FORM 2

THE PATENTS ACT  1970
(39 of 1970)
&
THE PATENT RULES  2003

COMPLETE SPECIFICATION

(See Section 10 and Rule 13)

Title of invention:
A SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EVALUATING  SCORING AND RATIONALIZING INVENTIONS

Applicant:
TATA Consultancy Services Limited
A company Incorporated in India under The Companies Act  1956
Having address:
Nirmal Building  9th Floor 
Nariman Point  Mumbai 400021 
Maharashtra  India

The following specification particularly describes the invention and the manner in which it is to be performed.
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present subject matter described herein relates in general to a financial instrument for evaluating intangible assets like inventions or intellectual properties (IP)  and more particularly  to an automated system and method for evaluating  scoring or rationalizing an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Inventions possessing novelty  inventiveness towards technical advancements and capabilities for commercialization construct the intellectual property asset(s) of an entity  organization  community or an Enterprise. Thus  while mining invention in an Enterprise  the prima facie objective is to trace and predict the tangible values attached to such intangible assets  which may further assist an Enterprise for building up strategic decision towards rationalizing / implementing the invention.

Significant challenges exist to efficiently and effectively evaluate  score and rationalize an invention due to complexities in the trend of technology growth  emergence of varieties of newer interdisciplinary fields  volatility of world economy  non-predictability of the market dynamics  etc. So far  several attempts have been made to evaluate different forms of Intellectual Properties viz.  Copyrights  Trademarks  Patents  Industrial Designs  etc. from their own  diversified legal and practitioner history. The constraints imposed by such attempts are inclined substantially towards legal and regulatory statutes  associated jurisdictional resolution and acceptable methodologies. On the other hand  considering Patents being the intangible asset  IP valuation systems and methods have been ideated based on prior licensing and sale transactional analysis  wherein such remuneration structures typically being normalized with respect to predictive algorithms based on their historical transactional data.

From an Enterprise perspective  an invention is acknowledged as an asset if the value it delivers exceeds its costs. Thus  throughout the life cycle of an invention  viz.  from the stage of ideation to its territorial protections and promotions  the value associated with the invention  normalized with respect to the current IP portfolio of an Enterprise  needs to be assessed. Further  being an invention to be aged inevitably  evaluation at multiple docketing levels is crucial for time sustainability and optimized return on investment throughout the entire life cycle of an invention.
Another complex dimension for evaluating an invention lies in cross correlation logistics between other inventions of an Enterprise  which may collectively be capable of producing higher aggregate score than the sum of the individuals  i.e.  to be synergistic in nature. However  the challenges are convoluted to evaluate portfolios in such multi-dimensional landscapes due to increasing proliferation and interdependencies among technologies  companies  products and processes.

Thus  it would be desirable to have a valuation  scoring and rationalization system of an Enterprise’s inventions  which can be automatically  efficiently and inherently linked to its vibrant and diversified business scenario.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The summary provided herein is to introduce the concepts related to system and method for evaluating  scoring and rationalizing an invention  a set of a plurality of inventions or an Enterprise-wide invention portfolio. This summary is not intended to identify essential features of the claimed subject matter nor is it intended for use in determining or limiting the scope of the claimed subject matter.

One of the preferred embodiments of the present subject matter comprises Invention valuation and Scoring System (IVSS) and method for evaluating  scoring and rationalizing invention(s)  wherein the said IVSS may comprise a processor and a memory  coupled to the processor. The memory may further comprise a Delivery Sustainability Weight Module (DSWM)  Dimension Maturity Rule Module (DMRM)  Capability Sustainability Scoring Module (CSSM)  Market oriented Clustering Module (MCM)  Invention Valuation Module (IVM)  Program Module (PM) and Other Module (OM). The IVSS system embodiments are modularized based on an underlying “sustainability-maturity-market” model (SMMM)  which evaluates an invention based on time sustainability capability of certain techno-business lag and lead measurements of an invention  quantified by achieving maturity across manifold techno-legal-economic dimensions of the said sustainable capabilities and determining a Capability Sustainability Score of the said invention(s). The model further evaluates and scores the invention by positioning it against its user-specific prime market at a given time for a particular geography or jurisdiction. The rationalization of an invention can be retrieved by evaluating an invention(s) for its projected or predicted Life Cycle revealing fields of improvements.

The scores  radar profiles  temporal evolutions for user-defined geography or jurisdiction and other graphical analysis and reports of invention(s) or intellectual property asset(s) may further be displayed in several display modules  as one of the embodiments of the memory of IVSS  which in turn facilitates rationalization  performance improvement factors identification  lifetime determination and other capability-sustainability visualization of the present subject matter.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Further objects  embodiments  features and advantages of the present invention will become more apparent and may be better understood when read together with the detailed description and the accompanied drawings. The components of the figures are not necessarily to scales  emphasis instead being placed on better illustration of the underlying principle of the subject matter. Different numeral references on figures designate corresponding elements throughout different views. In the figure(s)  the left-most digit(s) of a reference number identifies the figure in which the reference number first appears. The use of the same reference number in different figure(s) indicates similar or identical items. However  the manner in which the above depicted features  aspects  and advantages of the present subject matter are accomplished  does not limit the scope of the subject matter  for the subject matter may admit to other equally effective embodiments.

The detailed description is described with reference to the following accompanying figure(s):

