Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
133 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

The Illusive Slump of Disruptive Patents (2306.10774v1)

Published 19 Jun 2023 in econ.GN and q-fin.EC

Abstract: Despite tremendous growth in the volume of new scientific and technological knowledge, the popular press has recently raised concerns that disruptive innovative activity is slowing. These dire prognoses were mainly driven by Park et al. (2023), a Nature publication that uses decades of data and millions of observations coupled with a novel quantitative metric (the CD index) that characterizes innovation in science and technology as either consolidating or disruptive. We challenge the Park et al. (2023) methodology and findings, principally around concerns of truncation bias and exclusion bias. We show that 88 percent of the decrease in disruptive patents over 1980-2010 reported by the authors can be explained by their truncation of all backward citations before 1976. We also show that this truncation bias varies by technology class. We update the analysis to 2016 and account for a change in U.S. patent law that allows for citations to patent applications in addition to patent grants, which is ignored by the authors in their analysis. We show that the number of highly disruptive patents has increased since 1980 -- particularly in IT technologies. Our results suggest caution in using the Park et al. (2023) methodology as a basis for research and decision making in public policy, industry restructuring or firm reorganization aimed at altering the current innovation landscape.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (19)
  1. Altmetric, 2023. Overview of attention for article Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time published in nature, january 2023. https://nature.altmetric.com/details/140824206/citations. Accessed: 2023-04-26.
  2. Are disruption index indicators convergently valid? the comparison of several indicator variants with assessments by peers. Quantitative Science Studies 1, 1242–1259.
  3. Disruptive papers published in scientometrics: meaningful results by using an improved variant of the disruption index originally proposed by wu, wang, and evans (2019). Scientometrics 123, 1149–1155.
  4. Financial Times, 2023. Science is losing its ability to disrupt (2023). https://www.ft.com/content/c8bfd3da-bf9d-4f9b-ab98-e9677f109e6d.
  5. A dynamic network measure of technological change. Management science 63, 791–817.
  6. Forced out of the closet: The impact of the american inventors protection act on the timing of patent disclosure. RAND Journal of Economics 34, 96–112.
  7. Invention and the life course: Age differences in patenting. Research Policy 52, 104629.
  8. Synergy of combining methionine restriction and chemotherapy: The disruptive next generation of cancer treatment. Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis 3, 272.
  9. Patent citations reexamined. The RAND Journal of Economics 51, 109–132.
  10. A proposal to revise the disruption index. Profesional de la información (EPI) 30.
  11. Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time. Nature 613, 138–144.
  12. Methods to account for citation inflation in research evaluation. Research Policy 48, 1855–1865.
  13. Rethinking the disruption index as a measure of scientific and technological advances. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 172, 121071.
  14. Rebooting disruptive science: Exploring the challenges and potential solutions. European Journal of Clinical Investigation .
  15. Concept of a technology classification for country comparisons. Technical Report. WIPO.
  16. The Economist, 2023. Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive (2023). https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2023/01/04/papers-and-patents-are-becoming-less-disruptive.
  17. The New York Times, 2023. What happened to all of science’s big breakthroughs? (2023). https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/17/science/science-breakthroughs-disruption.html.
  18. Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology. Nature 566, 378–382.
  19. Make science disruptive again. Nature Biotechnology 41, 1–2.
Citations (3)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.