在知識經濟的發展下，產業在建構經營管理所必備的生產要素時，必須關切無形資產的創造與運用。無形資產評價賦予無形資產新的經濟價值，尤其是與智慧財產權相關，舉例而言，專利從保護發明人的技術知識構想，經由評價賦予價值後，使得專利權人能在市場進行專利授權、專利交易、專利質權，進而從中獲取利益。

根據學者Trajtenberg、Albert、Ernst提出專利引證指標可以判斷專利的技術價值或經濟價值，因此，現今評估專利價值大多也採用專利引證指標。然而，回歸探討專利引證制度的起始點，與專利審查官對於「專利引證」的想法，發現學者與專利審查官者在判斷專利價值的出發點大相逕庭，因此本研究比較專利前向引證數與專家評判的專利價值之差異。

本研究透過專利資訊分析專利前向引證數與專利價值兩者的關係，探究專利前向引證數的多寡，是否足以全面性衡量專利的價值，抑或是被認定的專利價值，是否具有相對應的前向引證數。分析結果經彙整如以下三點：(1)專利前向引證數實際上會受時間上的影響；(2)專利前向引證數的多寡，無法全面性衡量專利是否具有價值；(3)專利價值的高低，無法具有相對應的專利前向引證數。

Under the development of knowledge economy, while an industry is constructing the essential production factors for management purpose, concerning the creativity and utility of the intangible asset is necessary. The intangible assets have been given new economic value by the evaluation, especially those related to intellectual property. For instance, patent has transform from protecting the inventors’ technical knowledge concept to making profits by enabling the patentee to license, make transactions, or pledge after acquiring a value through evaluation.

According to scholars such as Trajtenberg, Albert, and Ernst, patent citation indicators are capable of determining the economic or technical value of a patent. Thus, most of the patent evaluations nowadays use patent citation indicators. However, by returning to the origin of patent citation system and how the patent examiners view the “patent citation”, we found tremendous difference between the concept of the scholars and the patent examiners. As a result, the thesis aim to compare the difference between the patent forward citation indicated and experts judged patent values.

Through analyzing patent information, the research studies the relation between the patent forward citation and the patent value, trying to understand whether the number of forward citations are capable of comprehensively evaluate the patent value, or whether the acknowledged patent value have corresponding patent forward citation. The analysis result are summarized as followed:

1. The patent forward citations are actually affected by the time;
2. The mere number of patent forward citation are not comprehensive of evaluating whether a patent is valuable;
3. The patent value does not correspond to the patent forward citation.

第1章 緒論
1.1 研究背景
1.1.1 知識經濟
1.1.2 無形資產評價
1.2 研究動機
1.3 研究目的
1.4 章節概要
第2章 文獻探討
2.1 專利文件與專利指標
2.2 專利指標應用以學者H. ERNST為例
2.3 專利引證
2.3.1 專利引證指標
2.3.2 專利引證指標種類
2.4 專利價值
2.5 專利引證與專利價值
2.6 小結
第3章 研究方法
3.1 研究流程
3.2 探索性研究
3.3 資料分析方法
3.3.1 檢索標的物特徵
3.3.2 資料庫選擇
3.3.3 關鍵字選擇
3.3.4 分類號選擇
3.3.5 擬定檢索式
3.3.6 驗證檢索式
3.3.7 專利資訊彙整
3.4 專利引證數計算與指標應用
3.5 專家介紹
3.6 專家判斷方法與標準
3.7 資料分析限制
第4章 分析結果
4.1 歷年公開年分析
4.2 歷年前向引證數分析
4.3 專利價值與前向引證數分析
4.4 前向引證數為0之專利
4.4.1 高等價值專利
4.4.2 中等價值專利
4.4.3 低等價值專利
第5章 結論
5.1 分析結論
5.2 未來研究建議
參考文獻 61

1. 詹炳耀，智慧財產估價的法制化研究，國立臺北大學法律學研究所博士論文，2003年。
2. 阮明淑, & 梁峻齊. (2009). 專利指標發展研究. 圖書館學與資訊科學, 35(2).
3. 智慧財產權月刊208期－論說明書中所載之先前技術-以智慧財產法院行政判決99年度行專訴字第129號、103年度行專訴字第84號為探討核心。
4. Schmookler, J. (1966). Invention and economic growth.
5. Carpenter, M. P., Narin, F., & Woolf, P. (1981). Citation rates to technologically important patents. World Patent Information, 3(4), 160-163.
6. Narin, F., Noma, E., & Perry, R. (1987). Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength. Research policy, 16(2-4), 143-155.
7. Basberg, B. L. (1987). Patents and the measurement of technological change: a survey of the literature. Research policy, 16(2-4), 131-141.
8. Trajtenberg, M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 172-187.
9. Albert, M. B., Avery, D., Narin, F., & McAllister, P. (1991). Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents. Research policy, 20(3), 251-259.
10. Brockhoff, K. K. (1992). Instruments for patent data analyses in business firms. Technovation, 12(1), 41-59.
11. Ernst, H. (1995). Patenting strategies in the German mechanical engineering industry and their relationship to company performance. Technovation, 15(4), 225-240.
12. Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., & Jaffe, A. (1997). University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Economics of Innovation and new technology, 5(1), 19-50.
13. Ernst, H. (1998). Patent portfolios for strategic R&D planning. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 15(4), 279-308.
14. Ernst, H. (1998). Industrial research as a source of important patents. Research policy, 27(1), 1-15.
15. Lanjouw, J., & Schankerman, M. (1998). Patent Suits: Do They Distort Research Incentives?.
16. Harhoff, D., Narin, F., Scherer, F. M., & Vopel, K. (1999). Citation frequency and the value of patented inventions. Review of Economics and statistics, 81(3), 511-515.
17. Guellec, D., & de la Potterie, B. V. P. (2000). Applications, grants and the value of patent. Economics letters, 69(1), 109-114.
18. Ernst, H. (2001). Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: evidence from time-series cross-section analyses on the firm level. Research Policy, 30(1), 143-157.
19. Ernst, H. (2003). Patent information for strategic technology management. World patent information, 25(3), 233-242.
20. Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M., & Vopel, K. (2003). Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research policy, 32(8), 1343-1363.
21. Abrams, D. S., Akcigit, U., & Popadak, J. (2013). Patent Value and Citations: Creative Destruction or Strategic Disruption? (No. w19647). National Bureau of Economic Research.
22. De Rassenfosse, G., Jaffe, A. B., & Webster, E. (2016). Low-quality patents in the eye of the beholder: Evidence from multiple examiners (No. w22244). National Bureau of Economic Research.
23. Ochmanek, David, Peter A. Wilson, Brenna Allen, John Speed Meyers, and Carter C. Price, U.S. Military Capabilities and Forces for a Dangerous World: Rethinking the U.S. Approach to Force Planning, Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, RR-1782-RC, 2017. As of April 16, 2018: