JP2000132606A - Invention evaluation system and computer-readable recording medium recording invention evaluation program - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To objectively show the invention evaluation which has been subjectively executed in a conventional case by replacing with characters which are very easily understandable in terms of concept by comparing the operation level of an inputted evaluation value with an evaluation level reference value becoming reference and judging to which evaluation level it applies. SOLUTION: A judgment display means 22 evaluates numerical value for evaluation of invention. The operation level value of an average value and a total value, which are obtained from a prescribed operation, is calculated from the inputted evaluation value. A reference value for leveling the invention of an evaluation object into the three stages of 'A', 'B' and 'C' is compared with the operation level value. The evaluation level is displayed on a display means 25 based on the result. An identification display means 24 colors a closed area obtained by connecting straight lines in the corresponding positions of a basic graph by a color corresponding to the evaluation level or it is filled with a mesh pattern, and the closed area is displayed on the display means 25 so that it can clearly be identified.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION The present invention relates to an invention relating to a right to receive a patent, mainly the content of an invention for filing a patent application, based on input values evaluated from the viewpoints of patentability, technology and economy. , B, C, etc., an invention evaluation system capable of evaluating the quality of the invention more objectively by displaying the result on a computer screen with good discrimination by coloring, meshing, etc. The present invention relates to a computer-readable recording medium recording an invention evaluation program.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art Conventionally, when applying for a patent at a corporation such as a company, the national or local government, or a university or research institution attached thereto, the patent application is divided into several ranks according to the content of the invention and applied for. There is an increasing tendency to file efficient patent applications by classifying inventions that should be and those that should not. It is known that such a tendency is particularly remarkable in a large company applying for a huge number of inventions.

[0003] For example, the development department reports in writing the outline of the invention to the Intellectual Property Department (hereinafter referred to as the “IP Department”) or the like, and requests a decision on whether or not to apply for a patent. The intellectual property department,
The content of the invention is ranked as "A", "B", "C". Here, the rank “A” is an important “patent application”, the rank “B” is a normal “patent application”, and the rank “C” is an unsuitable application or a utility model. Or,
For some companies, the higher one in the rank "A" considers foreign applications and strategically file defense-like ones, while the rank "B" applies for regular patent applications and ranks In the case of "C", a strategy may be adopted in which a patent application is filed without a request for examination even if the application is filed.

[0004] In addition, such an evaluation of the invention, after the above-mentioned ranking, is described in the type of application or in a separate document, or simply left as an additional record in a patent management database or the like. Was.

[0005] In the current unprecedented recession, reduction of capital investment such as development and R & D expenses is an urgent issue, but in Japan, the number of patent applications as a whole is still increasing. I am following. In particular, the number of international applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) has grown remarkably. And the current patent filing policy of companies has definitely shifted from so-called "pursuit of quantity" to "pursuit of quality".

[0006] The evaluation of an invention relating to the right to obtain a patent starts with the determination of the filing of an application, and is performed a number of times at specific points in time, such as the presence or absence of a foreign application, the time of request for examination, the time of implementation, and the time of providing a license to another company. Must also be done. Therefore, based on the results, the company takes a thorough rights-granting system for important inventions, and decides to abandon the application examination request, abandon the application, etc. for other items, and make effective use of expenses. It is desirable to improve the efficiency of application and application, and thus to improve the cost-effectiveness, and at the same time, it can contribute to the examination economy of the JPO.

[0007]

However, the ranking of inventions related to the right to receive a patent as described above is not based on a particularly clear standard, but is grasped from the entire document such as a written request including the contents of the invention. Various companies have pointed out the problem that evaluations of inventions cannot be used effectively, and effective measures cannot be taken in their own patent application strategies because they are often evaluated in the entire atmosphere in which they are conducted. I have.

Further, "A", "B",
Because there is no means by which any employee of the company can clearly grasp what the ranking of the invention by "C" etc. is based on such a rank, the invention evaluation is carried out by own patent. Various companies have presented the problem that they cannot be used effectively as part of a strategy.

[0009]

The inventor of the present invention has made intensive studies to solve the above-mentioned problems, and as a result, the present invention has been described by using input means such as a mouse and a keyboard, and patentability input from the input means. Patentability evaluation item storage means for storing evaluation items, economic evaluation item storage means for storing economic evaluation items input from the input means, display means such as a character display, a liquid crystal display, and the like. A rating value storage means for storing rating values, each of which is a value evaluated in at least three stages, according to an input from the input means, and a calculation level value calculated from each of the input rating values, A level, B
A judgment display means for comparing with an evaluation level reference value serving as a reference for classifying into three levels of a level and a C level, and judging which level is applicable, and displaying the judged evaluation level on a display means; Basic graph drawing means for drawing a radial basic graph having each of the evaluation items as basic items, and a polygonal straight line corresponding to the input rating value on an item line of the basic graph. Closed area display means for displaying the closed area, and the invention evaluation system and the like having identification display means for identifying and displaying the inside of the closed area for each evaluation level determined earlier,
The invention relating to the right to obtain a patent, mainly the content of the invention for filing a patent application, is evaluated in at least three stages based on input numerical values evaluated from the viewpoint of patentability, economy, etc., and the results are displayed on a computer screen. The present invention solves the above-described problem by displaying the image with good discrimination by color display, mesh display, and the like, so that the quality of the invention can be more objectively evaluated.

[0010]

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS A first embodiment of the present invention will be described below with reference to the drawings. FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an invention evaluation system of the present invention, and the main configuration is a central processing unit 31 (MPU). : Micro Prosessor Unit), storage unit 1
0, basic graph drawing means 21, judgment display means 22, closed area display means 23, identification display means 24, display means 25, input means 26, and the like.

The central processing unit 31 (hereinafter simply referred to as "MP
U31 ”) drives the entire invention evaluation system of the present invention based on a predetermined program, and is preferably a central processing unit such as a 32-bit MPU (Micro Processor Unit) capable of high-speed processing. However, the present invention is not limited to this.

The storage unit 10 is a readable and writable storage device (memory), for example, a RAM (Rand).
am Access Memory), FD (Flexible / Floppy Disk),
DVD-RAM (Digital Video Disk-RAM), EPRO
M (Erasable Programmable Read Only Memory), flash memory, and any other readable and writable storage device can be applied. The storage unit 10 assigns, for each storage area, an evaluation value storage unit 10a, a patentability evaluation item storage unit 10b, a technical evaluation item storage unit 10c, an economic evaluation item storage unit 10d, and the like.

As shown in FIGS. 6 to 11, the basic graph drawing means 21 displays the basic graph 25 on the display means 25.
e is drawn, and the graph is composed of a radial item axis and at least three levels "1", "2", and "3" at appropriate positions in each of the item axes. And a dividing point for equally dividing the In addition, there may be a case where the same-level division points are connected in advance by a straight line (auxiliary line).

The judgment display means 22 compares the magnitudes of numerical values in order to evaluate the invention. Specifically, first, a value that is a calculation level value such as an average value or a total value obtained by performing a predetermined calculation from the input rating value is calculated. Second, the invention to be evaluated must be at least "A",
A reference value for dividing into three evaluation levels of “B” and “C”, that is, evaluation level reference values N _AB and N _BC are compared with the calculation level value. Based on the result, the display means 25 displays "B level" as the evaluation level. At this time, the determination level value β, which is the basis value for determining the B level or the like, or the corrected determination level value β ′ (hereinafter, referred to as
Both of them may be simply referred to as “judgment level value” or “judgment level value β etc.”. ) May be displayed on the display means 25, for example, as "2.2 points".

The identification display means 24 displays, on the display means 25, a figure such as a polygon in which each corresponding position of the basic graph 25e is connected by a straight line based on each of the input values. Then, the figure surrounded by the straight line, that is, the inside of the closed area 25d is defined by the evaluation levels "A", "B", and "C".
The closed area 25d is displayed in such a manner that the closed area 25d can be clearly identified by coloring with a color corresponding to. Here, the “straight line” is a concept that includes a straight line that is close to a straight line, or a line in which symbols are arranged in a straight line.

The display means 25 is a device for displaying various images on a cathode ray tube, a liquid crystal display device or the like based on an instruction from the MPU 31. Specifically, a character display (CRT), a monitor device, a liquid crystal monitor and the like are provided. Can be summarized, but not limited to. The input means 26 is an input device such as a mouse or a keyboard.
5 is a device that sends data (or a signal) to the invention evaluation system of the present invention by clicking a specific position displayed in 5 or inputting characters.

Next, the storage unit 10 will be described in detail.
The storage unit 10 stores various items necessary for evaluating the invention, input numerical values, and the like. First, the patentability evaluation item storage means 10b stores an item name for evaluating patentability. In concrete pairwise, typing a patent evaluation item name from the input means 26, patent evaluation item names to be its input, in the order of input, patentability first endpoint P _1, patentability second endpoint P _2, are stored ... and the storage area is allocated. In the present embodiment, for example, as shown in FIG. 6, the patentability first endpoint P ₁ is "patentability", the patentability second endpoint P ₂ is "challenge and effects saliency"
.. Are input from the input means 26 and stored. That is, the patentability evaluation item storage means 10b
Stores an item name for evaluating patentability.

Next, when the technical evaluation item name is typed from the input means 26, the technical evaluation item names are displayed in the order of input, the first technical evaluation item T ₁ and the second technical evaluation item T.
₂ ,... Are allocated and stored. In the present embodiment, as shown in FIG. 6, for example, the “technical value level” is set as the first technical evaluation item T ₁ , and the “invention perfection level” is set as the technical second evaluation item T ₂ . It is assumed that “in-house easiness” is input from the input means 26 and stored in the third evaluation item T ₃ .

When an economic evaluation item name is typed from the input means 26, the economic evaluation item names are input in the order of input, and the first economic evaluation item E ₁ and the second economic evaluation item E are displayed.
₂ ,... Are allocated and stored. In the present embodiment, for example, as shown in FIG. 6, the economics first endpoint E ₁ "applications expandability" is, the economics of the second evaluation item E ₂ is "geographical market extensibility", the economy third endpoint E ₃ "lifecycle property" is, the "self-developed importance", assumed to be stored is inputted from the "third feasibility" is input means 26.

In this specification, the invention evaluation is classified into three major items. That is, there are three classifications of "patentability evaluation item", "technological evaluation item", and "economic evaluation item". Each of these items is composed of several small items. Specifically, the “patentability evaluation item” includes a patentability first evaluation item P ₁ , a patentability second evaluation item P _{2, and the} like. Regarding the “technological evaluation item”, the first technical evaluation item T ₁ , the second technical evaluation item T ₂ ..., And also regarding the “economic evaluation item”, the first economic evaluation item E ₁ , the second economic evaluation Item E ₂ ... The value entered by evaluating for each of these small items is referred to as "evaluation value" rating value that is input for patentability first endpoint P ₁ and P _V1, the patentability second endpoint P ₂ The rating value entered for is P _V2
... etc. Rating value is input to techniques of the first endpoint T ₁ in the same manner the T _V1, technology of the second endpoint T ₂
Inputted rated value input is a T _V2 ... etc, rating value that is input for economy first endpoint E ₁ and E _V1, with respect to economics second endpoint E ₂ with respect to The rating value is E _V2 ... etc.