Fig. 1(a) illustrates the schematic of the “sustainable-maturity-market” model (SMMM) of Invention Valuation and Scoring System (IVSS)  in accordance with one of the embodiments of the present subject matter.
Fig. 1 illustrates an exemplary network environment (comprising user devices in communication with the server system over a network) for implementing an Invention Valuation and Scoring System (IVSS)  in accordance with one of the embodiments of the present subject matter.
Fig.2 illustrates an exemplary Invention Valuation and Scoring System (IVSS)  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
Figure 3 illustrates the detailed components of the Invention Valuation Module (IVM) referred to in Figure 2  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
Figure 4 depicts a pictorial representation of Delivery Sustainability Weight matrix (DSW) as an exemplary component of Delivery Sustainability Weight Module (DSWM) referred to in Figure 2  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
Figure 5 depicts a pictorial representation of Dimension Maturity Rule Matrix (DMR) as an exemplary component of Dimension Maturity Rule Module (DMRM) referred to in Figure 2  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
Figure 6 depicts a pictorial representation of Capability Sustainability Scoring Matrix (CSS) as an exemplary component of Capability Sustainability Scoring Module (CSSM) referred to in Figure 2  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
Figure 7 depicts a pictorial representation of Market Oriented Clustering matrix (MC) as an exemplary component of Market Oriented Clustering Module (MCM) referred to in Figure 2  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
Figure 8 shows a flowchart illustrating a method for evaluating  scoring and rationalizing an invention or a set of plurality of inventions  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
Figure 9 illustrates the detailed components of the Display Module (DM) referred to in Figure 2  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
Figure 10(a) exemplifies Radar Profile Display for Core/lead Sustainability - Capability Module for an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
Figure 10(b) exemplifies asymmetric Radar Profile Display for Longevity/lag Sustainability - Capability Module for an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
Figure 11 depicts the Graphical Lifetime Valuation Display Module (GLVDM) for an invention or a set of plurality of inventions  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION:
The embodiments of the present subject matter comprise an automated Invention Valuation and Scoring system and method for evaluating and rationalizing an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions or an Enterprise-wide invention portfolio. The system embodiments are modularized based on an underlying “sustainable-maturity-market” model (SMMM) (111)  which evaluates an invention based on time sustainable capabilities (112-115) of certain techno-business lag and lead measurements (121-124) of one or more inventions  which is quantified by achieving maturity across manifold techno-legal-economic dimensions of the sustainable capabilities and determining a Capability Sustainability Score of the one or more inventions The model further evaluates and scores the invention(s) by positioning it/them against its prime market at a given time for a user-defined geography or jurisdiction. The rationalization of an invention can be retrieved by evaluating the invention(s) for its projected or predicted Life Cycle revealing fields of improvements.
Throughout the Specification of the present subject matter  the word “invention” has broadly been used to express an invention or a Patent or any known or futuristic form of any kind of intellectual property or its associated singular or a plurality of assets  artifacts  products  s  processes  machines  manufactures  compositions of matter  etc. and by no way limit the concept and scope of the present subject matter.
Moreover  throughout the Specification of the present subject matter  the word “asset’ has broadly been used to describe economic resources  properties  possessions  stake  etc. capable of being owned or controlled by an entity  wherein an entity can be a person  a stakeholder  a group of persons or stakeholders  an organization  community Enterprise  etc. to produce economic value. The phrase “tangible asset” thus surmises physical substances  wherein such physical substances may comprise liquid assets like cash or cash-equivalents  loans  stocks  prepaid expenses  bills  accrued incomes  varieties of licenses  trade investments or equivalents  etc. and by no manner limit the scope of the present subject matter.
Moreover  the word “valuation” has been used to express the value or tangible assets assigned to or possessed by at least an invention  wherein “score” and “rationalization” represent Scoring and rationalizing or arbitration respectively of at least an invention  thereby with their use in no manner limit the scope of the present subject matter.
For the sake of clarity of the present subject matter  the “sustainable-maturity-market” model (SMMM) (111) has been described in the following sections.
An “invention” originated from human intellect is legally defined as novel and useful product or process or machine  manufacture  composition of matter or any novel and useful improvements thereof  which encompasses an inventive step with technical advancement with capabilities towards industrial applicability. Thus  the valuation and rationalization of such an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions from an Enterprise perspective may be based prima facie on the business-oriented results it delivers or promises to deliver and the time sustainability of such results.
An Enterprise takes business decision to improve on managing its invention portfolio by prioritizing certain focused activities and by achieving growth and time sustainability of those activities (or Organizational invention portfolio) through certain initiatives. Thus  an invention or its technological implementation and commercialization being aligned to dynamic Business portfolio of an Enterprise have to be Anticipative  Agile  Efficient and Adaptable at various docketing levels of it. This may be measured/ evaluated in terms of matured capabilities of the aforementioned sustainable characteristics  viz.  (Business) Outcome  Process  Technology and Infrastructure. It is important to mention at this juncture that a person skilled in the art will understand that the said characteristic features describing the sustainability of an invention or a plurality of inventions are mere exemplary embodiments that an Enterprise may adapt with superior ability to sense and respond to the market opportunities with speed  efficiency and resilience and in no way limit the scope of the measurement features of the embodiments of the present subject matter.
To substantiate the said sustainable characteristics of an invention viz.  Anticipative  Agile  Efficient and Adaptable  exemplary elucidation of each of these features has been proposed.
An “Anticipative” characteristic (112) of an invention may be exemplarily attributed to the well analyzed anticipation of future necessity of the society  market  technology  etc. and creation of “Novelty” or Newness in the invention at the present time to plan and address such need. Hence  an anticipative characteristic of an invention may be intimately connected to the longevity of the invention.
An “Agile” or responsiveness characteristic (113) of an invention may be exemplarily ascribed by the “Inventive Steps” or “Utility” of the invention in order to sense the current technological evolution and customer need and provide a responsive solution towards achieving the advancement in technology in certain pre-existing or newer interdisciplinary domain(s)  which has not been obvious from the prior knowledge and infrastructure.
An “Efficient” characteristic (114) of an invention may be exemplarily described by the self-optimization of “Commercial implementation / Applicability” of an invention by ""doing more with less"" in terms of lower cost  minimum infrastructural modification  time reduction  better quality  less effort  optimization through process standardization  etc.
An “Adaptable” or resilience to change characteristic (115) of an invention may be exemplarily associated with the applicability of the prime commonality of the inventive steps with minimal changes for addressing similar scenarios or problems. Thus  the agility  efficiency and adaptable characteristics of an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions or an Enterprise-wide invention portfolio may comprise the core sustainability of the invention.
The measurements of the aforementioned time-sustainability of an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions may comprise two inter-dependable measures  viz.  the (Business) “Outcome” (121) or the lag measure which cohesively being related to the stakeholder or end consumer satisfaction and the “Capability” or the lead measure which steer (lead) to such outcome (lag measure). The lead measure may further categorize in three attributes of evaluation/rationalization  e.g.  Process (122)  Technology (123) and Infrastructure (124). Hence  the time sustainability characteristics for evaluating an invention may be assessed from an outcome perspective (end consumer  subscriber  etc.) as well as the set of key capabilities  viz.  the process  technology and infrastructure and is projected in the “Delivery Sustainability Weight matrix (DSW) (400).
The weight distribution in “Delivery Sustainability Weight matrix” (DSW) (400) is proportional to the invention’s long time sustenance with optimized revenue  thus higher weight is being assigned to the anticipative characteristics or longevity of an invention and its consequent impacts on the business outcome (lag measure). Further  to elaborate the model  equal weight (half the value of the higher weight) has been assigned to agile  efficient and adaptable sustainability characteristics with process  technology and infrastructure measures  However  a person skilled in the art will appreciate that the asymmetric weight distribution is a mere enablement of the above-mentioned concept and in no manner limiting the scope and maturity of the concept itself.
In order to determine the maturity level of time sustainable characteristics of an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions  a Dimension Maturity Rule matrix (DMR) (500) has been generated for allocating scores for each cell (i  j ? 1 4) in the Delivery Sustainability Weight Matrix (DSW) (400)  as an embodiment of the “sustainable-maturity-market” model. The DMR matrix is being configured to ascertain the maturity level of each sustainable characteristics of the invention to be evaluated with respect to its measurement capabilities.
The Dimension Maturity Rule matrix (DMR) (500) assigns manifold dimensions encompassing “Alignment to (Business) Strategy” (502)   “Difficulty to Reproduce” (504)  “Addressable Market and Spread” (506) and “Longevity in Consumers’ mind” (508)  to evaluate and rationalize an invention or the set of a plurality of inventions  with respect to the maturity level of each of the said dimensions. To elaborate the aforementioned dimensions for the purpose of scoring an invention at various docketing levels  exemplary explanation of each of these features have been explained.
The “Alignment to (Business) Strategy” (502) of an invention epitomizes the degree of alignment that the said invention or a portfolio comprising the said invention possesses towards organizational or enterprise-level strategy or initiatives. An enterprise will maintain/mature those inventions which has capabilities to deliver direct benefits to its stakeholders over a longer timeframe.
The “Difficulty to Reproduce” (504) dimension of an invention calculates the degree of difficulty the market may encounter to reproduce equivalent experience or satisfaction for the consumer in comparison with similar technologically implemented product  tool or process of other technological implementations / artifacts thereof. The said dimension is intricately linked to whether competency and end-to-end traceability has already been created and matured within the Enterprise towards speedy implementation of the patented technology  whether the invention /patented technology portfolio and Business cohesively exploit the established global market of the Enterprise with lower probability of litigation risk in the said technology domain  etc.
The “Addressable Market and Spread” (506) dimension of an invention focuses on the applicability (including legal) of an invention to multiple geographies/ jurisdiction and the uniformity of spread of consumer base across those. Thus  the maturity level of the aforementioned dimension depends on whether prior Enterprise-level  Business-Technology mapping have been pre-existing or established at those geographies  in order to commercialize the invention efficiently with minimal cost and time. Moreover  as the law of land varies globally  it has to be also taken into consideration that the subject matter of an invention must not fall under the “Non-Patentable Subject Matter” classification of the respective jurisdictional Patent Acts and Rules.
The maturity level of “Addressable Market and Spread” (506) is also being determined based on the uniformity of spread of consumer base and presence of Enterprise along with its partner or distributor. This provides input to Enterprise on resource planning to launch the product uniformly at various geographies having substantial demand for the product and a freedom-to-operate (FTO) clearance to practice the invented technology without infringement risks.
Lastly  “Longevity in Consumers’ Mind” (508) measures the long term sustenance of an invention as a key differentiator in a consumer’s mind. However  a person skilled in the art will understand that the said characteristic dimensions determining the maturity level of sustainability-capability factors of an invention or a plurality of inventions are mere exemplary embodiments and in no way limit the scope of the numbers or nature of additional dimensional features  which may be included as other embodiments of the present subject matter.
It is important to mention at this juncture that an invention is being protected (applied or granted) as a Patent application with associated Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)  wherein the regulatory and legal characteristics of the said rights are exclusionary  territorial and time-limited in nature. Hence  an invention needs to be evaluated in two mutually orthogonal dimensions  viz.  as a function of geography or jurisdiction where it is protected for a fixed period of time or as a function of time at a particular territory. In “sustainable-maturity-market” model (SMMM) (111)  the geographical dependency or globalization of an invention has been incorporated within the “Addressable Market and Spread” dimension of the Dimension Maturity Rule matrix (DMR) (500).
The maturity of manifold dimensions described in the Dimension Maturity Rule matrix (DMR) (500) are tested against five levels  viz.  low (512)  low-medium (514)  medium (516)  medium-high (518)  and high (520)  wherein low (512) and high (520) are the lowest and highest levels of maturity  respectively  and the intermediate levels (514-518) are stated in a hierarchical order. To elaborate the model  the maximum point score for all the dimensions are being kept identical for each level of maturity. However  a person skilled in the art will understand that such attribution is just the simplest representation of Dimension Maturity Rule matrix (DMR) (500) and in practice  can possess any other value at each dimension for each level.
The “sustainable-maturity-market” model (SMMM) (111) calculates the “cell score” of the Capability Sustainability Scoring Matrix (CSS) (600) at a given time  for a fixed geography. The “cell score” is being calculated in three steps:
In the first step (I)  the model determines the existence of a given sustainable characteristics for a measurement capabilities  wherein the existence is Boolean in nature (0 for non-existence and 1 for existence).
In the second step (II)  for each non null sustainable-measurable cell of DSW matrix (400)  the model runs through each “dimension” of “Dimension Maturity Rule matrix (DMR) (500) to determine its level of maturity and then add the maturity-level values obtained from each dimension to get the aggregate ‘maturity score’. Thus  for ""efficient"" characteristics in ""technology"" capability (   if the “alignment to strategy” is “medium” ( )  “difficult to reproduce” is “medium”   “addressable market and spread” is “high” ( and “longevity in consumer mind” is “low”   then the convoluted/aggregate ‘maturity score’ of (efficiency  technology) cell is:
………………………. (i)
In the third step (III)  the model multiplies ‘maturity score’ ( of each cell with its pre-assigned weight (wij for corresponding sij) to determine the final “cell score” for each cell to generate the Capability Sustainability Scoring Matrix (CSS) (600). Thus  the weighted “cell score” of (efficiency  technology) cell will become:
…………………… ……(ii)
Thus  the total “invention score” may be obtained as 
………………………………(iii)
The “sustainable-maturity-market” model further produces a Market oriented
Clustering Matrix (MC) (700)  which identifies the prime market (MKT) positioning (choose only one category) of the invention using the following categorization:
The market classification of the commercial implementation of an invention (as product  tool  process  machine  composition of matter  manufacture  etc.) is primarily strategized into two distinct classes  viz. “Mass Market” (704) comprises wide-spectrum customer coverage and “Enterprise Class” (706) comprises Enterprise-wide eco system.

