Current Challenges in Patent Information Retrieval PDF
Preview Current Challenges in Patent Information Retrieval
The Information Retrieval Series Volume 29 SeriesEditor W.BruceCroft EditorialBoard ChengXiangZhai MaartendeRijke NicholasJ.Belkin CharlesClarke Mihai Lupu (cid:2) Katja Mayer (cid:2) John Tait (cid:2) Anthony J. Trippe Editors Current Challenges in Patent Information Retrieval Editors MihaiLupu JohnTait InformationRetrievalFacility InformationRetrievalFacility Donau-CityStraße1 Donau-CityStraße1 Vienna1220 Vienna1220 Austria Austria [email protected] [email protected] KatjaMayer AnthonyJ.Trippe InformationRetrievalFacility 3LPAdvisors Donau-CityStraße1 PostRd.7003Suite409 Vienna1220 43016Dublin,OH Austria USA [email protected] [email protected] ISSN1387-5264 ISBN978-3-642-19230-2 e-ISBN978-3-642-19231-9 DOI10.1007/978-3-642-19231-9 SpringerHeidelbergDordrechtLondonNewYork LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2011926006 ACMComputingClassification(1998): H.3,I.7,J.1 ©Springer-VerlagBerlinHeidelberg2011 Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.Allrightsarereserved,whetherthewholeorpartofthematerialis concerned,specificallytherightsoftranslation,reprinting,reuseofillustrations,recitation,broadcasting, reproductiononmicrofilmorinanyotherway,andstorageindatabanks.Duplicationofthispublication orpartsthereofispermittedonlyundertheprovisionsoftheGermanCopyrightLawofSeptember9, 1965,initscurrentversion,andpermissionforusemustalwaysbeobtainedfromSpringer.Violations areliabletoprosecutionundertheGermanCopyrightLaw. Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames,trademarks,etc.inthispublicationdoesnot imply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfromtherelevantprotective lawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse. Coverdesign:deblik Printedonacid-freepaper SpringerispartofSpringerScience+BusinessMedia(www.springer.com) Preface Patent Information Retrieval is an economically important activity. Today’s econ- omy is becoming increasingly knowledge-based and intellectual property in the formofpatentsplaysavitalroleinthisgrowth.Between1998and2008,thenumber ofpatentapplicationsfiledworldwidegrewbymorethan50percent.Thenumber of granted patents worldwide continues to increase, albeit at a slower rate than at itspeakin2006(18%),whensome727,000patentsweregranted.Thesubstantial increaseinpatentsgrantedisdue,inpart,toeffortsbypatentofficestoreduceback- logsaswellasthesignificantgrowthinthenumberofpatentsgrantedbyChinaand, toalesserextentinthemorerecentyears,bytheRepublicofKorea.Accordingto these statistics, the total number of patents in force worldwide at the end of 2008 wasapproximately6.7million(WIPOreport2010).Apriorartsearchmighthave tocoverasmanyas70millionpatents.BycombiningdatafromOceanTomo’sIn- tangible Asset Market Value Survey, and Standard and Poor’s 1200 Index we can estimatethattheglobalvalueofpatentsexceedsUS$10trillionin2009. Apatentisabargainbetweentheinventorandthestate.Theinventormustteach thecommunityhowtomaketheproduct,andusethetechniqueshe/shehasinvented inreturnforalimitedmonopolywhichgiveshimasettimetoexploithisinvention and realise its value. Patents are used for many reasons, e.g. to protect inventions, to create value and to monitor competitive activities in a field. Much knowledge isdistilledthroughpatents,whichisneverpublishedelsewhere.Thuspatentsform animportantknowledgeresource—e.g.muchtechnicalinformationrepresentedin patentsisnotrepresentedinscientificliterature—andareatthesametimeimportant legaldocuments. Despitetheoverallincreaseinpatentapplicationsandgrants,asituationofeco- nomic downturn, such as the one the world has experienced in 2008, leads to a reductioninpatentapplicationsandgrants(asindicatedbypreliminaryfigurespub- lished by WIPO for 2009). This