Next, the rating value storage means 10a stores the rating value _{PV1 and the} like input from the input means 26 for each of the above-mentioned evaluation items. In the present embodiment, the rating value P _{V1 and the} like are numerical values in three stages of 1 or more and 3 or less. For example, the third economic value stored in the economic evaluation item storage means 10d.
For the "life cycle" of the evaluation item E _3, "2,
If the life cycle is 3 years or less, 1 is set; if the life cycle is about 4 to 6 years; 2 is set; if the life cycle is 7 years or more, 3 is set. As described above, a numerical value that is input by rating one aspect of the present invention is referred to as a “rated value” in this specification. However, the evaluation value can be in any range such as 0 or more and 5 or less, 0 or more and 10 or less, or can be a value in any of 5 or 10 levels.

Here, an example of a criterion such as a rating value P _V1 corresponding to each evaluation item P ₁ or the like will be described. The patentability is evaluated based on whether there is novelty and inventive step, whether or not the prior application exists, etc., and if the evaluation is “low”, 1 and “normal (may be)” If so, 2 is set, and if "high", 3 is set. In addition, the problem and the effect saliency are evaluated based on whether the problem or the like is epoch-making even if the patentability is low, and 1 if “low” and “normal”.
If it is, it is 2 and if it is “high”, it is 3.

The invention value level is patentability or economic efficiency as a criterion of each technical level in a company.
And 2 for “peripheral invention” and 3 for “basic invention”. In addition, the invention perfection level is 1 if the invention to be evaluated is “mere idea”, 2 if “design drawings etc. are completed”, and 3 if “prototype completed or mass production system”. Shows the degree of perfection of the completed invention.

The in-house operability is set to 1 if the invention relating to the evaluation is “difficult to implement in-house”, 2 if “implementable due to improvement of in-house equipment”, and 3 if “immediately implementable”. In addition, the application field development potential is 1 if the invention relating to the evaluation is “current or smaller” in the technical field only.
And 2 for “possible increase” and 3 for “increase”. In addition, the regional market expandability is 1 if the invention relating to the evaluation is “current or small” in the regional marketability, and 2 if “there is a possibility of becoming large”.
And "3 with world".

Since the life cycle property is as described above, the in-house developed importance is 1 if the invention relating to the evaluation is “not an in-house important issue nor an in-house product”;
2 for "Current product group invention" and "In-house important subject invention"
Then, it is set to 3. In addition, the feasibility of the other company is 1 if the possibility that the other company implements the invention according to the evaluation is "low possibility".
"2" for "possible" and 3 for "highly feasible".

Next, the recording section 27 is a recording medium in which a program for executing (driving) the invention evaluation system of the present invention and various data necessary for executing the program are stored (recorded). More specifically, a hard disk drive (HDD), a magneto-optical recording device (Magnetic Optical
Disk) and the like are applicable, but not limited thereto.

The program recorded in the recording section 27 is recorded in the program recording means 27a, and is appropriately executed based on a command from the MPU 31. The working area (expansion storage area) used at that time includes a RAM as the storage unit 10 and an HD as the storage unit 27.
A virtual memory or the like secured in D or the like may be used. Various data such as interworking with an O / S (basic software) unit and a storage area address of the storage unit 10 necessary for execution are stored in the data recording unit 27b. The program recording means 27a includes a non-volatile memory, for example, R
OM (Read only memory), HDD etc. can be applied,
It is not limited to this.

Next, FIG. 2 is a part of a main flowchart showing a main processing flow of the invention evaluation system of the present invention. First, according to the invention evaluation program recorded in the program recording means 27a, the MPU 31 displays a message prompting the input of the name of the invention on the display means 25. The user inputs "mobile phone" or the like (S1). The title of the invention is recorded in the data recording means 27b.

Next, the MPU 31 displays a message asking whether to judge from the basic patent requirements of the invention on the display means 25 based on the invention evaluation program. (S2).
That is, if the judgment is not made based on the basic requirements, the process immediately proceeds to the flow for receiving the invention evaluation. If the judgment is made based on the basic requirements, the process proceeds to the next step of judging novelty (S3).

Next, the MPU 31 displays a message relating to the determination of novelty (newness of the invention) on the display means 25 based on the invention evaluation program, and inputs an answer from the input means 26 (S4 to S4). S8). If the contents of the invention or the implementation of the invention is shown to another person before filing the application, a comment is displayed on the display means 25 to prompt the user to apply for the exceptional application of the loss of novelty (S5). If the novelty has not been lost, the process proceeds to the next step (S6).

Next, if the same invention has been seen in domestic and foreign newspapers and magazines, the MPU 31 displays an end message on the display means 25 based on the invention evaluation program, Ends the execution process (S
10). If not, proceed to the next step (S
7). Next, the MPU 31 displays, on the display means 25, a message asking whether or not the invention is not its own industry but subjectively has the novelty of the invention. If the answer is NO, the process proceeds to S10, where an end message is displayed on the display means 25, and the process of executing the invention evaluation program is ended. If you say you ’re new,
Proceed to the next step (S8).

Next, the MPU 31 displays on the display means 25 a message asking whether or not patent information has been searched as prior art based on the invention evaluation program. The process of setting the evaluation value of the novelty as two points is executed (S11), and the process proceeds to the next process (S100 and thereafter). If the survey is answered, the process of setting the rating value of the novelty to the highest three points is executed, and the value of the item importance coefficient corresponding to the novelty evaluation item is slightly smaller than the default value of 1. A process for setting the value to 1.5, which is large, is executed (S9), and the process proceeds to the next process (S100 and thereafter).

FIG. 3A is a part of the main flow of the invention evaluation program in the first embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention. First, the MPU 31 determines the patentability evaluation items P ₁ ,
Since a message prompting the input of P ₂ ,... Is displayed on the display means 25, “patentability”, “problem and effect saliency” and the like are input from the input means 26 such as a keyboard (S1).
00). The entered “patentability”,..., The patentability evaluation items P ₁ , P ₂ ,... Are stored in a predetermined storage area of the patentability evaluation item storage means 10b.

Next, the MPU 31 displays a message prompting the input of the technical evaluation items T ₁ , T ₂ ,... On the display means 25 based on the program. , "Invention perfection level" and the like (S101). The technical evaluation items T ₁ , such as “invention value level”, input here,
T _2, ... is stored in a predetermined storage area of the technical evaluation item storage unit 10c.

Next, the MPU 31 displays on the display means 25 a message prompting the user to enter the economic evaluation items E ₁ , E ₂ ,... On the basis of the program. , "Regional market expansion" and the like (S102). Economic evaluation items E ₁ , such as “application field development potential”, input here,
E _2, ... it is stored in a predetermined storage area of the economic evaluation item storage unit 10d.

[0036] Here, based on the inventive evaluation program according to the present invention, constitutes a base graph 25e from each item P ₁ like input or by providing a chart area 25a on the display means 25, the base graph 25e Display (S10
3). The base graph 25e is a radial radar chart graph as shown in FIGS. 6 to 11 and the like, having a radial shaft consisting of several such items P ₁ input, on each axis evaluation value at regular intervals Points corresponding to 1, 2, and 3 are plotted. Such a graph is referred to as a “basic graph 25e” in the present specification, and preferably, one point, two points,
Like the three points, an auxiliary line connecting the points of the same rating value continuously with a straight line is also displayed thinly (thinly). In the present specification, the patentability evaluation items P _1, etc., the first "patentability in order of input evaluation items P _1, patentability second endpoint P
_2, ... called "etc. simply when such" item "may generally called each such the" first patent evaluation items P _1, P _2, ... ".

Next, the MPU 31 displays a message prompting the input of the patentability rating values P _V1 , P _V2 ,... On the display means 25 based on the invention evaluation program (S104).
Specifically, the patentability rating values P _V1 , P _V2 ,... In three stages of 1, 2, or 3 points are input from input means 26 such as a ten key. The patentability rating values P _V1 , P entered here
_V2 ,... Are stored in an appropriate storage area of the rating value storage means 10a (see FIG. 1).

Next, MPU 31, based on the invention evaluation program, technical property assessment value T _V1, T _V2, displays ... a message prompting input on the display unit 25 in (S105).
Specifically, the technical evaluation values T _V1 , T _V2 ,... In three stages of 1, 2, or 3 points are input from input means 26 such as a ten key. The technical evaluation values T _V1 , T input here
_V2 ,... Are stored in an appropriate storage area of the rating value storage means 10a (see FIG. 1).

Next, MPU 31, the basis of the invention evaluation program, economical assessment value E _V1, E _V2, displays ... a message prompting input on the display unit 25 in (S106).
Specifically, the economical evaluation values E _V1 , E _V2 ,... In three stages of 1, 2, or 3 points are input from the input means 26 such as a ten key. The economic evaluation values E _V1 and E input here
_V2 ,... Are stored in an appropriate storage area of the rating value storage means 10a (see FIG. 1).

Next, based on the invention evaluation program, the MPU 31 displays on the display means 25 a message asking whether or not to evaluate the invention by applying the values of the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ . . The “item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K
" ₂ ..." is a correction value as a weight to be considered for each item, and is used to multiply the rating value given to the item by a maximum of twice when a particular item is particularly regarded as important. It is a real number of about 2 or less. In this specification,
... The operation of reflecting the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... In each rating value P _V1 or the like may be particularly referred to as “correction”.

When it is desired to reflect the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... In the invention evaluation, the input means 26 selects or inputs that effect (S107), and the item-specific importance coefficients shown in FIG. The process proceeds to the subroutine of the degree coefficient processing. If not reflected, select or input that effect from the input means 26 (S107) and proceed to the next step.

Here, in this specification, a numerical value that becomes a reference when the invention is determined as a final evaluation such as A, B, or C level is referred to as an “evaluation level reference value”. Specifically,
It is a real number not less than 1 and not more than about 3. In particular, the boundary value between the A level and the B level may be referred to as “evaluation level reference value N _AB ”, and the boundary value between the B level and the C level may be referred to as “evaluation level reference value N _BC ”. In the present embodiment, the determination level value β or the like is
The invention relating to the evaluation at the time of 2.5 or more is determined as the A level, and when the determination level value β or the like is 2.0 or more and less than 2.5, it is determined as the B level. When the determination level value β or the like is less than 2.0, the C level is determined. Is determined. In this case, the evaluation level reference value N _AB is 2.5, and the evaluation level reference value N _AB
BC is 2.0. In the invention evaluation system of the present invention, it is assumed that this value is previously recorded as a default in the data recording means 27b or the like.

Next, when a value such as the evaluation level reference value N _AB is to be changed, an instruction to that effect is input from the input means 26 (S108). When changing, the evaluation level reference value changing means 20b of the set value changing unit 20 rewrites the values such as the default evaluation level reference value N _AB based on the instruction of the MPU 31 (S301 and thereafter). If not, go to the next step.

