知識經濟時代的來臨使得智慧財產權逐漸成為相當重要的資源，但隨著公司所申請的專利愈來愈多，延續專利權的費用也會累積出巨大的開銷，公司如何判斷專利所擁有的價值高低來決定取捨，是一個相當複雜難解的問題，也因此成為了許多學者一直以來的研究目標。而過去的文獻中有部分學者運用實證資料證明被引證數之於專利價值為正相關，也有部分學者運用數據資料庫分析出對此學說有疑慮之結果。

本研究詳閱過去學者的相關文獻後統整，並與協力廠商之高階技術主管共同進行標的物的範疇界定，檢索出待驗證之專利群組後，請研發高階主管主觀判斷各專利價值，最後，探討專利被引證數對專利價值高低之判斷的有效性。

本研究之分析結果如下4點：（1）在本研究完整數據分析之下，專家判斷專利價值越高之專利群組，平均被引證數不一定越高；（2）在本研究被引證次數99次（含）以下之引證分析中，專家判斷專利價值越高之專利群組，平均被引證數越高；（3）在本研究之分析標的物技術領域中，以專家判斷為基準，專利被引證數作為專利價值的判斷方式，雖然具有一定的可參考程度，但仍有較高機率產生誤判；（4）本研究中，被引證數為0之專利，仍有一定的機率會被判斷為中價值或高價值之專利，故若需要正確判斷，仍須交由專家判斷。

The arrival of the era of knowledge economy has gradually made intelligence property more important an asset. However, along with the accumulation of the applications of patents a company has made, comes the enormous amount of expense of the maintenance fee of the rights. As a result, evaluate patents’ value and determine whether a company should keep holding on to them has become a complicated problem and a research topic scholars have been working on. Some of the scholars had proved with substantial evidences in the previous literatures that the value of a patent has positive correlation with the number of patent forward citations. However, there are scholars indicating otherwise with database analysis and doubt the results.
The research reviewed the related previous literature and define the scope of the subject with the R&D senior executive of the partner cooperation. After searching for the patent pool aimed to determine, the R&D senior executive will then asked to subjectively judge the value of the patent. At last, the research will investigate the credibility of the determination that the value of the patent correlates with the number of patent forward citations.
The result of the research are listed as below:
1. Under the integrate data analysis of the research, the group of patents that are valued higher by the expert does not necessarily have higher number of patent forward citations;
2. In this research, the forward citation analysis of forward citation number with or under 99, the group of patents having higher value, determined by the expert, have a higher forward citations in average;
3. Within the scope of the subject’s technical field in this research, based on the judgement of the expert, although using the forward citations of patents as index of patent value has some certain extent of referencing, there is still a high probability of misjudge;
4. In the research, patents having 0 forward citation still has the chance to be determined as middle or high value. As a result, expert’s consultant is still required to correctly determine the value of a patent.

摘要 I
ABSTRACT III
誌謝 V
目錄 VII
表目錄 IX
圖目錄 X
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景 1
1.2 研究動機 6
1.3 研究目的 6
1.4 章節概要 7
第二章 文獻探討 9
2.1 專利資訊 9
2.2 專利引證 10
2.3 專利價值 12
2.4 專利指標 14
2.5 以引證為基礎的專利指標 15
2.6 以引證為基礎之專利指標的相關研究整理 16
2.6.1 與Trajtenberg之主張相關之文獻 17
2.6.2 與Narin之主張相關之文獻 21
2.6.3 與Ernst之主張相關之文獻 22
2.6.4 Abrams等人（2013）對以引證為基礎之專利指標有疑慮之看法 24
2.7 小結 25
第三章 研究設計 27
3.1 探索性研究 27
3.2 研究設計 29
3.3 研究標的物之選擇 30
3.4 待驗證專利群組之篩選 32
3.4.1 資料庫之選擇 33
3.4.2 關鍵字之選擇 34
3.4.3 擬定檢索式 41
3.5 由專家判斷待驗證專利群組之價值高低 42
3.5.1 受訪者之資格認定 42
3.5.2 專家之判斷標準及方法 44
3.6 比較專家判斷與使用專利被引證數之分析結果之間的差異 45
3.7 檢視以引證為基礎之專利指標對於專利價值判斷的有效性 46
3.8 資料分析限制 47
第四章 研究結果 49
4.1 完整數據分析 49
4.1.1 各專利價值之平均被引證數分析 51
4.1.2 各專利價值之平均被引證數比對 52
4.1.3 被引證數對應專利件數分析 55
4.1.4 申請年分析 57
4.2 被引證次數99次（含）以下之專利數據分析 61
4.2.1 各專利價值之平均被引證數分析 63
4.2.2 各專利價值之平均被引證數比對 65
4.2.3 申請年分析 68
4.3 被引證數為零之分析 69
第五章 結論 71
5.1 研究分析總結 71
5.2 研究之限制 73
5.3 未來研究的建議 74
參考文獻 75

