MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012633125 · doi:10.21300/21.2.2020.131

Key Takeaways from “The Intersection of University Inventions and Recent Cases at the Patent Trial And Appeal Board (PTAB)”

2020· article· en· W3012633125 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology & Innovation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResearch, Science, and Academia
Canadian institutionsSheridan College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrademarkAppealIntellectual propertyLawPatentabilityMythologyPolitical scienceManagementPatent lawHistoryClassicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article provides a brief summary of the discussion, presentation, and knowledge shared during the Eight Annual Meeting of the National Academy of Inventors held in Houston, Texas, in April 2019. The panel, “The Intersection of University Inventions and Recent Cases at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB),” focused on university inventions and the PTAB, with perspectives from a university technology transfer office, a PTAB administrative patent judge, and attorneys practicing before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and in Federal District Court. The panel was led by Andrew Maas of Louisiana State University and included Kalyan Deshpande of the USPTO; Kyle Friesen of Shook, Hardy & Bacon; and Jay Yates of Patterson + Sheridan. The panel busted myths and provided helpful information and perspective on the PTAB.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.282
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.081 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it