Next, the judgment display means 22 makes a judgment for executing the evaluation of the invention (S109). In detail the case where no correction (see FIG. 6), the number of items entered are 10 items in total, evaluation values P _V1 such as each item P ₁ from the first endpoint P ₁ patentability Clockwise 3 points, 3 points, 2 points, 2 points, 2 points, 3 points, 3 points, 3
Points, three points, and two points. Item P ₁ relating to patentability
If the number of items such as is x, then x = 2 in this case. Further, if the number of items, such as item T ₁ to a technique of a y,
In this case, y = 3. Similarly, if the number of items, such as item E ₁ regarding economics is z, a z = 5.

Then, the judgment display means 22 performs no correction, that is, the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,
The calculation is performed in accordance with the equation in FIG. 5, which is an arithmetic equation in the case where a specific item is not weighted by. More specifically, the sum P of the ten input rating values P _V1 etc.
_V1 + _Pv2 + ... + E _V5 is _calculated as 3 + 3 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 3 + 3 +
3 + 3 + 2 = 26, and a simple average 2.6 obtained by dividing the sum 26 by the total number of items 10 is calculated. Such average value 2.
6 is compared with the evaluation level reference value, and according to the result of the comparison, the invention is evaluated as “A level”, “B level” or the like. The average value obtained in this way for comparison with the evaluation level reference value is herein referred to as “determination level value β”. The judgment display means 22 calculates the judgment level value β
= 2.6 and temporarily stored in an appropriate development area of the storage unit 10.

By the way, when it is assumed that each of the rating values P _{V1 and the} like of each item is the highest three points, the judgment level value β is (3 points × 10 items) ÷ 10 items = 3.0. This value is the determination level value β when no correction is made.
Is also the maximum value of In the present invention, the maximum value that the determination level value β or the like can take is particularly referred to as “maximum level value Lmax or the like”.

Next, as S110, the closed area display means 2
3 plots the corresponding position on the basic graph 25e based on each input rating value, and draws each of the plotted positions so as to connect them with a straight line (FIG. 6).
Etc.). The area surrounded by the drawn polygonal straight line is particularly referred to as a “closed area” in this specification. When drawing the closed region, the identification display means 24 makes the outline straight line thicker than other lines, or makes the outline straight line such as a color other than black, for example, blue, green, brown, gray, or the like. denoted with the predetermined color and mesh display identification within the balance of such evaluation values P _V1 for each seemingly item, sometimes distribution or the like for identifying and displaying on the display unit 25 to be identified.

Next, the judgment display means 22 compares the numerical value of 2.6 of the judgment level value β with the evaluation level reference value N _AB or N _BC recorded and set by default in the data recording means 27b (S111). ). Specifically, first,
2.6 of the determination level value β and the evaluation level reference value N
Compare with 2.0 of _BC (S111). Judgment level value β
Since 2.6 exceeds the evaluation level reference value N _BC of 2.0, the MPU 3 determines to shift to S114 which is the next judgment.
1 controls the processing.

In step S114, the judgment level value β
2.6 is compared with the evaluation level reference value N _AB of 2.5. 2.6 of the judgment level value β is the evaluation level reference value N
_Since it exceeds _AB of 2.5, it corresponds to A level and S11
Go to 7. Then, the identification display means 24 displays the closed area 25.
The inside of d is identified and displayed corresponding to the evaluation level “A level” (S117).

Here, the "identification display" means that the inside of the closed area 25d is colored with a color corresponding to each of the A level, the B level, and the C level, or filled with a mesh pattern. This refers to displaying the shape and distribution state of the closed region 25d so that they can be clearly identified. In the case of FIG. 6, since it is determined that the image corresponds to the A level, the inside of the closed area 25 d is first colored with a color (for example, blue) corresponding to the A level, or is identified and displayed with a mesh corresponding to the A level. Doing so corresponds to “identification display”.

Further, in order to further clarify that the invention relating to the evaluation has been evaluated as the A level, the judgment display means 2
2, an evaluation level display area 25b is provided in the display means 25 as shown in FIG. 6, and "A" is displayed as an evaluation level in the evaluation level display area 25b. Further, in the determination level value display area 25c, "2.6" is displayed as a large determination level value β corresponding to the evaluation level. Below this, the maximum level value Lmax may be displayed together with 3.0 as the maximum level value Lmax, and displayed for easy comparison with the determination level value β. Further, corresponding to the determination level value β of 2.6, the data recording means 27b
Alternatively, a text of an appropriate evaluation comment recorded (stored) in the evaluation comment storage unit 10f or the like may be displayed in the evaluation comment display area 25f.

The evaluation comments are “A”, “B”,
Default recording (memory) in advance for each evaluation level such as "C"
In the case of the A level, an evaluation comment as shown in FIG. 6 is displayed. This evaluation comment may have a comment content that is appropriately changed depending on the distribution state of the evaluation value _PV1 or the like. Thus, the main flow according to the first embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention ends.

Here, the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ ,
The process of performing the invention evaluation after correction in consideration of K ₂ ,... Will be described in detail. In S107, the process shifts to a subroutine for considering the item-by-item importance factors K ₁ , K _2, etc. (see FIG. 4A), for example, the “inventive value level” of the first technical evaluation item T _1. With emphasis on
Suppose that you want to evaluate this item 20% larger than the other items. Similarly, the “life cycle property” of the third economic evaluation item E ₃ is also regarded as important, and it is assumed that the user wants to evaluate this item by 20%.