The “Mass Market” (704) has further been sub-classified into three sub-classes based on consumer head count vs. market spread  e.g.  having market spread to be less than µ1 million consumer   between µ1 million and µ2 million consumer and greater than µ2 million consumer   wherein the valuation per unit “cell Score” (702) of an invention consumable under the aforementioned classes have been considered as   and respectively.
………………….. ………….(iv)
Similarly  the “Enterprise Class” 706 has been further sub-classified into three sub-
classes  e.g.  “Mass User”  “Restricted” and “Management”  wherein the value of an invention falling under the said categories are considered as and respectively  producing:
…………………………………….(v)
Thus  the Valuation of an invention may be obtained from “sustainable-maturity-market” model (SMMM) (111) in the following manner:
First  the Base Valuation for the Invention ( has been generated by Base Valuation Module (302) as:
……………………………………….……….(vi)
Wherein     considering the primary Currency for Valuation to be . The model has considered US$ as the primary currency to evaluate /rationalize an invention and Valuation in other Currency is based on Purchasing Power Index ( ) Multiplier. Moreover  a person skilled in the art would appreciate and understand that the preferred chosen unit of Currency being the US$ is an exemplary evaluation unit and will no matter limit the scope of evaluating an invention in any other Currency based on geographical market positioning.

The Time Projection Valuation or Invention Valuation of the invention (IV) generated by Time Projection Valuation Module (TPVM) (304) at any specified year is given by 
………………………………………(vii) 
Wherein and for .
As stated in the above expression  the valuation of an invention at a given time
is proportional to a “soothing factor”   wherein depends on t and is influenced by several factors like rate of change of market dynamics  volatility  positional dependence or proximity to inflection point in the time-technology quadrant  life cycle of the invention or its associated artifact  business diversification  mergers and acquisitions of an Enterprise  etc.
The functional dependency of t in IV(t) [Equation (vii)] has been incorporated in such
a manner that according to the above equation  the valuation of an invention on first year is given by BVI itself  i.e.  .
The Life Time Valuation of the Invention is given by 
……………………………….(viii)
Wherein may be a preferable option  as the lifetime of a Patent is approximately 20 years  without considering Patent term adjustments of various jurisdictions and considering the evaluation of the invention from the date of filing the Complete/Provisional Specification (CS/PS filing  depends on jurisdiction). However  the time period in different jurisdiction may have different criteria and will not limit the scope of the present subject matter.

The Life Time Valuation of the Invention predicts the total revenue that an invention can generate over the user-predicted life-cycle of the invention or its associated artifacts. This in turn may depict the rationalization of an invention by revealing fields of improvements (generating lower scores) across various sustainability  capability  market dimensions by measuring the corresponding maturity levels at various phases of the entire life cycle of the invention.

In the following description  several references and examples are made to the embodiment of the subject matter. However  it should be emphasized clearly that the subject matter in no manner is restricted by or limited to these specified references or examples of the embodiments. On the contrary  any combination of the following references and examples is contemplated to implement and practice the present subject matter. Furthermore  in various embodiments the present subject matter provides numerous advantages over the prior art  which are merely illustrative and are not considered elements of limitations for the present subject matter  specifically the claims.

System and method for evaluating  scoring and rationalizing an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions are described herein. The system and the method can be implemented in a variety of computing systems. The computing systems that can implement the described method include  but are not restricted to  mainframe computers  workstations  personal computers  desktop computers  minicomputers  servers  multiprocessor systems  laptops  mobile computing devices  and the like.

In one embodiment  the Invention Valuation and Scoring System (IVSS) 106 help in evaluating  scoring and rationalizing an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions. Examples of an invention may include an research and developmental level concept or idea in an initial stage of ideation  invention being disclosed as an Invention disclosure (ID)  an invention applied for a Patent application in a jurisdiction  an invention being granted as a valid Patent in a jurisdiction  an invention being commercialized as a product or a process  etc. A person skilled in the art will understand that the following definition of invention comprises a few examples of different stages of an invention and does not limit the scope of an invention in any other form.

