Nanotechnology strength indicators: international rankings based on US patents
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Technological strength indicators (TSIs) based on patent statistics for 1975-2000 are used to analyse patenting of nanotechnology in the USA, and to compile international rankings for the top 12 foreign patenting countries (namely Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and Taiwan). As the indicators are not directly observable, various proxy variables are used, namely the technological specialization index for national priorities, patent shares for international presence, citation rate for the contribution of patents to knowledge development and rate of assigned patents for potential commercial benefits. The best performing country is France, followed by Japan and Canada. It is shown that expertise and strength in nanotechnology are not evenly distributed among the technologically advanced countries, with the TSIs revealing different emphases in the development of nanotechnology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it