Gender homophily in patent examinations
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This paper is one of the first attempts that sheds light on the gendered practices in the patent examination process. The findings reveal the share of female examiners and female inventors has increased over time but is still considerably low. Along these lines, when the patent examiner is a woman, the granted patent comprises a higher contribution of women inventors. These results are persistent when controlling for patent characteristics, collaboration type, sectors, and technological fields. Moreover, the processing time is longer when the examiner is a woman. This raises the question of whether female examiners’ requisitions might be more challenged by the patent representative(s) and inventors (of whom the majority are men) than those of male examiners; or of whether male examiners favor patents with a higher share of male inventors involved. Along these lines, patent attorneys/agents play a significant role in the examination process, as these are who represent the inventors and are in direct communication with the patent examiners. This paper highlights that in all the sectors and fields, the lowest share of female inventorship is associated with patents represented by male attorney(s) or agent(s) to a male examiner. The opposite of this trend is also applicable to female-examined patents, which contributes to addressing the latter question and suggests the likely presence of gender homophily in the patent examination process. Patent claims and patent citations are two measures of technological applicability and impact. These two measures are correlated. Interestingly, the average number of claims is higher for female-examined patents, while the citation impact of the patents is lower. This finding, combined with the fact that women receive lower citation rates for their patents, presents an important implication for gendered practices in citations in patents. These practices could induce stark imbalances in gender and inclusion in patenting, as male examiners are responsible for 81% of total patents granted in the USPTO. This study also sheds light on the importance of open innovation and collaborative entities in addressing gender disparities in patenting, as women are shown to be more involved in patents granted to more than one entity. This study brings forth one of the possible elucidations for gender differences in inventorship and calls for gender-responsive policy mechanisms to provide women an environment conducive to more patenting engagement.<br>
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,418 | 0,228 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».