One embodiment of the subject matter is realized as a product being used in a computing environment. The software programs for such a product may comprise routines and subroutines/source codes written in a computer language to perform invention(s) valuation  scoring and rationalization  described as an embodiment of the present subject matter. Such a product can be contained on a variety of computer-readable or computer-rewritable media  wherein such media may include  but are not restricted to CD-ROM  DVD-ROM  floppy disks  hard disk drive  diskette drive  or other form of storage media  on which alterable/upgradable information can be stored.

Fig. 1 depicts an exemplary computing environment (100) for an automated Invention Valuation and Scoring System (IVSS)  according to one of the embodiments of the present subject matter. In the said embodiment  the computing environment (100) may comprise of one or more user devices 102-1  102-2 ...102-N  collectively referred to as the user devices (102)  communicating with a Invention Valuation and Scoring System (106) over a network (104). The Invention Valuation and Scoring System (106) and the user device (102) may be implemented as any of a variety of computing devices  including but not limited to  a desktop personal computer (PC)  a notebook or portable computer  a tablet computer  a workstation  a mainframe computer  a mobile computing device  an entertainment device  a computing platform  an internet appliance  and the like. However  a person skilled in the art will comprehend that the embodiment of the present subject matter are not limited to any particular computing system  architecture or application device  as it may be adapted to take advantage of new computing system and platform as they become accessible.

The Invention Valuation and Scoring System (106) is connected to the user device (102) over the network (104) through one or more communication links  for example  via dial-up modem connections  cable links  digital subscriber lines (DSL)  wireless or satellite links  or any other suitable form  wherein the network (104) may be a wireless network  a wired network  or any combination thereof. In an aspect  the system described may include a database (108) that may be connected with the Invention Valuation and Scoring System (106) wherein the details and characteristics relating to one or more inventions that need to be evaluated  scored and rationalized. In another aspect  the details and characteristics relating to one or more inventions may be entered by a user by employing the user device (102). Needless to mention that those skilled in the art will recognize that Fig. 1 illustrates a simplified schematic diagram to highlight the essential features of the present subject matter and that the computing environment (100) can include varieties of additional components elaborating intricate details which have not shown in Fig. 1.

Moreover  although the computing environment (100) of Fig. 1 illustrates an example of a user / server or a client / server like architecture  one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the embodiments of the present subject matter may be adapted for use in a variety of computing environments  such as standalone systems  distributed systems  embedded systems and the like. As an example  the complete user/server system may be a part of a software application running on a single computer system.

Figure 2 illustrates the system module of the Invention Valuation and Scoring System (IVSS) (106)  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter. In said embodiment  the IVSS system (106) includes one or more processors (202)  and a memory (210) coupled to the processor (202). The processor (202) may be implemented as one or more microprocessors  microcomputers  microcontrollers  digital signal processors  central processing units  state machines  logic circuitries  and/or any devices that manipulate signals based on operational instructions. Among other capabilities  the processor (202) is configured to fetch and execute computer-readable instructions and data stored in the memory (210). In an aspect  the Invention Valuation and Scoring System (106) may further comprise of a supporting circuits unit (204). The supporting circuits (204) may include components such as Input/ Output (I/O) interfaces (not shown in the figure)  network interfaces (not shown in the figure)  and the like.

The I/O interfaces may include a variety of software and hardware interfaces  for example  interface for peripheral device(s) such as a display unit  a keyboard  a mouse  an external memory  a printer  and the like. The network interfaces may enable the IVSS system (106) to communicate with other computing devices and peripheral devices  such as web servers  and external databases over the network (104). The network interfaces may facilitate multiple communications within a wide variety of protocols and networks  such as wired networks  e.g.  LAN  cable  etc.  and/or wireless networks  e.g.  WLAN  cellular  satellite  etc.

The memory (210) may include any computer-readable medium  such as volatile memory such as static random access memory (SRAM) and dynamic random access memory (DRAM)  and/or non-volatile memory  such as read only memory (ROM)  erasable programmable ROM  flash memories  hard disks  optical disks  magnetic tapes  and the like. The memory (210) includes one or more modules such as Delivery Sustainability Weight Module (DSWM) (214)  Dimension Maturity Rule Module (DMRM) (216)  Capability Sustainability Scoring Module (CSSM) (218)  Market oriented Clustering Module (MCM) (220)  and Invention Valuation Module (IVM) (230). The Delivery Sustainability Weight Module (DSWM) (214) causes the processor (202) to generate time sustainability characteristics of capability measurements of the one or more inventions. The Dimension Maturity Rule Module (DMRM) (216) causes the processor (202) to generate maturity score of the one or more inventions across at least one predefined dimension. The Capability Sustainability Scoring Module (CSSM) (218) causes the processor (202) to determine Invention Score of the one or more inventions. The step of determining score of the one or more inventions comprises multiplying an aggregate maturity score with weight factor of the corresponding sustainability-capability measurement. The Market Oriented Clustering Module (MCM) (220) causes the processor (202) to determine and position the one or more inventions against its associated pre-defined or user-defined prime market at a given time of the determination  for one or more user defined geographical locations or jurisdictions with a pre-defined or user-specified currency of evaluation. Further  the Invention Valuation Module (IVM) (230) causes the processor to generate one or more types of valuation scores for the one or more inventions. The Invention Valuation Module (IVM) (230) has been described in detail in Fig. 3.

In an aspect  another module (240) may be provided in the memory that may include programs or coded instructions that supplement applications and functions on the IVSS system (106)  for example  programs in operating system of the IVSS system (106). The other module (240) may further comprise input module for user-defined and user-specified input  output module to collect output  etc.

In another aspect  the memory (210) may also include a program module (212) and a program data module (260). The program module (212) may include routines  programs  objects  components  data structures  etc.  that perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types.

The program data module (260)  amongst other things  may serve as a repository for storing data processed  received  and generated by one or more of the modules. The program data module (260) may also include other data (262). The other data (262) may include data generated as a result of the execution of one or more modules in the other module (240).

In one of the embodiments  the program data module (260) may contain the invention(s) related data  viz.  infrastructure  process and technology related data  usage data  mining and analytical data  legal status data  filing  prosecution  granting and/or Docketing Data  etc. As also mentioned above the data related to the one or more inventions to be evaluated  scored and rationalized may be directly entered/inputted by a user by using the user device (102). A person skilled in the art will understand that these are exemplary embodiments and represent a subset of a broader data set and in no way by its definition limit the scope if the present subject matter.

The Program Data module (260) as illustrated in Figure 2 may further comprise transaction database  comprising transaction data corresponding to a singular or plurality of transactions related to the invention(s) or intellectual property asset(s) or its associated artifacts. Further  the Program Data module (260) may comprise data related to prime market comprising time-wise or geography-wise classification (or both)  as an exemplary embodiment of the present subject matter. The financial and business related data of an Enterprise may comprise its current and predicted future total turnover and turnover in the technology domain  market and jurisdiction where the invention may be made  used  sold  offered to sale  practiced  etc. It may further comprise the cost benefit assessment of the Enterprise-wide or organizational profit scenario with or without implementation of the invention or its associated artifacts. However  a person skilled in the art would appreciate that these are mere exemplary embodiments of varieties of data that may be stored in the Program Data module (260) as an embodiment of the present subject matter and in no way limit the scope of the same.

In another embodiment  the IVSS system (106) may further comprise a display module that may be coupled with the one or more modules such as Invention valuation module (230) for generating one or more graphs for displaying the valuation score generated by the Invention valuation module (230).

