A frequently used indicator for assessing technological strengths of nations are patents registered in the triad region, i.e.
in North America, Europe, and Asia. Currently these so-called triadic patents are defined as filed at the United States Patent
and Trademark Office (USPTO), the European Patent Office (EPO), and the Japanese Patent Office (JPO). Recent developments
suggested that this definition might lack adequacy regarding the offices in Europe and Asia. Our findings propose that in
particular Germany and China should be added to this triad definition since in some technology fields patents registered in
these countries show the same citation impact as patents registered at the EPO or JPO. Our results also underline that the
number of triadic patent families per country is a function of technological specialization and (national) patenting strategies.
We elicit filing strategies for patent families in China and Japan in two prominent technology fields: telecommunications
and audiovisual technology. For the two destination countries we find substantial heterogeneity in filing strategies among
applications from different countries. This heterogeneity cannot be explained with activities in technological subfields.
One way to achieve international patent protection is to file patents via the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). The application
process therein can be divided into two phases, those represented by chapters I and II of the PCT. According to the literature,
patent applications filed via chapter II of the Treaty tend to be more valuable. The results presented in this paper suggest
that in general this assumption is not justified. The analyses further revealed that for practitioners seeking fast patent
protection at the European Patent Office (EPO) via the PCT, the choice should be chapter II of the PCT, with the EPO as preliminary
This paper briefly reviews the knowledge-generation process and explores to what degree technical and scientific knowledge
from prior art anticipates novelty or the inventive step of an invention. Inventions are novel if they have not been described
(in the public) before, and they are inventive if the technical solution was non-obvious to a skilled person in the field.
We employ a novel approach of patent citation analysis to investigate this phenomenon. Since in this context common approaches
of such citation analysis are biased (usually, citations are neither exhaustive nor relevant in their entirety), we focus
on examination reports of European patent applications and the references given therein. Our findings reveal that particularly
technical knowledge comprised in patents serves as a source of novelty, while scientific knowledge frequently stems from multiple
scientific papers and accounts for the inventive step. In addition, it is found that in many cases scientific knowledge is
of commercial relevance and therefore constitutes more than general background information that aids the technical knowledge
This paper investigates the utility of the Inclusion Index, the Jaccard Index and the Cosine Index for calculating similarities
of documents, as used for mapping science and technology. It is shown that, provided that the same content is searched across
various documents, the Inclusion Index generally delivers more exact results, in particular when computing the degree of similarity
based on citation data. In addition, various methodologies such as co-word analysis, Subject-Action-Object (SAO) structures,
bibliographic coupling, co-citation analysis, and self-citation links are compared. We find that the two former ones tend
to describe rather semantic similarities that differ from knowledge flows as expressed by the citation-based methodologies.