial Llc | Method and apparatus for displaying a thought network from a thought's perspective |
| US6073134A (en) * | 1997-05-29 | 2000-06-06 | Oracle Corporation | Method article of manufacture, and apparatus for generating a multi-dimensional record management index |
| US6055540A (en) * | 1997-06-13 | 2000-04-25 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for creating a category hierarchy for classification of documents |
| US6098066A (en) * | 1997-06-13 | 2000-08-01 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for searching for documents stored within a document directory hierarchy |
| US5943668A (en) * | 1997-06-30 | 1999-08-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | Relational emulation of a multi-dimensional database |
| US5905985A (en) * | 1997-06-30 | 1999-05-18 | International Business Machines Corporation | Relational database modifications based on multi-dimensional database modifications |
| US6128617A (en) * | 1997-11-24 | 2000-10-03 | Lowry Software, Incorporated | Data display software with actions and links integrated with information |
| US6282546B1 (en) | 1998-06-30 | 2001-08-28 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for real-time insertion of data into a multi-dimensional database for network intrusion detection and vulnerability assessment |
| JP3856969B2 (en) * | 1998-11-02 | 2006-12-13 | 株式会社日立製作所 | Object analysis design support method |
| US7966328B2 (en) | 1999-03-02 | 2011-06-21 | Rose Blush Software Llc | Patent-related tools and methodology for use in research and development projects |
| US7716060B2 (en) | 1999-03-02 | 2010-05-11 | Germeraad Paul B | Patent-related tools and methodology for use in the merger and acquisition process |
| WO2000060495A2 (en) * | 1999-04-08 | 2000-10-12 | Aurigin Systems, Inc. | Patent-related tools and methodology for use in research and development projects |
| US6853950B1 (en) * | 1999-07-20 | 2005-02-08 | Newsedge Corporation | System for determining changes in the relative interest of subjects |
| US6408292B1 (en) | 1999-08-04 | 2002-06-18 | Hyperroll, Israel, Ltd. | Method of and system for managing multi-dimensional databases using modular-arithmetic based address data mapping processes on integer-encoded business dimensions |
| US6385604B1 (en) * | 1999-08-04 | 2002-05-07 | Hyperroll, Israel Limited | Relational database management system having integrated non-relational multi-dimensional data store of aggregated data elements |
| US6542895B1 (en) * | 1999-08-30 | 2003-04-01 | International Business Machines Corporation | Multi-dimensional restructure performance when adding or removing dimensions and dimensions members |
| US6546395B1 (en) * | 1999-08-30 | 2003-04-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Multi-dimensional restructure performance by selecting a technique to modify a relational database based on a type of restructure |
| US6556992B1 (en) * | 1999-09-14 | 2003-04-29 | Patent Ratings, Llc | Method and system for rating patents and other intangible assets |
| US20090259506A1 (en) * | 1999-09-14 | 2009-10-15 | Barney Jonathan A | Method and system for rating patents and other intangible assets |
| US7016851B1 (en) * | 1999-09-30 | 2006-03-21 | Eugene M. Lee | Systems and methods for preparation of an intellectual property filing in accordance with jurisdiction- and/or agent specific requirements |
| US20090307577A1 (en) * | 2001-08-28 | 2009-12-10 | Lee Eugene M | System for providing a binding cost for foreign filing a patent application |
| US7016852B1 (en) | 1999-09-30 | 2006-03-21 | Eugene M. Lee | Fee transaction system and method for intellectual property acquisition and/or maintenance |
| US6510420B1 (en) | 1999-09-30 | 2003-01-21 | International Business Machines Corporation | Framework for dynamic hierarchical grouping and calculation based on multidimensional member characteristics |
| US20020138297A1 (en) * | 2001-03-21 | 2002-09-26 | Lee Eugene M. | Apparatus for and method of analyzing intellectual property information |
| US20040103112A1 (en) * | 1999-10-08 | 2004-05-27 | Colson Thomas J. | Computer based method and apparatus for mining and displaying patent data |
