8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Bipartite networks describe R&D collaboration between institutions

      Preprint
      ,

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A number of real world networks are, in fact, one-mode projections of bipartite networks comprised of two types of nodes. For institutions engaging in collaboration for technological innovation, the underlying network is bipartite with institutions (agents) linked to the patents they have filed (artifacts), while the projection is the co-patenting network. Projected network topology is highly affected by the underlying bipartite structure, hence a lack of understanding of the bipartite network has consequences for the information that might be drawn from the one-mode co-patenting network. Here, we create an empirical bipartite network using data from 2.7 million patents. We project this network onto the agents (institutions) and look at properties of both the bipartite and projected networks that may play a role in knowledge sharing and collaboration. We compare these empirical properties to those of synthetic bipartite networks and their projections in order to understand the processes that might operate in the network formation. A good understanding of the topology is critical for investigating the potential flow of technological knowledge. We show how degree distributions and small cycles affect the topology of the one-mode projected network - specifically degree and clustering distributions, and assortativity. We propose new network based metrics to quantify how collaborative agents are in the co-patenting network. We find that several large corporations that are the most collaborative agents in the network, however such organisations tend to have a low diversity of collaborators. In contrast, the most prolific institutions tend to collaborate relatively little but with a diverse set of collaborators. This indicates that they concentrate the knowledge of their core technical research, while seeking specific complementary knowledge via collaboration with smaller companies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results

          M. Newman (2001)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Resource-based View of Strategic Alliance Formation: Strategic and Social Effects in Entrepreneurial Firms

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The Architecture of Cooperation: Managing Coordination Costs and Appropriation Concerns in Strategic Alliances

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                24 September 2019
                Article
                1909.10977
                8f16dfc1-71c4-472e-9b8a-eeb5869366c3

                http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/

                History
                Custom metadata
                23 pages, 12 figures, 2 tables
                physics.soc-ph cs.SI

                Social & Information networks,General physics
                Social & Information networks, General physics

                Comments

                Comment on this article