“…There are statistical methods that could refine the 39 TRIZ parameters into a smaller set a posteriori, e.g., Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) [41]. However, these methods can only reduce numbers of parameters by extraction whereas we intend to reduce some numbers of parameters by combination also (Section 2.1.1).…”
Section: Alternative Statistical Methodsmentioning
This paper presents a novel method of patent mapping for visualising conflicts between patent claims that incorporates the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ). The method uses TRIZ engineering parameters as the criteria for evaluating dissimilarities between patent claims, producing a visualisation based on Multi-Dimensional Scaling (MDS) that can be compared with legal judgments.The advantages of the method are that it (a) reduces evaluation complexity by transforming claim-toclaim comparisons into claim-to-criteria comparisons, and (b) provides a means of comparing judgement standards between different legal authorities in mechanical engineering terms. Reliability and validity of the method are tested through focus groups using a case study on aircraft seats. The scope of the method is limited to the field of mechanical inventions.
“…There are statistical methods that could refine the 39 TRIZ parameters into a smaller set a posteriori, e.g., Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) [41]. However, these methods can only reduce numbers of parameters by extraction whereas we intend to reduce some numbers of parameters by combination also (Section 2.1.1).…”
Section: Alternative Statistical Methodsmentioning
This paper presents a novel method of patent mapping for visualising conflicts between patent claims that incorporates the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ). The method uses TRIZ engineering parameters as the criteria for evaluating dissimilarities between patent claims, producing a visualisation based on Multi-Dimensional Scaling (MDS) that can be compared with legal judgments.The advantages of the method are that it (a) reduces evaluation complexity by transforming claim-toclaim comparisons into claim-to-criteria comparisons, and (b) provides a means of comparing judgement standards between different legal authorities in mechanical engineering terms. Reliability and validity of the method are tested through focus groups using a case study on aircraft seats. The scope of the method is limited to the field of mechanical inventions.
“…On the design-by-analogy front, Linsey et al (2012), Segers et al (2005), and Verhaegen et al (2011) develop approaches to analogical retrieval and reasoning through linguistic (semantic word) associations, problem re-representation, and mappings. Shai and Reich (Reich and Shai 2012;Shai and Reich 2004) developed approaches to analogical retrieval of knowledge structures and processes that allow the use of across domains.…”
Section: Design-by-analogymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Theories like TRIZ and their resulting tools have attempted to address this (Altshuller and Shapiro 1956;Altshuller et al 1985;Zhang et al 2007;Nix 2011;Goldfire 2012;DuranNovoa et al 2011;Krasnoslobodtsev and Langevin 2005;Nakagawa 2012;Houssin and Coulibaly 2011;Mann et al 2003;CREAX. (September 7, 2012); Hernandez et al 2013;Liang et al 2013), along with many more researchdriven tools and methods (Verhaegen et al 2011;Goel et al 1997;Bhatta and Goel 1996;Vincent et al 2006;Chiu and Shu 2007). However, much of this previous work often relies deeply on users/designers to create their own analogies, or search through large, unstructured quantities of results with little indication of relevance.…”
Design-by-analogy is a growing field of study and practice, due to its power to augment and extend traditional concept generation methods by expanding the set of generated ideas using similarity relationships from solutions to analogous problems. This paper presents the results of experimentally testing a new method for extracting functional analogies from general data sources, such as patent databases, to assist designers in systematically seeking and identifying analogies. In summary, the approach produces significantly improved results on the novelty of solutions generated and no significant change in the total quantity of solutions generated. Computationally, this design-by-analogy facilitation methodology uses a novel functional vector space representation to quantify the functional similarity between represented design problems and, in this case, patent descriptions of products. The mapping of the patents into the functional analogous words enables the generation of functionally relevant novel ideas that can be customized in various ways. Overall, this approach provides functionally relevant novel sources of design-byanalogy inspiration to designers and design teams.
“…Ahmed developed a system for helping designers to index and build a knowledge network based on engineering designer queries, which generates associations between concepts, with the end goal of aiding in the search for information, reformulation of a query, and prompting design tasks [47]. Linsey et al [48][49][50], Seger et al [51], and Verhaegen et al [52] develop approaches to analogical retrieval and reasoning through linguistic associations, problem re-representation, and mappings.…”
Section: Analogical Reasoningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Attempts to aid in the search and use of the patent database include theories like TRIZ and their resulting tools [58,59,[72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82], along with many more research driven tools and methods [35,52,[83][84][85]. Previous work in this field most often relies deeply on users and designers to create their own analogies, or search through large quantities of results.…”
Design-by-analogy is an effective approach to innovative concept generation, but can be elusive at times due to the fact that few methods and tools exist to assist designers in systematically seeking and identifying analogies from general data sources, databases, or repositories, such as patent databases. A new method for extracting analogies from data sources has been developed to provide this capability. Building on past research, we utilize a functional vector space model to quantify analogous similarity between a design problem and the data source of potential analogies. We quantitatively evaluate the functional similarity between represented design problems and, in this case, patent descriptions of products. We develop a complete functional vocabulary to map the patent database to applicable functionally critical terms, using document parsing algorithms to reduce text descriptions of the data sources down to the key functions, and applying Zipf's law on word count order reduction to reduce the words within the documents. The reduction of a document (in this case a patent) into functional analogous words enables the matching to novel ideas that are functionally similar, which can be customized in various ways. This approach thereby provides relevant sources of design-by-analogy inspiration. Although our implementation of the technique focuses on functional descriptions of patents and the mapping of these functions to those of the design problem, resulting in a set of analogies, we believe that this technique is applicable to other analogy data sources as well. As a verification of the approach, an original design problem for an automated window washer illustrates the distance range of analogical solutions that can be extracted, extending from very near-field, literal solutions to far-field cross-domain analogies. Finally, a comparison with a current patent search tool is performed to draw a contrast to the status quo and evaluate the effectiveness of this work.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.