Figure 3 exhibits the sub-modules embedded in the Invention Valuation (IVM) module (230)  as one of the embodiments of the present subject matter. The Invention Valuation module (230) comprises one or more modules for determining the valuation of the one or more inventions  including but not limited to Base valuation Module (BVM) (302)  Time Projection Valuation Module (TPVM) (304)  Lifetime Valuation Module (LVM) (306)  Clustering/ Correlation Valuation Module (CCVM) (308)  Portfolio Valuation Module (PVM) (310) and other valuation Module (312).

The Base valuation Module (BVM) (302) generates the Base Valuation for the Invention ( at the current timeframe (present year) of the invention. The Time Projection Valuation Module (TPVM) (304) produces the valuation of the invention at any given year   both ( and ( being evaluated for a particular jurisdiction and a specific prime market as a user input in the IVSS system. Further  the Lifetime Valuation Module (LVM) (306) of the Invention Valuation (IVM) module (230) generates the aggregate score during the entire life period of an invention  wherein such life period may be another input parameter being fed to the respective module by the user. The Clustering/ Correlation Valuation Module (CCVM) 308  generates value of a cluster or a set of a plurality of inventions. Further  the Portfolio Valuation Module (PVM) (310) to generate total value of a portfolio of inventions. Such a portfolio may be aligned to the Enterprise’s core Business capability and may comprise mapping as a function of location  time  depth and width of Business  etc.

Figure 4 illustrates a Delivery Sustainability Weight matrix (DSW) (400) in accordance with an embodiment. Such a Delivery Sustainability Weight matrix (DSW) (400) may be implemented by the Delivery Sustainability Weight Module (DSWM) (214) for enabling the processor to assess time sustainability characteristics of capability measurements of an invention. The Delivery Sustainability Weight matrix (DSW) (400) generates cross-relational weight between the “Anticipative”  “Agile”  “Efficient” and “Adaptable” sustainable characteristics of an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions as a function of lag measure (“Business Outcome’) and lead measures (“Process”  “Technology” and “Infrastructure”). Table I illustrates an exemplary DSW matrix wherein a weight value of 1 may be assigned for core sustainable characteristics (agility  efficient  adaptable) with lead outcome measures (process  technology  infrastructure)  wherein DSW matrix (400) assigns weight value of 2 for longevity characteristics with lag measure. Thus  the cell depicting anticipative characteristics for Business outcome acquires the highest weight of 4. However  a person skilled in the art will understand that the aforementioned weight distribution is an exemplary manifestation of the present embodiment and may assign any other distribution without restricting the scope of the invention.

Weight Table Results Outcome Process Technology Infrastructure
Sustainability LAG LEAD LEAD LEAD
Anticipative 4 2 2 2
Agile 2 1 1 1
Efficient 2 1 1 1
Adaptable 2 1 1 1
Table I
Referring now to Figure 5  a Dimension Maturity Rule matrix (DMR) (500) is shown  in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter. The DMR matrix (500) may be generated by the Dimension Maturity Rule Module DMRM (216) in the maturity level determination stage for time sustainability-capability measurements of an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions  measured against manifold dimensions of “Alignment to Business Strategy”  “Difficulty to Reproduce”  “Addressable Market and Spread” and “Longevity in Consumers’ mind”. The various maturity levels of aforementioned dimensions of the DMR matrix may comprise low  low-medium  medium  medium-high and high. For example  different dimension may be assigned same score for same maturity level  wherein the levels have values of 0.2  0.4  0.6  0.8 and 1 (Table II) in hierarchical order of maturity. Moreover  a person skilled in the art will appreciate that the number of maturity levels of the aforementioned dimensions and the corresponding level values represented in Table II elucidate exemplary demonstration of Dimension Maturity Rule matrix (DMR) (500) and thereby not restricting the scope and capacities of the present invention by the manner of presentation.

Rule Table Maturity Low Low-Medium Medium Medium-High High
Dimension
Alignment to strategy 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Difficulty to Reproduce 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Addressable Market and Spread 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Longevity in Consumers Mind 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Table II
Figure 6 demonstrates a Capability Sustainability Scoring (CSS) matrix (600) that may be generated by the Capability Sustainable Scoring Module (CSSM) (218) in accordance to an embodiment. The scores obtained by testing an invention’s various dimensional maturity level in term of its sustainability characteristics for deliverable measure  multiplied by corresponding cell’s weight value. The values in the Table I and Table II may be employed. Any changes to these values and scale are subject to analysis by the Enterprise that best suits to their type of inventions. However  the in Figure 6 should have the numerical value 100. The capability Sustainability Scoring Module (218) may also comprise a Scoring table as shown in table 4.

Referring now to Figure 7  a Market Oriented Clustering Matrix (MC) (700) is shown  in accordance with an embodiment that may be implemented by the Market Oriented Clustering Module (MCM) (220). The MCM module (220) allows the user to input the prime currency (CRN) for valuation of an invention and to identify the prime market (MKT) positioning (choose only one category) of an invention from the listed categories. The Valuation per Unit Score (VUS) (702) has two-fold dependencies on MKT and CRN  and is a user input. Table III provides an exemplary Market Oriented Clustering Matrix (MC)  values are assigned for different markets considering US$ as the CRN.
Recommended VUS for CRN = US$
Mass Market Enterprise Class
< µ1M µ1M to µ2M > µ2M Mass Users Restricted Management
Valuation per Unit Score (VUS)
10K 15K 25K 20K 10K 15K
Table III
Figure 8 illustrates the flow diagram of the Invention valuation and scoring system  as an embodiment of the present subject matter. An invention or a set of a plurality of inventions or an Enterprise-wide invention portfolio whose values need to assessed and rationalized may be obtained (801) from an internal or external database or from a user-specified input. User-input (802) related to the invention may be accepted by the IVSS system. The invention may run through various modules stored in memory to generate a score  which may further be displayed and reported at a display unit provided in the user device. First  a weight distribution has been assigned for each cell of Delivery Sustainability Weight Matrix (DSW) (400). Following  a Dimension maturity Rule Matrix (DMR) (500) of an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions may be generated by the Delivery maturity Rule Module (DSRM) (216) to determine the maturity scores across manifold dimensions comprising “Alignment to Business Strategy”  “Difficulty to Reproduce”  “Addressable Market and Spread” and “Longevity in Consumers’ mind”. Thereafter  a Invention Score (IS) of the said invention or the set of a plurality of inventions is generates by weighted multiplication of the maturity score by employing the Capability Sustainability Scoring Module (CSSM) (218). Further  based on the user-defined market and user-specified currency of calculation (CRN) of Market Oriented Clustering Module (MCM) (220)  at least one of the base valuations (BVI)  time projected valuation (IV)  lifetime valuation (LVI)  clustering/ correlation valuation  Portfolio valuation or rationalization of an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions or Enterprise-wide invention portfolio may be evaluated by employing the Invention valuation module and the various sub-modules included. The Base Valuation (BVI) computation of an invention as described herein may comprise generating a pre-defined or user-specified value of Valuation per unit cell score (VUS) of an invention determined by the scoring based on the invention’s consumable capacity mapped to at least one of the sub-classes of the Enterprise class or the sub-classes of the Mass Market class  generating Invention Score (IS) or Invention Score (IS) normalized with maximum possible score (N) of the said invention wherein the said Invention score (IS) and the maximum possible score (N) may be obtained by the Capability Sustainability Scoring Module (CSSM) (600) of IVSS  and computing the Base Valuation (BVI) comprising Valuation per unit cell score (VUS) and Invention Score (IS) or Invention Score (IS) normalized with maximum possible score (N).

Further in reference to figure 8  the Time Projection Valuation (IV) computing of an invention as described in Figure 8 may further comprise obtaining the Base Valuation (BVI) of an invention  computing the Base Valuation of an invention powered by Invention Score (IS) normalized with maximum possible score (N) and a soothing factor (?)  wherein the Invention Score (IS) normalized with maximum possible score (N) and a soothing factor (?) may further be powered by a time dependent function wherein the time dependency is such that the Time Projection Valuation may lead to Base Valuation for the beginning year of the invention  wherein the Invention Score (IS) may be computed by adding the cell scores of all the cells of Capability Sustainability Scoring (CSS) matrix. Moreover  the Lifetime Valuation (LVI) computing of an invention may further comprise the aggregating of Time Projection Valuation for each time data point over a user-defined time period or the lifecycle of the invention. Such values that may be generated are then displayed by the user device.

Figure 9 illustrates the Display Module (DM) (900) of an invention  a set of a plurality of inventions or an Enterprise-wide invention portfolio as various display sub-modules (910-950) orchestrated within a display module (900) are also shown  according to one of the embodiments of the present subject matter. The display module DM (900) includes a Radar Profile Display Module (RPDM) (910)  Graphical Lifetime Valuation Display Module (GLVDM) (920)  Reports Module (930) and Other Display Module (940). However  a person skilled in the art will understand that the aforementioned Display Module (900) comprises exemplary embodiments of displaying the evaluation of an invention or a plurality of inventions and in no way limit the scope of the nature or numbers of additional displaying features  which may be included as other display module (940) embodiment of the present subject matter.

Figure 10(a) displays the Radar profile of ‘Core/lead Sustainable–Capability Display’ 1010 of an invention at a given time t  projected for a given user-defined geography or jurisdiction  positioned against a user-specified market. The sustenance of an invention measured against agile  efficient and adaptable characteristics which can further be mapped with inventive steps  industrial applicability and anticipation /obviousness of an invention or its artifact has been displayed as connected points in the Radar profile measured against their capabilities in Process  Technology and Infrastructure measurements (1020). Further  maturity score of each of these capabilities measured against their sustenance characteristics for manifold dimensions encompassing “Alignment to Business Strategy”  “Difficulty to Reproduce”  “Addressable Market and Spread” and “Longevity in Consumers’ mind” has been determined and multiplied with the weight factor to generate the Cell Score. Thus  the Radar profile may provide a combination of holistic and discrete visualization of the Sustainable–Capability assessments of the given invention(s)  thereby projecting the immediate risks  benefits and opportunities  the stronger and weaker dimensions and the revealing of the influence and mutual interplay between various Core/lead Sustainable–Capability dimensions.

As the overall score for each core-lead Sustainability-Capability factors may vary from 0 to (in accordance to Table II)  the Radar Profile 1010 allows score from 0 to 4  as an exemplary embodiment of the present subject matter. Further  the discrete score points are connected by lines for projecting overall covered area by the invention with respect to the total area of coverage  however each line does not carry any linkage between two score points. The Radar profile 1010 of Core/lead Sustainable–Capability measurements at a given time t may further produce a plurality of invention’s Core/lead Sustainable–Capability measurements data with different mode of presentation (color code  joining line  symbol size and shape  etc.) on one single display  which may be used to compare their features and visualize them graphically. Further  the Radar Profile of Core/lead Sustainable–Capability measurements may display the Scores of an invention as a function of time t (i.e.  for various user-specified years)  thereby visualizing the decay or enhancement of sustainability- Capability characteristics of the invention with time. This may further assist in rationalizing the invention revealing its areas and scopes of improvements throughout the user-specified time period or throughout the life-cycle of the invention.

Figure 10(b) further illustrates an asymmetric Radar profile of Longevity /Lag Sustainable–Capability display (1030) of an invention at any given time t  projected for a given user-defined geography positioned against a user-specified market  wherein Anticipative characteristic measured against the lag and lead capabilities  and the (Business) Outcome capability measured against Anticipative characteristics is displayed. As the DSW matrix (400) described in Table I assigns weight value of 2 for longevity characteristics and lag measure wherein the Anticipative characteristics for (Business) Outcome acquires the highest weight of 4  an asymmetric Radar Profile Display 1040 has been created to capture the importance of Anticipative-(Business) Outcome Sustainable–Capability measurements incorporated in their weight distribution.

All the featured described in the previous paragraphs in relation with core-lead Sustainability-Capability display 1010 may be extended for the Longevity /Lag Sustainable–Capability display 1030 of an invention or a set of inventions or a plurality of comparative inventions. The Anticipative characteristics for Business Outcome score has been displayed with different color code (red in the display) than the remaining ones and is displayed on a scale of 16 which may be the maximum possible score for that characteristic measurement  wherein the other Sustainable-Capability measurements are displayed on a scale of their respective maximum score  viz.  8. The asymmetric Radar Profile Display of Figure 10 (b) illustrates the Sustainability Capability Scores of the synthetic invention “INV” being depicted in Table IV in the “working example of the present subject matter” section.

Figure 11 illustrates the Graphical Lifetime Valuation Display Module (GLVDM) 920 of IVSS system  wherein a plurality of graphical representations of valuation of an invention (IV(t)) may be displayed as a function of time t  for t being calculated in the units of year and the values being projected in the unit of US$  as an embodiment of the present subject matter.

As an exemplary illustration 1110  a plurality of inventions with diversified sustainable capabilities marked with varieties of invention score (IS) has been displayed on the Graphical Lifetime Valuation Display Module (GLVDM) 920  for IS being varied over a range of 50 to 80. A series of graphs of IV(t) as a function of t hence gets generated with IS = 50  60  70 and 80  which have been projected on a semi-log scale (IV(t) in log scale  t in normal scale) as connected data points represented with different symbols and color codes for the clarity in visualization. It is noteworthy to mention at this juncture that for a variety of inventions exemplified by a wide range of Invention Score (IS) may all produce similar Time Projection Valuation or Invention Valuation (IV(t)) on logarithmic scale at the beginning year of an invention  wherein such value may further merge with the Base Valuation (BVI) of the invention. However  with the evolution of time  the Invention valuation (IV(t)) may decay further exponentially with different rate of decay in their economic value so that the invention with highest invention score (IS) to begin with decays much slower (even on logarithmic scale) in comparison with the inventions possessing lower Invention Score (IS) to begin with. However  over a longer period of time  Invention Valuation (IV(t)) for entire aforementioned series with varieties of Invention Score (IS) ranging between 50 to 80 all decay gradually towards a common saturation point  depicting the end of lifecycle of an invention. Thus  the Graphical Lifetime Valuation Display Module (GLVDM) (920) may further elucidate the rationalization criteria of any invention with its lifetime determination  wherein the said determination may be performed based on its relative decay at any given point of time with respect to other inventions matured with different sustainable capabilities over manifold techno-legal-business dimensions. Hence  the exemplary illustration depicted in Figure 11 may project that with increasing Invention Score (IS) with higher Capability-sustainability  the decay in the Invention Valuation (IV(t)) is slower  wherein such visualization may be implemented as a primary indicator for Lifetime determination and rationalization of an invention.

The Display Module (900) of Invention Valuation and Scoring System (IVSS) may comprise other reporting modules (930) with assessment reports based on a set of rules comprising several analytical features  risk-benefit assessment features  portfolio analysis features  comparative analysis between a set of a plurality of inventions  etc. A person skilled in the art will understand that the aforementioned display modules and features are mere illustrative modes of the performance of an invention or a set of inventions and in no manner may limit the scope of the present subject matter.

As an exemplary illustration of the present subject matter  a synthetically created invention “INV” (Symbolic name) is being considered and executed under the “sustainable-maturity-market” model (SMMM) (111). A person skilled in the art would understand and appreciate that such an example is to merely illustrate various steps and features comprising the present subject matter and in no way limit the scope of the same from its realization in the broadest manner.

The synthetic invention “INV” referring hereafter may represent an invention or a set of plurality of inventions or an Enterprise-wide invention portfolio or any other known or futuristic form of its associated artifact or implementation.