Referring to the example shown in FIG. 7, in S201 of FIG. 4A, first, importance factors K ₁ , K ₂ ,... Relating to patentability evaluation items P ₁ , P ₂ ,.
Is entered in the corresponding mode, but in this case, they can be left at the default value of 1.0 and can be ignored. In the next step S202, the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ , and K ₁ , T ₂ ,.
… Input mode. In this case, the items to be considered for the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... Are first the technical first evaluation items T _1. increased 20% 1.0, i.e. 1.2, this is the K _3.

That is, in the basic graph 25e of FIG.
The value of itemized importance factors in the patentability first endpoint P ₁ as the starting point and K _1, below, in order to value the itemized importance factors in the patentability second endpoint P ₂ clockwise and K ₂ To be assigned, the technical first evaluation item T ₁
The value of itemized importance factors to enter in response to, since the value to be input to the third, in which the K _3.

Similarly, in the next step S203, the input mode for the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... Since the evaluation item to which the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... Are to be applied is the third economic evaluation item E ₃ , the value of the item-specific importance coefficient input corresponding to this is set to 1.0. 20%
, Which is 1.2, which is K ₈ according to the counting sequence described above.
And Other items K ₁ , K ₂ , and K that are not particularly input
_{For 4} ,..., The value of the item-specific importance coefficient is set to 1.0 as a default setting value.

[0057] Then, the determination display section 22, each itemized importance coefficient K _1, K _2, ... for, according to the equation shown in FIG. 5, first itemized importance coefficient K _1, K ₂ ... sum α of Ask for. Specifically, the total alpha, in base graph 25e in FIG. 7, clockwise from the first endpoint P ₁ patentability, 1 + 1 + 1.2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1.2 + 1 +
1 = 10.4. The sum α is temporarily stored in an appropriate development area of the storage unit 10 (S20).
4). The item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... Input and determined in this way are stored in the item-specific importance coefficient storage means 10 e by the item-specific importance coefficient changing means 20 a of the set value changing unit 20. (S20
5). Then, the process returns to the main flow of FIG. 3A and proceeds to the next S108.

In S108, the value of the evaluation level reference value N _AB or N _BC recorded and set in the data recording means 27b or the like as a constant value by default is arbitrarily changed.
Processing is performed such that the criteria for the evaluation levels such as A, B, and C can be raised or lowered as desired. In such a case, the process proceeds to the evaluation level reference value change subroutine of FIG.

That is, when it is desired to change the evaluation level reference value N _AB , the desired value is input (S301). For example, if it is desired to lower the criterion determined as the A level, input “2.3” or the like. Similarly, when it is desired to change the evaluation level reference value N _BC which is a reference for the B level and the C level,
The user inputs the desired value (S302). The evaluation level reference values N _{AB and the} like changed by these means are stored in the MPU 3
The evaluation level reference value changing means 20b controlled based on the instruction 1 replaces the default value (S303).

Then, returning to S109, the determination display means 22 determines the corrected determination level value β 'according to the flow described above. Specifically, correction is performed by applying the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... To each rating value P _{V1 and the} like based on the equation in FIG. In this case, the sum α of the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... K ₁₀ of all ten items is 10.4, which corresponds to the first item in FIG. 7, that is, the first patentability evaluation item P ₁ . Since the item-specific importance coefficient K ₁ is 1.0, which is the default, if correction is applied to the first patentability evaluation item P ₁ , 3 points × 1.0 ÷ 10.4 = approximately 0.288.

In the same manner, calculation is performed for the remaining nine items. As the items to be considered in the item-specific importance coefficients K ₂ , K ₃ ,..., The _third item in FIG. 7, that is, the rating value _{TV 1} of the technical first evaluation item T ₁ is 2 points, and the corresponding item since the importance coefficient K ₃ 1.2, applying a correction in the art of the first endpoint T _1, 2 × 1.2 ÷ 1
0.4 = about 0.231. Next, the eighth item, that is, the economic property third endpoint E _3, in evaluation value E _V3 are three points, because the corresponding itemized importance coefficient K ₈ is inputted with 1.2, 3 × 1.2 ÷ 10.4 = 0.346.

If the sum of the values calculated as described above is obtained, the corrected judgment level value β 'applying the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... Is determined. That is, in the present case, in order from patentability first endpoint P ₁ clockwise in FIG. 7, according to the formula 5, [(3 × 1) +
(3 × 1) + (2 × 1.2) + (2 × 1) + (2 × 1) +
(3 × 1) + (3 × 1) + (3 × 1.2) + (3 × 1) +
(2 × 1)] ÷ 10.4 = about 2.6. A value of 2.6 for this determination level value β'may be that the average value calculated by applying a correction to each evaluation value P _V1, and the like. This determination level value β ′ is temporarily stored in an appropriate area such as the storage unit 10 or the like.

Here, assuming that each of the rating values of each item is the highest three points, the maximum level value Lmax ′ when the correction is applied is obtained as follows: [(3 × 1) + (3 × 1) +
(3 × 1.2) + (3 × 1) + (3 × 1) + (3 × 1) +
(3 × 1) + (3 × 1.2) + (3 × 1) + (3 × 1)]
÷ 10.4 = 3.0. This is also the maximum value of the determination level value β '. In this specification, both the maximum level value Lmax ′ and the maximum level value Lmax when no correction is applied may be simply referred to as “maximum level value”.