| US6405208B1 (en) * | 1999-12-13 | 2002-06-11 | Hyperion Solutions Corporation | Dynamic recursive build for multidimensional databases and methods and apparatus thereof |
| US20070260974A1 (en) * | 1999-12-27 | 2007-11-08 | Hauser Carl H | System and method for assigning a disposition to a document through information flow knowledge |
| US6675166B2 (en) | 2000-02-09 | 2004-01-06 | The John Hopkins University | Integrated multidimensional database |
| US20020029207A1 (en) * | 2000-02-28 | 2002-03-07 | Hyperroll, Inc. | Data aggregation server for managing a multi-dimensional database and database management system having data aggregation server integrated therein |
| JP4713707B2 (en) * | 2000-03-28 | 2011-06-29 | 日産自動車株式会社 | Data display system |
| US20020077757A1 (en) * | 2000-04-03 | 2002-06-20 | Libraria, Inc. | Chemistry resource database |
| US20020022974A1 (en) * | 2000-04-14 | 2002-02-21 | Urban Lindh | Display of patent information |
| US7523114B2 (en) * | 2000-04-24 | 2009-04-21 | Ebay Inc. | Method and system for categorizing items in both actual and virtual categories |
| US6915289B1 (en) | 2000-05-04 | 2005-07-05 | International Business Machines Corporation | Using an index to access a subject multi-dimensional database |
| US7269786B1 (en) | 2000-05-04 | 2007-09-11 | International Business Machines Corporation | Navigating an index to access a subject multi-dimensional database |
| US20020049707A1 (en) * | 2000-05-08 | 2002-04-25 | Townsley Norton R. | Expanded patent search |
| US7020679B2 (en) * | 2000-05-12 | 2006-03-28 | Taoofsearch, Inc. | Two-level internet search service system |
| US6446083B1 (en) * | 2000-05-12 | 2002-09-03 | Vastvideo, Inc. | System and method for classifying media items |
| US20020019836A1 (en) * | 2000-05-16 | 2002-02-14 | Hirokazu Uchio | Information processing apparatus for management of documents relevant to patent application |
| EP1299821A1 (en) * | 2000-06-09 | 2003-04-09 | Thanh Ngoc Nguyen | Method and apparatus for data collection and knowledge management |
| US7058516B2 (en) * | 2000-06-30 | 2006-06-06 | Bioexpertise, Inc. | Computer implemented searching using search criteria comprised of ratings prepared by leading practitioners in biomedical specialties |
| US7376635B1 (en) * | 2000-07-21 | 2008-05-20 | Ford Global Technologies, Llc | Theme-based system and method for classifying documents |
| WO2002008946A2 (en) * | 2000-07-24 | 2002-01-31 | Protigen, Inc. | A method and system for a document search system using search criteria comprised of ratings prepared by experts |
| US20060161353A1 (en) * | 2000-07-24 | 2006-07-20 | Bioexpertise, Inc. | Computer implemented searching using search criteria comprised of ratings prepared by leading practitioners in biomedical specialties |
| KR100729779B1 (en) * | 2000-07-26 | 2007-06-20 | 삼성전자주식회사 | Method for analysing of an intellectual property information and system for performing the same |
| US7493391B2 (en) * | 2001-02-12 | 2009-02-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | System for automated session resource clean-up by determining whether server resources have been held by client longer than preset thresholds |
| US20050101012A1 (en) * | 2001-03-12 | 2005-05-12 | Gerold Schuler | CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells from human blood |
| US8484177B2 (en) | 2001-03-21 | 2013-07-09 | Eugene M. Lee | Apparatus for and method of searching and organizing intellectual property information utilizing a field-of-search |
| US6665670B2 (en) | 2001-03-30 | 2003-12-16 | M.Cam, Inc. | Method and system for graphical representation of multitemporal, multidimensional data relationships |
| US20020147738A1 (en) * | 2001-04-06 | 2002-10-10 | Reader Scot A. | Method and appratus for finding patent-relevant web documents |
| EP1256883A1 (en) * | 2001-05-10 | 2002-11-13 | Siemens Aktiengesellschaft | Patent information system |
| US6980984B1 (en) * | 2001-05-16 | 2005-12-27 | Kanisa, Inc. | Content provider systems and methods using structured data |