The invention “INV” and its valuation parameters / features can be entered as a user-specified input or can be taken from any external or internal database (260). To begin with  the time sustainability of “INV” characterized by Anticipation  Agile  Efficient and Adaptable dimensions have to be measured each against Business Outcome  Process  Technology and Infrastructure capabilities. Let “INV” may comprise the following features:

“INV” is lacking in Business “Process” capability for sustainable abilities to sense the current need of the market and technology thereby not being “Agile” to provide a responsible solution. For such a scenario  “INV” may not have any sustainable “""Agile” characteristics in “Process” capability measurements  thus the score of the cell INV (Agile  Process) may assign Null value (represented by s22) in Figure 6. This may result in no further influence by dimensions  as the existence of any sustainable-capability measurements is Boolean in nature (0 or Null value for non-existence and 1 for existence).

Let us consider the “Efficient” sustainable characteristics of INV for “doing more with less” in terms of lower cost  time reduction  better quality  less effort  etc.  being measured against “Technology” capability lead measure. We may assume that INV has existence for Efficient-Technology sustainable capability measurements  which produces Boolean value 1. For any “existence” scenario  the Dimension maturity Rule matrix (DMR) (500) (illustrated in Figure 5) has to be computed to generate aggregate score for that said cell.
The DMR matrix (500) may be generated by the Dimension Maturity Rule Module DMRW (216) in the maturity level determination stage for time sustainability-capability measurements of an invention or a set of a plurality of inventions  measured against manifold dimensions of “Alignment to Business Strategy”  “Difficulty to Reproduce”  “Addressable Market and Spread” and “Longevity in Consumers’ mind”. The various maturity levels of aforementioned dimensions of the DMR matrix may comprise low  low-medium  medium  medium-high and high  wherein the best mode implementation of the DMR matrix may assign same score for same maturity level with values of 0.2  0.4  0.6  0.8 and 1 (Table II) in hierarchical order of maturity.

We may further utilize Table II to generate the aggregate ‘maturity score’ for the cell (Efficient  Technology) for INV with the following maturity dimensions:
“Alignment to Business Strategy” is considered to be “medium”(value 0.6)  “Difficulty to Reproduce” is considered to be “medium” (value 0.6)  “Addressable Market and Spread” may be considered to be “medium-high” (value 0.8) and “Longevity in Consumers’ Mind” may be considered to be “low-medium” (value 0.4).
Thus the aggregate maturity score of the cell INV (Efficient  Technology) represented by s33 in Figure 6 becomes 
s33 = 0.6 + 0.6 + 0.8 + 0.4 = 2.4

In a similar manner  the ‘maturity scores’ for each cell have been computed and are being incorporated in Score table being an embodiment of Capability Sustainable Scoring Module (CSSM) 218.Thus  INV being synthetically evaluated for various longevity and core sustainable characteristics against lag and lead capability measures being represented by the following Table IV (Score Table INV ST) as:

ScoreTable (ST) Results Outcome Process Technology Infrastructure
Sustainability LAG LEAD LEAD LEAD
Anticipative 1.8 0 3.2 2.8
Agile 1.2 0 2.8 3
Efficient 2.6 1 2.4 2.4
Adaptable 2.4 1.4 2.2 3.2
Table IV: Score for INV (INV ST)
The sustainable capabilities exhibited in Table IV may need to be weighted by the Delivery Sustainability Weight matrix (DSW) in order to generate the Capability Sustainability Scoring (CSS) matrix (600) for INV as represented in Figure 6. As in the best mode implementation of IVSS (106)  various weighted sustainable capability measures may be represented by Table I ( i.e.  DSW matrix with weight value of 1 for core sustainable characteristics (agile  efficient  adaptable) with lead outcome measures (process  technology  infrastructure)  and weight value of 2 for longevity characteristics with lag measure)  the score table for INV (INV ST) and weight table (Table I) generates the aggregate score for the invention (INV SCORE) as projected in Table V as:.
INV SCORE = {7.2 + 2.4 + 5.2 +4.8 + 0 + 0 + 1 + 1.4 + 6.4 + 2.8 + 2.4 + 5.6 + 3 + 2.4 + 3.2} = 50

WT*INV ST Results Outcome Process Technology Infrastructure
Sustainability LAG LEAD LEAD LEAD
Anticipative 7.2 0 6.4 5.6
Agile 2.4 0 2.8 3
Efficient 5.2 1 2.4 2.4
Adaptable 4.8 1.4 2.2 3.2
TABLE V: (INV SCORE)
After determining the invention score (INV SCORE) of the synthetic invention INV by measuring various aforementioned “sustainable” capabilities gauged by their “maturity” quantification across predefined manifold techno-legal-business-economic dimensions  the “sustainable-maturity-market” model (SMMM) further considers a “Market” oriented Clustering Matrix (MC)  which identifies the prime market (MKT) positioning (choose only one category) of INV. Such a positioning may be user-specified based on predefined categorization of the market classification.

We may assume that the synthetic invention INV be positioned in “Enterprise Class” Market under “Mass User” subclass  as described in Table III  wherein the valuation per unit “cell Score” of INV may be considered as . Let may further assume that the currency of valuation for INV be US$  which implies CRN = US$. Considering Table III  such a market scenario may generate the VUS for INV to be US$20K.

Based on the above information and computations  the Base Valuation (BVI) of the synthetic invention INV can be computed by 

= F1 (US$20K  50)
Considering a simple and illustrative functional dependence   the Base Valuation of INV is given by  US$20K ? 50 = US$ 1M  wherein 20K implies 20 ? 103 and M implies M = million = 106.

As the Base Valuation further projects the valuation of an invention for the first year of consideration  the valuation of the synthetic invention INV for the first year may be given by  IV(1)_INV = US$1M.

Further the time dependency of the valuation of the invention projected at any given year may be given by the following relation   wherein N = maximum possible invention score = 100 thereby producing for INV. Further considering a representative functional dependency of F as: with the smoothing factor   the invention score IV(t)_INV at any given time t may produce:
~ for = 1.
The invention valuation IV(t)_INV of INV as obtained by the aforementioned equation may be graphically depicted in Figure 11 as the plotted curve of (IS 50). The graphical representation of the IV(t)_INV versus t data projects the decay rate of INV with time t throughout the lifecycle of INV  wherein the lifecycle has been considered as 20 years. The graph shows that the decay in economic value of INV on a semi-log scale is very rapid at the beginning years of valuation which becomes eventually slower at the later stage of the lifecycle.

The lifetime valuation of the synthetic invention INV may be computed as:

=
Thus  for t = 20  LVI_INV generates 
LVI_INV = (1M + +……….+ )US$
= US$(1000000 + 1000 + 31.6 + 5.6 + 2.4 + 1.5 +……..) ~ US$ 1.001M
Such Life Time Valuation of the synthetic invention INV may predict the total revenue that INV may generate over the 20 years of lifecycle  which in turn may depict the rationalization of INV by revealing fields of improvements (from its decay rate at various projected time and time period) across various sustainability  capability  market dimensions by measuring the corresponding maturity levels at various phases of the entire life cycle of the invention.

The present subject matter  therefore  provides an Invention Valuation and Scoring System and Method for evaluating  scoring and rationalizing an invention  a set of a plurality of inventions or an Enterprise-wide invention portfolio. The present subject matter may be used for evaluating Intellectual Property Assets primarily Patents  Patent Portfolio  etc. or to reveal the rationalization factors of the said assets with time and geography. The present subject matter may also be used to evaluate and score multiple competitive inventions or Patents or Intellectual Property assets  which can be advantageous towards determining Enterprise’s strategic movement in profitable technological domain and aligned market/geography.