1.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).
2.Abrams, D. S., Akcigit, U., & Popadak, J. (2013). Patent Value and Citations: Creative Destruction or Strategic Disruption? (No. w19647). National Bureau of Economic Research.
3.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.
4.Ashton, W. B., & Sen, R. K. (1988). Using patent information in technology business planning—I. Research-Technology Management, 31(6), 42-46.
5.Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120.
6.Basberg, B. L. (1987). Patents and the measurement of technological change: a survey of the literature. Research policy, 16(2-4), 131-141.
7.Beal, G. M., & Bohlen, J. M. (1957). The diffusion process. Agricultural Experiment Station, Iowa State College.
8.Bessen, J., & Meurer, M. J. (2008). Patent failure: How judges, bureaucrats, and lawyers put innovators at risk. Princeton University Press.
9.Boldrin, M., & Levine, D. K. (2012). The case against patents.
10.Campbell, R. S., & Nieves, A. L. (1979). Technology Indicators Based on Patent Data: The Case of Catalytic Converters: Phase I Report, Design and Demonstration. Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories.
11.Carpenter, M. P., Narin, F., & Woolf, P. (1981). Citation rates to technologically important patents. World Patent Information, 3(4), 160-163.
12.Edvinsson, L., & Malone, M. S. (1997). Intellectual capital: Realizing your company\'s true value by finding its hidden brainpower.
13.Edvinsson, L., & Sullivan, P. (1996). Developing a model for managing intellectual capital. European management journal, 14(4), 356-364.
14.Ernst, H. (1995). Patenting strategies in the German mechanical engineering industry and their relationship to company performance. Technovation, 15(4), 225-240.
15.Ernst, H. (1998). Industrial research as a source of important patents. Research policy, 27(1), 1-15.
16.Ernst, H. (1998). Patent portfolios for strategic R&D planning. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 15(4), 279-308.
17.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.
18.Ernst, H. (2003). Patent information for strategic technology management. World patent information, 25(3), 233-242.
19.Fabry, B., Ernst, H., Langholz, J., & Köster, M. (2006). Patent portfolio analysis as a useful tool for identifying R&D and business opportunities—an empirical application in the nutrition and health industry. World Patent Information, 28(3), 215-225.
20.Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent statistics as economic lndicators. Joumal _of Economic.
21.Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2000). Market value and patent citations: A first look (No. w7741). national bureau of economic research.
22.Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools (No. w8498). National Bureau of Economic Research.
23.Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1990). Strategic intent. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 18-38.
24.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.
25.Schmookler, J. (1966). Invention and economic growth.
26.Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Fogarty, M. S. (2000). Knowledge spillovers and patent citations: Evidence from a survey of inventors. American Economic Review, 90(2), 215-218.
27.Kortum, S., & Lerner, J. (1998, June). Stronger protection or technological revolution: what is behind the recent surge in patenting?. In Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy (Vol. 48, pp. 247-304). North-Holland.
28.Moser, P., Ohmstedt, J., & Rhode, P. (2012). Patent Citations and the Size of Innovation–Evidence from Hybrid Corn. Stanford University working paper.
29.Narin, F., Noma, E., & Perry, R. (1987). Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength. Research policy, 16(2-4), 143-155.
30.Schumpeter, J. (1942). Creative destruction. Capitalism, socialism and democracy, 825.
31.Schumpeter, J. A. (2017). Theory of economic development. Routledge.
32.Thurow, L. C., & Cunningham, J. (1999). Building wealth (pp. 116-129). New York: HarperCollins.
33.Trajtenberg, M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 172-187.
34.Vernon, R. (1966). Comprehensive model-building in the planning process: the case of the less-developed economies. The Economic Journal, 76(301), 57-69.
35.Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource‐based view of the firm. Strategic management journal, 5(2), 171-180.