| US20020178120A1 (en) * | 2001-05-22 | 2002-11-28 | Reid Zachariah J. | Contract generation and administration system |
| US9541977B1 (en) | 2001-08-28 | 2017-01-10 | Eugene M. Lee | Computer-implemented method and system for automated claim charts with context associations |
| US9460414B2 (en) | 2001-08-28 | 2016-10-04 | Eugene M. Lee | Computer assisted and/or implemented process and system for annotating and/or linking documents and data, optionally in an intellectual property management system |
| US7885987B1 (en) | 2001-08-28 | 2011-02-08 | Lee Eugene M | Computer-implemented method and system for managing attributes of intellectual property documents, optionally including organization thereof |
| US6920444B2 (en) * | 2001-09-26 | 2005-07-19 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Accessing relational database using an object-oriented language |
| WO2003030033A2 (en) * | 2001-10-01 | 2003-04-10 | Delphion, Inc. | System and method for generating a work set of patents or other documents |
| MXPA05004111A (en) * | 2001-10-17 | 2005-10-05 | Diniz Queiroga Loureiro Jorge | Data management. |
| EP1324235A1 (en) * | 2001-12-27 | 2003-07-02 | Sap Ag | Determination of a characteristic function of a matrix using a predetermined scheme |
| EP1324236A1 (en) * | 2001-12-27 | 2003-07-02 | Sap Ag | Determination of a characteristic function of a matrix using accumulation and consolidation |
| DE10215495A1 (en) * | 2002-04-09 | 2003-10-30 | Bayer Ag | Computer system and method for research, statistical evaluation and analysis of documents |
| US20040025048A1 (en) * | 2002-05-20 | 2004-02-05 | Porcari Damian O. | Method and system for role-based access control to a collaborative online legal workflow tool |
| US20040015481A1 (en) * | 2002-05-23 | 2004-01-22 | Kenneth Zinda | Patent data mining |
| US20030229470A1 (en) * | 2002-06-10 | 2003-12-11 | Nenad Pejic | System and method for analyzing patent-related information |
| US8222033B2 (en) | 2002-08-12 | 2012-07-17 | Argos Therapeutics, Inc. | CD4+CD25− T cells and Tr1-like regulatory T cells |
| US20040230568A1 (en) * | 2002-10-28 | 2004-11-18 | Budzyn Ludomir A. | Method of searching information and intellectual property |
| US7472127B2 (en) | 2002-12-18 | 2008-12-30 | International Business Machines Corporation | Methods to identify related data in a multidimensional database |
| US20040181518A1 (en) * | 2003-03-14 | 2004-09-16 | Mayo Bryan Edward | System and method for an OLAP engine having dynamic disaggregation |
| US20040236753A1 (en) * | 2003-05-20 | 2004-11-25 | Porcari Damian O. | Method and system for automated messaging in an online legal workflow tool |
| US7333997B2 (en) * | 2003-08-12 | 2008-02-19 | Viziant Corporation | Knowledge discovery method with utility functions and feedback loops |
| US20050278362A1 (en) * | 2003-08-12 | 2005-12-15 | Maren Alianna J | Knowledge discovery system |
| US20050108384A1 (en) * | 2003-10-23 | 2005-05-19 | Lambert John R. | Analysis of message sequences |
| US8694419B2 (en) * | 2003-11-18 | 2014-04-08 | Ocean Tomo, Llc | Methods and systems for utilizing intellectual property assets and rights |
| US20050198026A1 (en) * | 2004-02-03 | 2005-09-08 | Dehlinger Peter J. | Code, system, and method for generating concepts |
| JP2007528543A (en) * | 2004-03-04 | 2007-10-11 | バイエル・ビジネス・サービシーズ・ゲゼルシャフト・ミット・ベシュレンクテル・ハフツング | A method of providing some type of storage medium for storing prerecorded structured information |
| US7823061B2 (en) * | 2004-05-20 | 2010-10-26 | Wizpatent Pte Ltd | System and method for text segmentation and display |
| US20060036451A1 (en) * | 2004-08-10 | 2006-02-16 | Lundberg Steven W | Patent mapping |
| US20060036453A1 (en) * | 2004-08-11 | 2006-02-16 | Allan Williams | Bias compensated method and system for patent evaluation |
| US8161049B2 (en) * | 2004-08-11 | 2012-04-17 | Allan Williams | System and method for patent evaluation using artificial intelligence |
| US8145640B2 (en) * | 2004-08-11 | 2012-03-27 | Allan Williams | System and method for patent evaluation and visualization of the results thereof |
| US7840460B2 (en) * | 2004-08-11 | 2010-11-23 | Allan Williams | System and method for patent portfolio evaluation |
| US8145639B2 (en) * | 2004-08-11 | 2012-03-27 | Allan Williams | System and methods for patent evaluation |
| US7389282B2 (en) * | 2004-11-02 | 2008-06-17 | Viziant Corporation | System and method for predictive analysis and predictive analysis markup language |
| US7610300B2 (en) | 2004-11-30 | 2009-10-27 | International Business Machines Corporation | Automated relational schema generation within a multidimensional enterprise software system |
| US7505888B2 (en) | 2004-11-30 | 2009-03-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | Reporting model generation within a multidimensional enterprise software system |
| US7593955B2 (en) | 2004-11-30 | 2009-09-22 | International Business Machines Corporation | Generation of aggregatable dimension information within a multidimensional enterprise software system |
| US7418438B2 (en) | 2004-11-30 | 2008-08-26 | International Business Machines Corporation | Automated default dimension selection within a multidimensional enterprise software system |
| US7536312B2 (en) * | 2005-01-26 | 2009-05-19 | Ocean Tomo, Llc | Method of appraising and insuring intellectual property |
| US7747648B1 (en) * | 2005-02-14 | 2010-06-29 | Yahoo! Inc. | World modeling using a relationship network with communication channels to entities |
| US7421419B2 (en) * | 2005-04-12 | 2008-09-02 | Viziant Corporation | System and method for evidence accumulation and hypothesis generation |
| US9110985B2 (en) * | 2005-05-10 | 2015-08-18 | Neetseer, Inc. | Generating a conceptual association graph from large-scale loosely-grouped content |
| US7958120B2 (en) | 2005-05-10 | 2011-06-07 | Netseer, Inc. | Method and apparatus for distributed community finding |
| WO2006128183A2 (en) | 2005-05-27 | 2006-11-30 | Schwegman, Lundberg, Woessner & Kluth, P.A. | Method and apparatus for cross-referencing important ip relationships |
| WO2007014341A2 (en) | 2005-07-27 | 2007-02-01 | Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A. | Patent mapping |
| WO2007027967A2 (en) * | 2005-08-31 | 2007-03-08 | Eagleforce Associates | System for hypothesis generation |
| US7716226B2 (en) | 2005-09-27 | 2010-05-11 | Patentratings, Llc | Method and system for probabilistically quantifying and visualizing relevance between two or more citationally or contextually related data objects |
| US20070168345A1 (en) * | 2006-01-17 | 2007-07-19 | Andrew Gibbs | System and method of identifying subject matter experts |
| WO2007084778A2 (en) | 2006-01-19 | 2007-07-26 | Llial, Inc. | Systems and methods for creating, navigating and searching informational web neighborhoods |
| WO2007084791A2 (en) * | 2006-01-20 | 2007-07-26 | Glenbrook Associates, Inc. | System and method for managing context-rich database |
| US20080097773A1 (en) * | 2006-02-06 | 2008-04-24 | Michael Hill | Non-disclosure bond for deterring unauthorized disclosure and other misuse of intellectual property |
| US8843434B2 (en) * | 2006-02-28 | 2014-09-23 | Netseer, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for visualizing, managing, monetizing, and personalizing knowledge search results on a user interface |
| DE102007008904A1 (en) * | 2006-05-08 | 2007-11-15 | Abb Technology Ag | System and method for the automated and structured transfer of technical documents and the management of the acquired documents in a database |
| US9817902B2 (en) * | 2006-10-27 | 2017-11-14 | Netseer Acquisition, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for matching relevant content to user intention |
| JP2008112934A (en) * | 2006-10-31 | 2008-05-15 | Oki Electric Ind Co Ltd | Semiconductor memory, and its manufacturing method |
| US8321462B2 (en) * | 2007-03-30 | 2012-11-27 | Google Inc. | Custodian based content identification |
| US7730017B2 (en) * | 2007-03-30 | 2010-06-01 | Google Inc. | Open profile content identification |
| US20080243607A1 (en) * | 2007-03-30 | 2008-10-02 | Google Inc. | Related entity content identification |
