检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:温芳芳[1] Wen Fangfang(College of Management,Henan University of Science and Technology,Luoyang 471023,China)
出 处:《现代情报》2018年第7期142-147,共6页Journal of Modern Information
基 金:国家社会科学基金青年项目"基于多维信息计量分析的学术影响力综合评价研究"(项目编号:15CTQ023);河南省高等学校哲学社会科学研究优秀学者资助项目(项目编号:2017-YXXZ-07)
摘 要:[目的/意义]企业间的技术相似性能否转化为现实的合作关系,专利耦合所揭示的潜在关联究竟预示着合作还是竞争,这些问题需要在实证研究中寻找答案。[方法/过程]以德温特专利分类号为媒介构建专利耦合网络,采用可视化和因子分析方法考察企业的技术相似性及其聚类结构、发掘技术派系及其研究方向,对专利耦合网络与现实合作网络进行比较。[结果/结论]单纯的技术相似性不能作为潜在合作关系的有效判定依据,基于专利耦合形成的潜在合作关系难以转化为现实,社会关系因素对于专利合作的影响程度远甚技术相似性。[Purpose/Significant] Whether the technology similarity between enterprises can be transformed into the real collaboration relationship? Whether the potential correlation disclosed by patent coupling indicates collaboration or competition? Answers for these questions must be deduced from empirical research. [Method/Process] With the methods of visualization and factor analysis,this paper constructed patent bibliographic coupling network based on Derwent patent classified codes to investigate enterprises' technology similarity and cluster structure,and explored technology cliques and RD directions,as well as compared the patent bibliographic coupling network and patent co-invent network. [Result/Conclusion] The simple technology similarity was not the effective basis to identify the potential collaboration relationship. The potential collaboration relationship based on patent bibliographic network was hardly to transform into reality. Social relation factors were more significant than technology similarity to determine the patent collaboration of enterprises.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.28