Paper detail

The role of bipartite structure in R&D collaboration networks

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.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.