| US7983927B2 (en) | 2007-07-31 | 2011-07-19 | Peer Fusion Llc | System and method of managing community based and content based information networks |
| US10387892B2 (en) | 2008-05-06 | 2019-08-20 | Netseer, Inc. | Discovering relevant concept and context for content node |
| US20090300009A1 (en) * | 2008-05-30 | 2009-12-03 | Netseer, Inc. | Behavioral Targeting For Tracking, Aggregating, And Predicting Online Behavior |
| US20100131513A1 (en) | 2008-10-23 | 2010-05-27 | Lundberg Steven W | Patent mapping |
| JP2010231564A (en) * | 2009-03-27 | 2010-10-14 | Nomura Research Institute Ltd | Patent application evaluation device |
| US9110971B2 (en) * | 2010-02-03 | 2015-08-18 | Thomson Reuters Global Resources | Method and system for ranking intellectual property documents using claim analysis |
| US8639695B1 (en) | 2010-07-08 | 2014-01-28 | Patent Analytics Holding Pty Ltd | System, method and computer program for analysing and visualising data |
| AU2010202901B2 (en) | 2010-07-08 | 2016-04-14 | Patent Analytics Holding Pty Ltd | A system, method and computer program for preparing data for analysis |
| JP5195948B2 (en) * | 2011-02-07 | 2013-05-15 | 日産自動車株式会社 | Data display system |
| WO2012112149A1 (en) * | 2011-02-16 | 2012-08-23 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Population category hierarchies |
| US9904726B2 (en) | 2011-05-04 | 2018-02-27 | Black Hills IP Holdings, LLC. | Apparatus and method for automated and assisted patent claim mapping and expense planning |
| US20130086070A1 (en) | 2011-10-03 | 2013-04-04 | Steven W. Lundberg | Prior art management |
| US20130084009A1 (en) | 2011-10-03 | 2013-04-04 | Steven W. Lundberg | Systems, methods and user interfaces in a patent management system |
| EP2698753A1 (en) * | 2012-08-16 | 2014-02-19 | Corporación Medichem, S.L. | Data management system for generating a report document by linking technical data to intellectual property rights data |
| US11461862B2 (en) | 2012-08-20 | 2022-10-04 | Black Hills Ip Holdings, Llc | Analytics generation for patent portfolio management |
| US10311085B2 (en) | 2012-08-31 | 2019-06-04 | Netseer, Inc. | Concept-level user intent profile extraction and applications |
| US9767190B2 (en) | 2013-04-23 | 2017-09-19 | Black Hills Ip Holdings, Llc | Patent claim scope evaluator |
| US20150269263A1 (en) * | 2014-03-24 | 2015-09-24 | Computer Software Associates, Inc. | Method, system, and program product for creating reports for intellectual property |
| JP6491345B2 (en) * | 2015-09-25 | 2019-03-27 | 株式会社日本電気特許技術情報センター | Information processing apparatus, information processing method, and program |
| JP6347775B2 (en) | 2015-12-28 | 2018-06-27 | 日東電工株式会社 | Spiral membrane element |
| EP3739491B1 (en) | 2019-05-17 | 2022-07-06 | Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | Electronic apparatus and controlling method thereof |
Family Cites Families (10)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US5010478A (en) * | 1986-04-11 | 1991-04-23 | Deran Roger L | Entity-attribute value database system with inverse attribute for selectively relating two different entities |
| US5142674A (en) * | 1988-03-08 | 1992-08-25 | International Business Machines Corporation | Interchange object data base index which eliminates the need for private copies of interchange documents files by a plurality of application programs |
| CA2246946C (en) * | 1991-03-28 | 1999-09-14 | Ibm Canada Limited-Ibm Canada Limitee | Method and means for encoding storing and retrieving hierarchical data processing information for a computer system |
| US5511186A (en) * | 1992-11-18 | 1996-04-23 | Mdl Information Systems, Inc. | System and methods for performing multi-source searches over heterogeneous databases |
| FR2698977B1 (en) * | 1992-12-03 | 1994-12-30 | Alsthom Cge Alcatel | Multimedia information system. |
| US5615112A (en) * | 1993-01-29 | 1997-03-25 | Arizona Board Of Regents | Synthesized object-oriented entity-relationship (SOOER) model for coupled knowledge-base/database of image retrieval expert system (IRES) |
| US5594837A (en) * | 1993-01-29 | 1997-01-14 | Noyes; Dallas B. | Method for representation of knowledge in a computer as a network database system |