It is to mention at this juncture that although the present subject matter has been described in detail; those skilled in the art should understand that they can make various changes  substitutions and alteration herein  without departing from the crux of the subject matter in its broadest form.

WE CLAIM:

1. A system for evaluating  scoring and rationalizing one or more inventions  the system comprising at least one user device connected to an Invention Valuation and Scoring System (IVSS) via a network  wherein the Invention Valuation and Scoring System comprises:
a processor; and
a memory coupled to the processor  wherein the memory comprising:
a Delivery Sustainability Weight Module (DSWM) causing the processor to generate a Delivery Sustainability Weight Matrix by assessing weighted longevity or core sustenance of the one or more inventions measured against at least a lag or lead capability attribute;
a Dimension Maturity Rule Module (DMRM) causing the processor to generate a Dimension Maturity Rule Matrix by determining an aggregate maturity score for each cell of the Delivery Sustainability Weight Matrix;
a Capability Sustainability Scoring Module (CSSM) causing the processor to generate a Capability Sustainability Scoring Matrix by determining score of the one or more inventions by multiplying an aggregate maturity score with weight factor of the corresponding sustainability-capability cell;
a Market Oriented Clustering Module (MCM) causing the processor to determine and position the one or more inventions against its associated pre-defined or user-defined prime market  for one or more user defined geographical locations or jurisdictions with a pre-defined or user-specified currency of evaluation;
an Invention Valuation Module (IVM) causing the processor to generate one or more types of valuation scores and rationalize the one or more inventions; and
at least one Display Module adapted to display the generated valuation scores or reports related to the one or more inventions.

2. The system as claimed in claim 1  wherein the Invention Valuation Module (IVM) comprises at least one of a Base valuation Module (BVM)  a Time Projection Valuation Module (TPVM)  a Lifetime Valuation Module (LVM)  a Clustering Correlation valuation Module (CCVM) and a Portfolio Valuation Module (PVM).

3. The system as claimed in claim 1  wherein the Delivery sustainability weight matrix (DSW) comprises:
at least one of weighted sustainable Longevity characteristics adapted to be measured by an Anticipative characteristic of an invention and one or more weighted sustainable Core characteristics adapted to be measured by at least one of Agile  Efficient and Adaptable characteristics of an invention; and
at least one of lag and lead Capability attribute for at least one aforementioned sustainable characteristic  wherein the lag capability attribute further comprises a (Business) Outcome measure and the lead capability attribute further comprises at least a Process  a Technology or an Infrastructure measure.
4. The system as claimed in claim 3  wherein a higher weighted distribution may be assigned to the longevity sustainable characteristic with the lag capability measure.
5. The system as claimed in claim 3  wherein existence of a given sustainable characteristics for a measurement capabilities of Delivery sustainability Weight Matrix (DSW) may be Boolean in nature.
6. The system as claimed in claim 1  wherein Dimension Maturity Rule Matrix (DMR) comprises at least one of;
an “Alignment to Business Strategy”  a “Difficulty to Reproduce”  an “Addressable Market and Spread” and a “Longevity in Consumers’ mind” as the predefined dimension; and
a plurality of maturity levels comprising low  low-medium  medium  medium-high and high  wherein low and high determining the lowest and highest levels of maturity  respectively  with the intermediate maturity levels being stated in a hierarchical order in value.
7. The system as claimed in claim 1  wherein the Market Oriented Clustering Matrix comprises a plurality of Market options wherein the Market options may further comprise:
a “Mass Market” option  wherein the “Mass Market” option is sub-classified into a plurality of sub-classes determined by the consumer head count versus market spread; and
an “Enterprise Class” option wherein the “Enterprise class” is sub-classified into a plurality of sub-classes comprising at least one of “mass users” sub-class  “restricted users” sub-class and “Management” sub-class.

8. The System as claimed in claim 2  wherein the Base Valuation module further generates Base Valuation of the one or more inventions at a beginning year  wherein the Base Valuation may further comprise:
a pre-defined or user-specified value of Valuation per unit cell score of the invention determined by the scoring based on the invention’s consumable capacity mapped to at least one of the sub-classes of the Enterprise option or the sub-classes of the Mass Market option; and
an Invention Score of the invention obtained by the Capability Sustainability Scoring Module.
9. The system as claimed in claim 1  wherein the Time Projection Valuation comprises:
Base Valuation of the invention raised to the power of an Invention Score (IS) normalized with maximum possible score (N) and a soothing factor (?) 
wherein the Invention Score (IS) normalized with maximum possible score (N) and a soothing factor (?) may further be powered by a time dependent function wherein the time dependency is such that the Time Projection valuation may lead to Base Valuation for the beginning year of the invention; and
wherein  the Invention Score (IS) may be obtained by adding the cell scores of all the cells of Capability Sustainability Scoring (CSS) matrix.
10. The system as claimed in claim 1 wherein the Lifetime Valuation comprises the aggregate value of Time Projection Valuation for each time data point over a user-defined time period or the lifecycle of the invention.
11. The system as claimed in claim 1 may further comprise a Display module comprising at least one of
a Radar Profile Display Module (RPDM) configured to visualize at least one of
a Core/Lead Sustainability-Capability display module for visualization of at least one of agile  efficient and adaptable sustainable characteristics measured against at least one of technology  process and infrastructure capability attributes for at least one invention at a user-defined time or at a set of plurality of user-defined times;
a Longevity/Lag Sustainability–Capability display module for visualization of anticipative sustainable characteristic measured against at least one of (business) outcome  technology  process or infrastructure capability attribute or the (business) outcome lag measure determined for at least one of anticipative  agile  efficient or adaptable sustenance for at least an invention at a user-defined time or at a set of plurality of user-defined times;
a Graphical Lifetime Valuation Display Module (GLVDM) displaying the lifetime valuation of at least an invention for a user-defined time period; and
Reports Module (RM) configured to generate assessment reports based on a set of rules.

12. The set of rules as claimed in claim 11 may further comprise at least:
a singular or plurality of analytical features  risk-benefit assessment features  portfolio analysis features or comparative analysis between a set of a plurality of inventions.

13. A computer-implemented method for determining the valuation of an invention or a set of inventions or an Enterprise-wide invention portfolio  the method comprising:
obtaining at least an invention from a database comprising invention(s)  invention portfolio(s) or from a user-specified input;
defining a Sustainable Maturity Market Model (SMMM) comprising
a Delivery sustainability Weight matrix (DSW) for weighted sustainable capability measurements by determining the sustenance of the said invention;
a Dimension Maturity Rule Matrix (DMR) for generating the aggregate maturity score of an invention measured over at least one predefined maturity dimension;
determining Capability Sustainability Score of an invention from the aggregate maturity score multiplied by the cell weight of delivery sustainability weight matrix;
identifying prime market or having user-specified input of the prime market in Market Oriented Clustering Module determining the positioning of the invention and identifying the Currency for Valuation (CRN); and
calculating at least one of Base Valuation  Time Projection Valuation and Lifetime Valuation of the said invention by accepting user input of the data related to the invention where required.
Dated this 21st Day of December  2011

Priyank Gupta
Agent for Applicant
IN-PA-1454

ABSTRACT

A SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EVALUATING  SCORING AND RATIONALIZING INVENTIONS
A system  and method for evaluating  scoring and rationalizing an invention  a set of a plurality of inventions or an Enterprise-wide invention portfolio has been described  based on weighted sustainable characteristics of the said invention(s) gauged against lag and lead capability measures. The said sustainable capability measurements  incorporating maturity quantification across manifold dimensions generates a Capability Sustainability Score of the said invention(s)  which is further fed to evaluate an invention by positioning it against its prime market at a given time for a user-defined geography or jurisdiction. The rationalization of an invention can be retrieved by evaluating the said invention(s) for its projected or predicted Life Cycle revealing fields of improvements.
FIG. 3