REVIEW 2 cited by
PatentMatch: A Dataset for Matching Patent Claims & Prior Art
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Patent examiners need to solve a complex information retrieval task when they assess the novelty and inventive step of claims made in a patent application. Given a claim, they search for prior art, which comprises all relevant publicly available information. This time-consuming task requires a deep understanding of the respective technical domain and the patent-domain-specific language. For these reasons, we address the computer-assisted search for prior art by creating a training dataset for supervised machine learning called PatentMatch. It contains pairs of claims from patent applications and semantically corresponding text passages of different degrees from cited patent documents. Each pair has been labeled by technically-skilled patent examiners from the European Patent Office. Accordingly, the label indicates the degree of semantic correspondence (matching), i.e., whether the text passage is prejudicial to the novelty of the claimed invention or not. Preliminary experiments using a baseline system show that PatentMatch can indeed be used for training a binary text pair classifier on this challenging information retrieval task. The dataset is available online: https://hpi.de/naumann/s/patentmatch.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
PEDANTIC: A Dataset for the Automatic Examination of Definiteness in Patent Claims
PEDANTIC provides the first public dataset of 14k patent claims labeled with examiner-cited reasons for indefiniteness, along with baselines showing LLMs still lag logistic regression on binary prediction.
-
Can AI Examine Novelty of Patents?: Novelty Evaluation Based on the Correspondence between Patent Claim and Prior Art
A new patent novelty benchmark from real examiner rejections shows large language models can classify novelty at about 62% accuracy, while smaller classification models perform at chance.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.