| WO1995004960A2 (en) * | 1993-08-02 | 1995-02-16 | Persistence Software, Inc. | Method and apparatus for managing relational data in an object cache |
| US5630125A (en) * | 1994-05-23 | 1997-05-13 | Zellweger; Paul | Method and apparatus for information management using an open hierarchical data structure |
| JP2777698B2 (en) * | 1994-07-28 | 1998-07-23 | 日本アイ・ビー・エム株式会社 | Information retrieval system and method |
-
1996
- 1996-06-04 US US08/655,262 patent/US5721910A/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
-
1997
- 1997-06-04 JP JP10500849A patent/JP2000511668A/en not_active Ceased
- 1997-06-04 WO PCT/US1997/009729 patent/WO1997046958A1/en not_active Application Discontinuation
- 1997-06-04 BR BR9710844A patent/BR9710844A/en not_active Application Discontinuation
- 1997-06-04 AU AU33774/97A patent/AU715248B2/en not_active Ceased
- 1997-06-04 EP EP97929800A patent/EP0979465A4/en not_active Withdrawn
- 1997-06-04 CA CA002255880A patent/CA2255880A1/en not_active Abandoned
-
1998
- 1998-12-03 NO NO985649A patent/NO985649L/en not_active Application Discontinuation
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| JP2000511668A (en) | 2000-09-05 |
| WO1997046958A1 (en) | 1997-12-11 |
| EP0979465A4 (en) | 2000-10-11 |
| AU3377497A (en) | 1998-01-05 |
| AU715248B2 (en) | 2000-01-20 |
| US5721910A (en) | 1998-02-24 |
| BR9710844A (en) | 1999-08-17 |
| EP0979465A1 (en) | 2000-02-16 |
| NO985649L (en) | 1999-01-27 |
| NO985649D0 (en) | 1998-12-03 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CA2255880A1 (en) | A relational database system containing a multidimensional hierarchical model of interrelated subject categories with recognition capabilities | |
| Eom | Author Cocitation Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Mapping the Intellectual Structure of an Academic Discipline: Quantitative Methods for Mapping the Intellectual Structure of an Academic Discipline | |
| US8021163B2 (en) | Skill-set identification | |
| Ikpaahindi | An overview of bibliometrics: its measurements, laws and their applications | |
| US7333984B2 (en) | Methods for document indexing and analysis | |
| CN106202248B (en) | Phrase-based search in information retrieval system | |
| EP1899800B1 (en) | Schema and etl tools for structured and unstructured data | |
| EP1899855B1 (en) | System and method of making unstructured data available to structured data analysis tools | |
| US8131701B2 (en) | Method and system for probabilistically quantifying and visualizing relevance between two or more citationally or contextually related data objects | |
| US20060179051A1 (en) | Methods and apparatus for steering the analyses of collections of documents | |
| US20070011183A1 (en) | Analysis and transformation tools for structured and unstructured data | |
| US20070276796A1 (en) | System analyzing patents | |
| Peritz et al. | The sources used by bibliometrics-scientometrics as reflected in references | |
| US20050114302A1 (en) | Method for fast searching and displaying a genealogical tree of patents from a patent database | |
| Wilson et al. | Uncertainty in information seeking | |
| CN108536841A (en) | Intelligence learning interrogation model based on service-user custom | |
| WO2000026839A9 (en) | Advanced model for automatic extraction of skill and knowledge information from an electronic document | |
| Wang et al. | Hybrid rule ordering in classification association rule mining | |
| Thunkijjanukij et al. | Ontology development: a case study for thai rice | |
| EP1672544A2 (en) | Improving text search quality by exploiting organizational information | |
| Zervanou et al. | Documenting social unrest: Detecting strikes in historical daily newspapers | |
| Smith | Concept-based mining to enhance the scope and speed of archival qualitative research | |
| Karanikas et al. | A temporal text mining application in competitive intelligence | |
| Mini Devi et al. | Toxicology literature | |
| Durfee | Text Mining Promise and Reality |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| EEER | Examination request | ||
| FZDE | Discontinued |