Next, as shown in FIG. 7, the closed area display means 23 plots the rating values P _{V1 and the} like of each item on the basic graph 25e, connects them with straight lines, and draws the closed area 25d (S
110). Hereafter, as if no correction was applied,
Evaluation levels such as “A”, “B”, “C”, etc. are determined (S
111, S114), the closed area 25d is identified and displayed by a color, mesh, or other remarkable display mode corresponding to the evaluation level (S112, S115, S117).
The evaluation level, preferably the determination level value β, etc., and an evaluation comment corresponding to the evaluation level are displayed in a predetermined area of the display unit 25 (S113, S11).
6, S118), and the processing of the invention evaluation program to which the series of item-specific importance coefficients (weighting) according to the first embodiment is applied ends.

FIG. 8 is an example of the result display when the “patentability first evaluation item” and the “patentability second evaluation item” are novelty and inventive step. The mesh as the identification display is at the B level. Yes, it is. No correction was applied to each rating value _PV1 or the like. FIG. 9 is also an example of the result display, in which the invention evaluation is determined to be at the C level, and the mesh corresponds to the C level. No correction was applied to each rating value _PV1 or the like.

Next, a second embodiment of the present invention will be described. FIG. 10A is an example of a GUI (Graphical ⁰¹ ser Interface) of a menu screen according to the second embodiment of the present invention. However, it may be used in the first embodiment. In the graph area 25a, 10 items to 1
The basic graph drawing means 2 is composed of two basic graphs 25e.
1 is drawn. In the vicinity of each end of the basic graph 25e, a desired item for selecting a desired item from default evaluation items "patentability", "invention value level",... A pop-up list section 25h is provided.

In the pop-up list section 25h, FIG.
"Patentability", "problem and saliency", "importance of in-house development", "feasibility of other companies", etc.
In addition to the above, in the category of economy, various default evaluation items to which "international / industrial standardization", "global environment" and the like are added are displayed. Then, a desired item can be selected by the input unit 26 such as a mouse, and the result is obtained by the patentability evaluation item storage unit 10b, the technical evaluation item storage unit 10c, and the economic evaluation item storage unit 10d.
Is controlled by the MPU 31 so as to be stored as appropriate.

The pop-up list section 25h
In addition to selecting a desired item, any character can be input from the input unit 26 such as a keyboard. The result of the input is determined by the patentability evaluation item storage unit 10b and the technical evaluation item storage unit 10c. And stored in the economic evaluation item storage means 10d, preferably the data recording means 27.
b is controlled by the MPU 31 [FIG.
(B)).

Each of the evaluation items P _{1 and the} like selected (or input) in this manner is used as a new basic graph screen in the graph area 25 a, preferably in the category corresponding to the category of patentability, technology, and economy. The items are displayed clockwise in order from the item (see FIG. 11A). Then, similarly to the first embodiment, when each rating value _{PV1 and the} like are input, for example, in the case of six items, a display as shown in FIG. 11B is displayed.

The second embodiment of the present invention as described above
The processing is executed according to the flowchart shown in FIG. That is, first, the pop-up list section 25
Select (or input) a desired item in h [FIG. 12 (A)
S100 to S102]. Then, similarly to the first embodiment, the evaluation values P _{V1 and the} like evaluated for each of the evaluation items P _{1 and the} like are input in three stages of 1, 2, and 3 [FIG.
2 (A) S104 to S106].

If the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... Are applied to the invention evaluation in the present embodiment, S107
Jumps to the subroutine shown in FIG.
405). That is, the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,..., Which are real numbers in the range from 1.0 to about 2.0, are applied to the desired evaluation items P _{V1 and the} like to be weighted. Since the default values of the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... Are 1.0 as in the first embodiment, no input is required when weighting is not performed (when correction is not performed). In this case, since each rating value P _{V1 and the} like are multiplied by the default value of 1.0, there is no influence such as an error on the judgment level value β or the like calculated later.

Then, the determination level value in this embodiment is calculated by the operation shown in FIG. 14 (S
404). Specifically, the determination level value β in the present embodiment when no weight is assigned to each rating value P _V1 or the like (when no correction is made) is set as a simple total value of each rating value P _V1 or the like [ See FIG. 14]. Further, when the desired rating value P _V1 or the like is multiplied by the item-specific importance coefficient K ₁ , K ₂ ,... And the correction is performed, the corrected judgment level value β ′ is the corrected rating value P _{V1 and the} like (see FIG. 14). Item-specific importance factors K ₁ other than the default value,
When K ₂ ,... Are input, as in the first embodiment,
The default item importance coefficient 1.0 previously recorded in the data recording means 27b or the like is rewritten by the input value by the item importance coefficient changing means 20a (S405).

Then, the judgment level value β calculated as described above is temporarily stored in an appropriate working area of the storage unit 10 and determined (S109 '). As a result, the invention to be evaluated is at least A level, B level
The rank is divided into three levels: level and C level. FIG.
Explaining with reference to the specific example shown in the above, the total number of evaluation items is 1
Since there are 0 items and the maximum score of each item is 3 points, the total maximum score is 30 points. The maximum score without correction is referred to as “total maximum score Tmax” for convenience of calculation, and may be particularly referred to as “γ point” in this specification (see FIG. 15 (1)).

Since the minimum score of each evaluation item is one, the total minimum score when all the items are each one is ten. This is referred to as “total minimum point number Tmin” for convenience of calculation, and in this embodiment, may be particularly referred to as “ε point” (see FIG. 15 (2)). The total maximum score Tmax is equal to the “maximum level value Lmax” in the first embodiment.
The concept is substantially the same as the maximum value that can be taken as compared with "equivalent". However, in that a value obtained by the sum of such individual assessment values P _V1, different from the maximum level value Lmax which is obtained by the average of the first embodiment.

