PatentMind: A Multi-Aspect Reasoning Graph for Patent Similarity Evaluation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.19347v2
• Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2025 02:15:33 GMT
• Title: PatentMind: A Multi-Aspect Reasoning Graph for Patent Similarity Evaluation
• Authors: Yongmin Yoo, Qiongkai Xu, Longbing Cao,
• Abstract summary: Patent similarity evaluation plays a critical role in intellectual property analysis.<n>We introduce PatentMind, a novel framework for patent similarity assessment based on a Multi-Aspect Reasoning Graph (MARG)<n>Our framework provides a structured and semantically grounded foundation for real-world decision-making.
• Score: 35.13558856456741
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Patent similarity evaluation plays a critical role in intellectual property analysis. However, existing methods often overlook the intricate structure of patent documents, which integrate technical specifications, legal boundaries, and application contexts. We introduce PatentMind, a novel framework for patent similarity assessment based on a Multi-Aspect Reasoning Graph (MARG). PatentMind decomposes patents into their three dimensions of technical features, application domains, and claim scopes, then dimension-specific similarity scores are calculated over the MARG. These scores are dynamically weighted through a context-aware reasoning process, which integrates contextual signals to emulate expert-level judgment. To support evaluation, we construct a human-annotated benchmark PatentSimBench, comprising 500 patent pairs. Experimental results demonstrate that the PatentMind-generated scores show a strong correlation ($r=0.938$) with expert annotations, significantly outperforming embedding-based models, patent-specific models, and advanced prompt engineering methods. Beyond computational linguistics, our framework provides a structured and semantically grounded foundation for real-world decision-making, particularly for tasks such as infringement risk assessment, underscoring its broader impact on both patent analytics and evaluation.

Related papers

• Towards Automated Quality Assurance of Patent Specifications: A Multi-Dimensional LLM Framework [0.5534764384104999]
  Although AI drafting tools have gained prominence in patent writing, the systematic evaluation of AI-generated patent content quality represents a significant research gap.<n>We propose to evaluate patents using regulatory compliance, technical coherence, and figure-reference consistency detection modules.<n>The framework is validated on a comprehensive dataset comprising 80 human-authored and 80 AI-generated patents from two patent drafting tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-29T11:20:18Z)
• PANORAMA: A Dataset and Benchmarks Capturing Decision Trails and Rationales in Patent Examination [44.74519851862391]
  We build PANORAMA, a dataset of 8,143 U.S. patent examination records.<n>We decompose the trails into sequential benchmarks that emulate patent professionals' patent review processes.<n>We argue that advancing NLP, including LLMs, in the patent domain requires a deeper understanding of real-world patent examination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-25T03:24:13Z)
• PatentScore: Multi-dimensional Evaluation of LLM-Generated Patent Claims [32.272839191711114]
  We introduce PatentScore, a multi-dimensional evaluation framework for assessing LLM-generated patent claims.<n>Unlike general-purpose NLG metrics, PatentScore reflects patent-specific constraints and document structures, enabling evaluation beyond surface similarity.<n>We report a Pearson correlation of $r = 0.819$ with expert annotations, outperforming existing NLG metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-25T22:20:11Z)
• Towards Better Evaluation for Generated Patent Claims [0.0]
  We introduce Patent-CE, the first comprehensive benchmark for evaluating patent claims.<n>We also propose PatClaimEval, a novel multi-dimensional evaluation method specifically designed for patent claims.<n>This research provides the groundwork for more accurate evaluations of automated patent claim generation systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-16T10:27:16Z)
• Can AI Examine Novelty of Patents?: Novelty Evaluation Based on the Correspondence between Patent Claim and Prior Art [5.655276956391884]
  This paper introduces a novel challenge by evaluating the ability of large language models (LLMs) to assess patent novelty.<n>We present the first dataset specifically designed for novelty evaluation, derived from real patent examination cases.<n>Our study reveals that while classification models struggle to effectively assess novelty, generative models make predictions with a reasonable level of accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-10T10:09:29Z)
• PatentEdits: Framing Patent Novelty as Textual Entailment [62.8514393375952]
  We introduce the PatentEdits dataset, which contains 105K examples of successful revisions. We design algorithms to label edits sentence by sentence, then establish how well these edits can be predicted with large language models. We demonstrate that evaluating textual entailment between cited references and draft sentences is especially effective in predicting which inventive claims remained unchanged or are novel in relation to prior art.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-20T17:23:40Z)
• Structural Representation Learning and Disentanglement for Evidential Chinese Patent Approval Prediction [19.287231890434718]
  This paper presents the pioneering effort on this task using a retrieval-based classification approach. We propose a novel framework called DiSPat, which focuses on structural representation learning and disentanglement. Our framework surpasses state-of-the-art baselines on patent approval prediction, while also exhibiting enhanced evidentiality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-23T05:44:16Z)
• Top-K Pairwise Ranking: Bridging the Gap Among Ranking-Based Measures for Multi-Label Classification [120.37051160567277]
  This paper proposes a novel measure named Top-K Pairwise Ranking (TKPR) A series of analyses show that TKPR is compatible with existing ranking-based measures. On the other hand, we establish a sharp generalization bound for the proposed framework based on a novel technique named data-dependent contraction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-09T09:36:37Z)
• Unveiling Black-boxes: Explainable Deep Learning Models for Patent Classification [48.5140223214582]
  State-of-the-art methods for multi-label patent classification rely on deep opaque neural networks (DNNs) We propose a novel deep explainable patent classification framework by introducing layer-wise relevance propagation (LRP) Considering the relevance score, we then generate explanations by visualizing relevant words for the predicted patent class.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-31T14:11:37Z)
• Adaptive Taxonomy Learning and Historical Patterns Modelling for Patent Classification [26.85734804493925]
  We propose an integrated framework that comprehensively considers the information on patents for patent classification. We first present an IPC codes correlations learning module to derive their semantic representations. Finally, we combine the contextual information of patent texts that contains the semantics of IPC codes, and assignees' sequential preferences to make predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-10T07:02:24Z)
• A Survey on Sentence Embedding Models Performance for Patent Analysis [0.0]
  We propose a standard library and dataset for assessing the accuracy of embeddings models based on PatentSBERTa approach. Results show PatentSBERTa, Bert-for-patents, and TF-IDF Weighted Word Embeddings have the best accuracy for computing sentence embeddings at the subclass level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-28T12:04:42Z)
• A Diagnostic Study of Explainability Techniques for Text Classification [52.879658637466605]
  We develop a list of diagnostic properties for evaluating existing explainability techniques. We compare the saliency scores assigned by the explainability techniques with human annotations of salient input regions to find relations between a model's performance and the agreement of its rationales with human ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-25T12:01:53Z)
• A Unified Taylor Framework for Revisiting Attribution Methods [49.03783992773811]
  We propose a Taylor attribution framework and reformulate seven mainstream attribution methods into the framework. We establish three principles for a good attribution in the Taylor attribution framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-21T22:07:06Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.