is, to some extent, explained by the high costs involvedinapplyingforapatent,particularlyforsmallenterprises.Thecostsofthe pre-applicationprocess,thelongdurationoftheapplicationprocessandthecorre- spondinguncertaintyinthelong-termeconomyinsuchperiodsofeconomicdown- turnneedtobeaddressedbychangingthewaywesearchthepatentandnon-patent v vi Preface literature.BoththeIntellectualProperty(IP)professionalsandtheInformationRe- trieval (IR) scientists can see this book as a challenge: for the former, in terms of adaptingtonewtools;forthelatter,intermsofcreatingbettertoolsforanobviously difficulttask;forboth,intermsofengaginginexchangeandcooperation. Inthepast10or15years,generalinformationretrievalandWebsearchengines havemadetremendousadvances.Andstill,weseeahugegapbetweenthetechnolo- gieswhich,ontheonehand,wereemergingfromresearchlabsandinusebymajor internet search engines, in e-commerce, and in enterprise search systems, and, on theother,thesystemsinday-to-dayusebythepatentsearchcommunities. It has been estimated that since 1991, when the US Federal National Insti- tute of Standards and Technology (NIST) began its Text Retrieval Conference (TREC) evaluation campaign, the available information retrieval and search sys- tems have improved 40% or more in their ability to find relevant documents. And yetthetechnologiesunderlyingthepatentsearchsystemwerelargelyunaffectedby thesechanges.Patentsearchersgenerallyusethesametechnologyasinthe1980s. Boolean specification of searches and set-based retrieval are the norm rather than therankedretrievalsystemsusedbyGoogleandthelike.Toolsinsomeareashave movedonsignificantly:someprovidershavesemanticanalysistools,otherseffec- tivevisualisationmechanismsforpatentdocuments.Andyettherehasnotbeenthe kindofrevolutioninpatentsearchwhichGooglehadrepresentedforWebsearch. Inthepastfewyears,theInformationRetrievalFacility(anot-for-profitresearch institution based in Vienna, Austria) has organised a series of events to bring to- gether leading researchers in IR with those who practice and use patent search, to establishtheinterdisciplinarydialoguebetweentheIRandtheIPcommunitiesand to create a discursive as well as empirical space for sustainablediscussion and in- novation. In the first Information Retrieval Facility Symposium in Vienna in 2007 (www.irfs.at),adistinguishedaudienceofinformationretrievalscientistsandpatent search specialists started to explore the reasons for the knowledge gap. It turned out that academic researchers were often unaware of the specialised needs of the patent searchers: for example, they needed a degree of transparency quite unlike the casual Web searchers, upon which the academics mainly focussed. The patent searcherswereoftenunawareoftheadvancesmadeinotherareas,andhowtheyhad been achieved. There were difficulties in finding (and using) a common, compre- hensiblevocabulary.InthecourseofthatfirstSymposium,andthroughsubsequent IRF symposia and other joint activities, such as the CLEF-IP and TREC-CHEM tracks,thePaIRandAspireworkshops,majorprogresshasbeenmadeindevelop- ingacommonunderstanding,andevenanagendabetweensearchresearchersand technologistsandthepatentsearchcommunity. Thisbookispartofthedevelopmentofthatjointunderstanding.Itsoriginsliein theideaofproducingpost-proceedingsforthefirstIRFSymposium.Thatideawas notfullyfollowedup,inpartbecauseofpressuretoproducemorepractical,action- oriented work, and in part because many of the participants felt their approaches wereattooearlyastageforformalpublication.Inthecourseofthefollowingyears itbecameapparenttherereallywasademandtoproduceavolumewhichwasacces- sibletoboththepatentsearchcommunityandtotheinformationretrievalresearch Preface vii community;toprovideacollectedandorganizedintroductiontotheworkandviews