IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/24018.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mainstream Formation and Competitive Dynamics in the Computer Graphics Industry: Topic modeling analysis of US patents

Author

Listed:
  • WATANABE Ichiro
  • SHIMIZU Hiroshi

Abstract

This study conducts a quantitative analysis of the relationship between mainstream formation and competition in technological fields. The process of determining the dominant design is crucial in analyzing mainstream formation within specific technological fields, and numerous studies have explored this process. The quantitative analysis conducted in this study indicates that, during the process in which the dominant design is determined, the dominant category, a broader framework than the dominant design, is also established. In this study, we use topic modeling analysis to examine the relationship between the convergence of research and development (R&D) trends among organizations and the number of organizations publishing patents in the computer graphics processing systems industry. Specifically, the number of organizations publishing patents in the industry increased when the degree of convergence among the R&D trends of each organization was relatively low, whereas it decreased when the degree of convergence among R&D trends of each organization was relatively high. Further, the change in the degree of convergence occurred before the change in the number of organizations. These observations suggest that the formation of a mainstream within the industry, which is associated with the convergence of R&D tendencies of specific organizations, affects the competitive environment within the industry.

Suggested Citation

  • WATANABE Ichiro & SHIMIZU Hiroshi, 2024. "Mainstream Formation and Competitive Dynamics in the Computer Graphics Industry: Topic modeling analysis of US patents," Discussion papers 24018, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:24018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/24e018.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Suominen, Arho & Toivanen, Hannes & Seppänen, Marko, 2017. "Firms' knowledge profiles: Mapping patent data with unsupervised learning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 131-142.
    2. Roberto Fontana & Alessandro Nuvolari & Bart Verspagen, 2009. "Mapping technological trajectories as patent citation networks. An application to data communication standards," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 311-336.
    3. Kaplan, Sarah & Tripsas, Mary, 2008. "Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 790-805, June.
    4. Taylor, Margaret & Taylor, Andrew, 2012. "The technology life cycle: Conceptualization and managerial implications," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 541-553.
    5. Sarah Kaplan & Keyvan Vakili, 2015. "The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1435-1457, October.
    6. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    7. Martinelli, Arianna, 2012. "An emerging paradigm or just another trajectory? Understanding the nature of technological changes using engineering heuristics in the telecommunications switching industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 414-429.
    8. Chen, Baitong & Tsutsui, Satoshi & Ding, Ying & Ma, Feicheng, 2017. "Understanding the topic evolution in a scientific domain: An exploratory study for the field of information retrieval," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 1175-1189.
    9. Fernando F. Suarez & Stine Grodal & Aleksios Gotsopoulos, 2015. "Perfect timing? Dominant category, dominant design, and the window of opportunity for firm entry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 437-448, March.
    10. Utterback, James M. & Suarez, Fernando F., 1993. "Innovation, competition, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, February.
    11. Sun, Bixuan & Kolesnikov, Sergey & Goldstein, Anna & Chan, Gabriel, 2021. "A dynamic approach for identifying technological breakthroughs with an application in solar photovoltaics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    12. Possas, Mario Luiz & Salles-Filho, Sergio & da Silveira, JoseMaria, 1996. "An evolutionary approach to technological innovation in agriculture: some preliminary remarks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 933-945, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ichiro Watanabe & Soichiro Takagi, 2021. "Technological Trajectory Analysis of Patent Citation Networks: Examining the Technological Evolution of Computer Graphic Processing Systems," The Review of Socionetwork Strategies, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 1-25, June.
    2. Ichiro Watanabe & Soichiro Takagi, 2022. "NK model-based analysis of technological trajectories: a study on the technological field of computer graphic processing systems," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 119-140, April.
    3. Dai, Haiwen & Qualls, William J. & Zhu, You, 2024. "Win, lose, or draw? Forecasting the outcome of a race toward a dominant formal standard with machine learning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    4. Junmo Kim & Juneseuk Shin, 2018. "Mapping extended technological trajectories: integration of main path, derivative paths, and technology junctures," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1439-1459, September.
    5. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    6. Alessandri, Enrico, 2023. "Identifying technological trajectories in the mining sector using patent citation networks," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    7. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    8. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    9. Kim, Dong-hyu & Lee, Heejin & Kwak, Jooyoung, 2017. "Standards as a driving force that influences emerging technological trajectories in the converging world of the Internet and things: An investigation of the M2M/IoT patent network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1234-1254.
    10. Zhou, Yong & Yang, Qijin & Lu, Shuo, 2023. "Research on the identification and formation mechanism of the main path of digital technology diffusion: Empirical evidence from China," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    11. Sean T. Hsu & Susan K. Cohen, 2022. "Overcoming the Incumbent Dilemma: The Dual Roles of Multimarket Contact During Disruption," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 319-348, March.
    12. Flavia Filippin, 2021. "Do main paths reflect technological trajectories? Applying main path analysis to the semiconductor manufacturing industry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6443-6477, August.
    13. Fei Yuan & Kumiko Miyazaki, 2017. "Trajectory Identification as Proxies for Discerning the Dynamic Nature of Technological Change — The Case of Electric Vehicles Industry," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(01), pages 1-20, February.
    14. Jakob Hoffmann & Johannes Glückler, 2023. "Technological Cohesion and Convergence: A Main Path Analysis of the Bioeconomy, 1900–2020," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-17, August.
    15. Epicoco, Marianna, 2013. "Knowledge patterns and sources of leadership: Mapping the semiconductor miniaturization trajectory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 180-195.
    16. Hélène Dernis & Mariagrazia Squicciarini & Roberto Pinho, 2016. "Detecting the emergence of technologies and the evolution and co-development trajectories in science (DETECTS): a ‘burst’ analysis-based approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 930-960, October.
    17. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    18. Markard, Jochen, 2020. "The life cycle of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    19. Sun, Bixuan & Kolesnikov, Sergey & Goldstein, Anna & Chan, Gabriel, 2021. "A dynamic approach for identifying technological breakthroughs with an application in solar photovoltaics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    20. Shinjinee Chattopadhyay & Janet Bercovitz, 2020. "When one door closes, another door opens … for some: Evidence from the post‐TRIPS Indian pharmaceutical industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 988-1022, June.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:24018. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.
    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy