Recently I had to try to understand how good is the coverage of patstat in terms of CPCs for some of the most relevant application authorities.
Obviously there is no benchmark data available, thus the main concept I used was a comparison of average number of Cpcs by application authority/year in order to display whether the baseline had some discontinuities.
I also dropped data where the number of applications was below 10k.
I display the results below.
A couple of short comments:
1) only few authorities seem to have discontinuities int their average number of CPCs: AT, BR and IT somehow.
2) average number of CPCs can differ much among patent offices (see FI values above 2 for MX, FR versus an average 0.2 for JP and 0.5 for CN); this seems to indicate difference in examination process, but values below 1 also indicate possible errors in data.
year
|
AT
|
AU
|
BR
|
CA
|
CN
|
DE
|
EP
|
ES
|
FR
|
GB
|
IT
|
JP
|
KR
|
MX
|
RU
|
SU
|
TW
|
UA
|
US
|
1990
|
1,5805
|
1,0222
|
1,2443
|
1,4408
|
0,319
|
0,6848
|
1,1223
|
1,5077
|
1,8886
|
0,9416
|
0,8238
|
0,1386
|
0,7823
|
|
|
0,115
|
|
|
0,7347
|
1991
|
1,8534
|
1,0777
|
1,2416
|
1,5371
|
0,2501
|
0,7081
|
1,1752
|
1,5672
|
1,9282
|
0,9396
|
0,7817
|
0,1468
|
0,6869
|
|
|
0,1497
|
|
|
0,7179
|
1992
|
2,0021
|
1,2314
|
|
1,634
|
0,2463
|
0,7133
|
1,1792
|
1,6628
|
1,968
|
0,9351
|
0,8025
|
0,1558
|
0,6441
|
|
|
0,1708
|
|
|
0,7021
|
1993
|
2,0424
|
1,2887
|
1,5505
|
1,7356
|
0,3428
|
0,7074
|
1,1998
|
1,7068
|
1,986
|
0,9856
|
0,8661
|
0,168
|
0,559
|
|
0,419
|
|
|
|
0,6926
|
1994
|
1,9649
|
1,0341
|
1,6268
|
1,6973
|
0,5032
|
0,6946
|
1,1794
|
1,7314
|
1,9676
|
0,9847
|
0,8669
|
0,2014
|
0,4896
|
|
0,5025
|
|
|
|
0,6595
|
1995
|
1,9811
|
1,0222
|
1,543
|
1,6666
|
0,5663
|
0,6806
|
1,1286
|
1,7256
|
1,9316
|
0,9925
|
0,8117
|
0,2011
|
0,4196
|
|
0,5805
|
|
|
|
0,5947
|
1996
|
1,9141
|
0,9888
|
1,5517
|
1,5929
|
0,5651
|
0,6548
|
1,0688
|
1,6665
|
1,876
|
0,9942
|
0,8342
|
0,2022
|
0,4373
|
|
0,5507
|
|
|
|
0,598
|
1997
|
1,9004
|
0,9449
|
1,4826
|
1,5193
|
0,5625
|
0,6324
|
0,9858
|
1,667
|
1,8377
|
0,9898
|
0,8288
|
0,2012
|
0,4574
|
|
0,584
|
|
|
|
0,5325
|
1998
|
1,8352
|
0,897
|
1,5285
|
1,4542
|
0,5681
|
0,6172
|
0,9136
|
1,6449
|
1,8431
|
0,9694
|
0,8305
|
0,1996
|
0,4092
|
|
0,568
|
|
1,0407
|
|
0,511
|
1999
|
1,7457
|
0,8469
|
1,455
|
1,4137
|
0,5214
|
0,6146
|
0,8547
|
1,6162
|
1,8554
|
0,9476
|
0,9134
|
0,2036
|
0,3617
|
|
0,5118
|
|
0,7697
|
|
0,461
|
2000
|
1,6225
|
0,7958
|
1,4826
|
1,3732
|
0,4663
|
0,6169
|
0,7965
|
1,6489
|
1,8563
|
0,9262
|
0,9536
|
0,1978
|
0,3027
|
|
0,5013
|
|
0,7841
|
|
0,3945
|
2001
|
1,656
|
0,7811
|
1,5078
|
1,3952
|
0,4516
|
0,6452
|
0,7667
|
1,6923
|
1,8714
|
0,9591
|
1,018
|
0,2014
|
0,3956
|
|
0,4893
|
|
0,7597
|
|
0,353
|
2002
|
1,7174
|
1,1174
|
1,5313
|
1,4065
|
0,4049
|
0,6962
|
0,7802
|
1,744
|
1,9083
|
0,9843
|
1,0718
|
0,2096
|
0,4178
|
2,2191
|
0,4933
|
|
0,7513
|
|
0,3497
|
2003
|
1,7458
|
0,8989
|
1,5068
|
1,4185
|
0,3647
|
0,736
|
0,7664
|
1,7436
|
1,9423
|
1,0343
|
1,0689
|
0,2152
|
0,3862
|
2,2894
|
0,514
|
|
0,5934
|
0,3853
|
0,3419
|
2004
|
1,7494
|
1,378
|
1,448
|
1,4239
|
0,3348
|
0,85
|
0,7282
|
1,7534
|
1,8975
|
1,1297
|
1,0841
|
0,2112
|
0,3122
|
2,2233
|
0,5591
|
|
0,537
|
|
0,3124
|
2005
|
1,7678
|
1,3685
|
1,4751
|
1,3627
|
0,2924
|
0,8675
|
0,6956
|
1,7406
|
1,9154
|
1,2638
|
1,1522
|
0,2116
|
0,3297
|
2,1751
|
0,6032
|
|
0,5286
|
|
0,2911
|
2006
|
1,8316
|
1,3601
|
1,4945
|
1,3074
|
0,2581
|
0,911
|
0,6806
|
1,8097
|
1,9235
|
1,3325
|
1,0348
|
0,2236
|
0,3352
|
2,3045
|
0,6156
|
|
0,5412
|
0,3992
|
0,2881
|
2007
|
2,0192
|
1,3467
|
1,475
|
1,287
|
0,2306
|
0,9558
|
0,6755
|
1,8217
|
1,9513
|
1,3541
|
1,0811
|
0,2324
|
0,3822
|
2,0726
|
0,6335
|
|
0,5729
|
0,3067
|
0,2803
|
2008
|
2,2159
|
1,4345
|
0,8578
|
1,3487
|
0,1984
|
0,9881
|
0,6757
|
1,8483
|
1,9885
|
1,3961
|
1,4127
|
0,2364
|
0,4006
|
|
0,6282
|
|
0,5591
|
0,2352
|
0,2864
|
2009
|
2,5456
|
1,4981
|
|
1,412
|
0,1637
|
1,0438
|
0,7061
|
1,8853
|
2,0335
|
1,3971
|
1,7341
|
0,2607
|
0,3819
|
2,0523
|
0,6939
|
|
0,5626
|
0,132
|
0,3034
|
2010
|
|
1,5006
|
|
1,4812
|
0,1395
|
1,0705
|
0,6947
|
1,8731
|
2,1195
|
1,449
|
1,8386
|
0,2692
|
0,388
|
2,1157
|
0,6558
|
|
0,5983
|
0,0535
|
0,2955
|
2011
|
|
1,4532
|
|
1,4864
|
0,1106
|
1,0637
|
0,6948
|
1,6421
|
2,1896
|
1,5088
|
1,8135
|
0,277
|
0,3975
|
2,1235
|
0,4225
|
|
0,5993
|
0,0403
|
0,2861
|
2012
|
|
1,2387
|
|
1,3143
|
0,0804
|
1,0109
|
0,6665
|
|
2,1202
|
1,4576
|
1,8017
|
0,2395
|
0,3442
|
2,0942
|
0,2363
|
|
0,5584
|
0,0367
|
0,2684
|
2013
|
|
0,5364
|
|
0,746
|
0,0437
|
0,7309
|
0,895
|
|
1,1866
|
0,7998
|
|
0,2894
|
0,2791
|
2,1296
|
0,0695
|
|
0,4253
|
|
0,2985
|
5 comments:
have figured out what the variables cpc_value and cpc_position mean?
I cannot find any info on whether these are meaningful (ideally, signal of relative importance of a given CPC class?)
Brilliant! Thanks Gianluca. However, you say "instead", but in the data the majority have both.
I don't think it is always the case that F and I are perfectly correlated, either, so maybe we need to interpret them as different measures (rather than substitutes)? Just a thought. Thanks again. -Luis
you're right, I amended the comment
CPC_POSITION should be helpful for indentifying main class (where = "F" first) where patent authority has the concept
CPC_VALUE gives indication of the value of the classification i.e. is the class symbol relating to the invention or to aspects not related to the invention (but in the application). I=Invention A=Additional (Non-invention)
Nice post, I bookmark your blog because I found very good information on your blog, Thanks for sharing more information
Trademark search and registration | Patent Registration in India
Post a Comment