ofthetwosidesoftheemergingpatentsearchresearchandinnovationcommunity; andtoprovideacoherentandorganisedviewofwhathasbeenachievedand,per- hapsevenmoresignificantly,ofwhatremainstobeachieved. We have already noted the need for transparency (or at least defensibility) of searchprocessesfromthepatentsearchcommunity.Wehopethisbookwillallow theIRresearcherstobetterunderstandwhysuchtransparencyisneeded,andwhatit meansinpractise.Furthermore,itisourhopethatthisbookwillalsobeavaluable resourceforIPprofessionalsinlearningaboutcurrentapproachesofIRinthepatent domain. It has often been difficult to reconcile the focus on useful technological innovation from the IP community, with the demands for scientific rigour and to proceedonthebasisofsoundempiricalevidence,whichissuchanimportantfeature ofIR(incontrasttosomeotherareasofcomputerscience). Moreover, patent search is an inherently multilingual and multinational topic: thenoveltyofapatentmaybedismissedbyfindingadocumentdescribingthesame ideainanylanguageanywhereintheworld.Patentsarecomplexlegaldocuments, evenlessaccessiblethanthescientificliterature.Thesearejustsomeofthecharac- teristicsofthepatentsystem,whichmakeitanimportantchallengeforthesearch, informationretrievalandinformationaccesscommunities. The book has had a lengthy and difficult gestation: the list of authors has been revisedmanytimesasaresultofchangesininstitutional,occupationalandprivate circumstances. Although we, the editors, do feel we have succeeded in producing a volume which will provide important perspectives of the issues affecting patent searchresearchandinnovationatthetimeofwriting,aswellasauseful,briefin- troductiontotheoutlookandliteratureofthecommunityaccessibletoitsmembers, regardlessoftheirbackground,wewouldhavelikedtocoverseveraltopicsnotrep- resentedhere. InparticularitwasdisappointingwecouldnotincludeachapteronNTCIR,the first of the evaluation campaigns to focus seriously on patents. Also, a chapter on theuseofLatentSemanticIndexingforthepatentdomainhadbeenplanned,which ultimatelycouldnotappearinthisbook. Several of the chapters have been written jointly by intellectual property and informationretrievalexperts.Membersofbothcommunitieswithabackgroundop- positetotheprimaryauthorhavereviewedallthechapters.Ithasnotalwaysbeen easytoreconciletheirdifferingviewpoints:wemustthankthemfortakingthetime toresolvetheirdifferencesandfortakingtheopportunitytoexchangetheirknowl- edge across fields and disciplinary mind-sets and to engage in a mutual discourse thatwillhopefullyfostertheunderstandinginthefuture. Finally, we would like to thank the IRF for making this publication possible, thepublisher,Springer;andinparticularRalfGerstner,forthepatiencewithwhich he accepted the numerous delays, as well as the externalreviewers who read each chapterandprovidedtheauthorswithvaluableadvice. Theeditorsareverygratefultothefollowingpersons,whoagreedtoreviewthe manuscripts:StephenAdams,LindaAndersson,GeethaBasappa,JohnM.Barnard, Shariq Bashir, Helmut Berger, Katrien Beuls, Ted Briscoe, Ben Carterette, Paul viii Preface Clough,BruceCroft,SzabolcsCsepregi,BarrouDiallo,KarlA.Froeschl,Norbert Fuhr, Eric Gaussier, Julio Gonzalo, Allan Hanbury, Christopher G. Harris, Ilkka Havukkala, Bruce Hedin, Cornelis H.A. Koster, Mounia Lalmas, Patrice Lopez, TeresaLoughbrough,Marie-FrancineMoens,HenningMüller,IadhOunis,Florina Piroi,KeithvanRijsbergen,PatrickRuch,PhilipTetlow,HenkThomas,IngoThon, SteveTomlinson,AnthonyTrippe,SuzanVerberne,EllenM.Voorhees,PeterWil- lett,ChristaWomser-Hacker. MihaiLupu KatjaMayer JohnTait AnthonyTrippe Contents PartI IntroductiontoPatentSearching 1 IntroductiontoPatentSearching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 DoreenAlberts,CynthiaBarcelonYang,DeniseFobare-DePonio,Ken Koubek,SuzanneRobins,MatthewRodgers,EdlynSimmons,and DominicDeMarco 2 AnIntroductiontoContemporarySearchTechnology . . . . . . . . 45 VeronikaStefanovandJohnI.Tait PartII EvaluatingPatentRetrieval 3 OverviewofInformationRetrievalEvaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 BenCarteretteandEllenM.Voorhees 4 Evaluating Information Retrieval in the Intellectual Property Domain:TheCLEF–IPCampaign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 FlorinaPiroiandVeronikaZenz 5 EvaluationofChemicalInformationRetrievalTools . . . . . . . . . 109 MihaiLupu,JimmyHuang,andJianhanZhu 6 EvaluatingRealPatentRetrievalEffectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 AnthonyTrippeandIanRuthven PartIII HighRecallSearch 7 MeasuringandImprovingAccesstotheCorpus . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 RichardBache 8 MeasuringEffectivenessintheTRECLegalTrack . . . . . . . . . . 167 StephenTomlinsonandBruceHedin ix x Contents 9 Large-ScaleLogicalRetrieval:TechnologyforSemanticModelling ofPatentSearch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 HanyAzzam,IraklisA.Klampanos,andThomasRoelleke 10 PatentClaimDecompositionforImprovedInformationExtraction . 197 PeterParapaticsandMichaelDittenbach 11 FromStaticTextualDisplayofPatentstoGraphicalInteractions . . 217 SteffenKochandHaraldBosch PartIV Classification 12 AutomatedPatentClassification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 KarimBenzinebandJacquesGuyot 13 Phrase-basedDocumentCategorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263 CornelisH.A.Koster,JeanG.Beney,SuzanVerberne,andMerijnVogel 14 UsingClassificationCodeHierarchiesforPatentPriorArtSearches 287 ChristopherG.Harris,RobertArens,andPadminiSrinivasan PartV SemanticSearch 15 Information Extraction and Semantic Annotation for Multi- ParadigmInformationManagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307 Hamish Cunningham, Valentin Tablan, Ian Roberts, Mark A. Greenwood,andNirajAswani 16 IntelligentInformationAccessfromScientificPapers . . . . . . . . . 329 TedBriscoe,KarlHarrison,AndrewNaish,AndyParker,MarekRei, AdvaithSiddharthan,DavidSinclair,MarkSlater,andRebeccaWatson 17 RepresentationandSearchingofChemical-StructureInformation inPatents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 JohnD.HollidayandPeterWillett 18 OfferingNewInsightsbyHarmonizingPatents,Taxonomiesand LinkedData . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357 AndreasPesenhofer,HelmutBerger,andMichaelDittenbach 19 AutomaticTranslationofScholarlyTermsintoPatentTerms . . . . 373 HidetsuguNanba,HideakiKamaya,ToshiyukiTakezawa,Manabu Okumura,AkihiroShinmori,andHidekazuTanigawa 20 FuturePatentSearch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389 JohnI.TaitandBarouDiallo Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409 Contributors Doreen Alberts Theravance Inc., 901 Gateway Blvd., South San Francisco, CA, USA RobertArens NuanceCommunications,Burlington,MA,USA, [email protected] NirajAswani DepartmentofComputerScience,UniversityofSheffield,Sheffield, UK,[email protected] HanyAzzam QueenMaryUniversityofLondon,London,UK, [email protected] RichardBache DepartmentofComputerandInformationSciences,Universityof Strathclyde,GlasgowG41XH,Scotland,UK,[email protected] JeanG.Beney Dept.Informatique,LCI,INSAdeLyon,Lyon,France, [email protected] Karim Benzineb SIMPLE SHIFT, Ruelle du P’tit-Gris 1, 1228 Plan-les-Ouates, Switzerland,[email protected] HelmutBerger max.recallinformationsystems,Vienna,Austria, [email protected] Harald Bosch Institute for Interactive Systems and Visualization, Universität Stuttgart,Stuttgart,Germany TedBriscoe UniversityofCambridge,Cambridge,UK,[email protected]; iLexIRLtd,Cambridge,UK BenCarterette UniversityofDelaware,Newark,DE19716,USA, [email protected] HamishCunningham DepartmentofComputerScience,UniversityofSheffield, Sheffield,UK,[email protected] xi
The list of books you might like