Next, the judgment display means 22 judges the evaluation level by the judgment level value β and the like and the evaluation level reference value N _AB.
Or a N _BC, checked by comparing the magnitude relation. That is, as shown in FIG. 14, the judgment display means 22 obtains a difference between the total maximum score Tmax and the total minimum score Tmin. Then, as shown in FIG. 15, the judgment level value β or the like is determined by the total maximum point Tmax and the total minimum point Tm.
If the score is within the lower 30% of the difference from in, C
If the score is within the range of 40%, the B level is determined, and if the score is within a range that does not correspond to any of the C level and the B level, the A level is determined (S111 ′, S114 ').

In other words, in order for the invention to be determined as the A level, it is necessary that the determination level value β and the like take a value within the upper 30% of Tmax-Tmin. In the case of Figure 18, it does not consider the itemized importance coefficient K ₁ and the like,
The total value of the rating values P _V1 etc. of each item, that is, the judgment level value β
Is 23 points from (3 + 3 + 2 + 3 + 3 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 1). On the other hand, Tmax−Tmin is 30−10 = 20.
However, in order to adopt the end points, 1 is added to make 21 points.

Here, the score corresponding to 30% of the 21 points is about 6.3 points.
A score of 23.7 points or more after subtracting 3 points is the top 3 of Tmax-Tmin.
This is a score layer of 0%, that is, a score layer determined to be at the A level. Therefore, the evaluation level reference value N _AB is 23.7 points. Similarly, the B level is 30% to 70% of Tmax-Tmin.
% Scoring layer. In other words, 15.3 points or more and less than 23.7 points are determined to be the B level. Therefore, the evaluation level reference value N _BC
Is 15.3 points.

Come to be [0078] Since the decision level value β in the case of example of Fig. 18 is 23 points, the results are compared with the evaluation level reference value N _BC in S111', than the evaluation level reference value N _BC Is larger than the evaluation level reference value N _AB , the result is determined to be B level. Such evaluation is performed by the judgment display means 2
2 is performed by executing the processing of the invention evaluation program according to the present invention. The evaluation level is the first
In the same manner as in the embodiment, the evaluation level display area 25b includes
The judgment level value β is the judgment level value display area 25c.
Are displayed respectively. In addition, the evaluation comment display unit 28 may display an evaluation comment having a content corresponding to the value of the determination level value β in the evaluation comment display area 25f.

Next, in the second embodiment, each rating value P
Processing when correction is applied to _V1 or the like will be described. The corrected judgment level value β ′ is calculated in the same manner as described above.
Is calculated according to the following equation. The level division after the correction is substantially the same as the case without the previous correction. However, in the evaluation item to which the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... Are input, the value is multiplied by the rating value P _{V1 of the} evaluation item, and the like.
The sum of the weighted values becomes the determination level value β ′.

Therefore, when the correction is applied, the total maximum number Tmax ′ of the ten evaluation items P ₁ , P ₂ ,... In this embodiment is not 3 points × 10 items = 30 points. The itemized importance coefficient K _1, K _2, ... This is because is multiplied rated value P _v1, etc. of a predetermined evaluation item. Therefore, the total maximum score Tmax of all n items when the correction is performed
'Is the γ point shown in the equation of FIG. Similarly, the total minimum score Tmin ′ of all n items is represented by ε shown in the equation of FIG.
Points.

FIG. 17 shows a specific example in which predetermined evaluation items are corrected (weighted) as described above. That is,
Corresponding to the input evaluation values P _V1 , P _V2 ,... Of the respective evaluation items, the closed area display means 23 for all ten items from “patentability first evaluation item” to “economic fifth evaluation item” Displays the closed area 25d on the display means 25.

Here, the input evaluation value P of each evaluation item
_V1 etc. are 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 3, 3, 2, 2, clockwise in order from “patentability first evaluation item” in FIG.
Two points were given. Further, as a correction, the patentability first evaluation item P ₁
The importance factor K ₁ for each item of “patentability” is 1.3,
Economy fourth evaluation item E ₄ barrels a "homegrown importance" 1.2
And Determination level value β ′ when such correction is applied
Is (2 × 1.3) + 2 + 2 + 2 + 3 + 2 + 3 + 3 + (2 × 1.
2) + 2 = 24 points.

On the other hand, the corrected maximum total score Tmax ′ is calculated from the patentability first evaluation item P _{1 in the} clockwise direction by the evaluation value P of each item.
_{Since each of V1} , _Pv2 ,... Can be the sum of three points, (3 × 1.3 × 1 item) + (3 × 1.2 × 1 item) + (3 × 1.0 × 8 items) = 31.5 points Becomes The corrected minimum total number of points Tmin 'is also (1 × 1.3 × 1 item) +
(1 x 1.2 x 1 item) + (1 x 1.0 x 8 items) = 10.5 points. Therefore, Tmax'-Tmin '= 31.5-10.5 = 21 points, but as described above, one point is added to take 22 points into consideration, taking the end points into consideration. Here, also in the present embodiment, the corrected total maximum number of points Tmax ′ may be referred to as a “maximum level value”.

Therefore, 30% of the 22 points are 6.
Since the total score is 6 points, the score of 24.9 points or more obtained by subtracting 6.6 points from 31.5 points of the total maximum score Tmax 'is considered to be the upper 30% of the score layer, that is, the score layer evaluated as A level. the evaluation level reference value N _AB of the 24.9-point. Similarly, the evaluation level reference value N _BC , which is a boundary value between the B level and the C level, is a score corresponding to the upper 70% of the total maximum score Tmax ′, that is, 16.1 points.
If 'is less than 16.1 point, the invention will be evaluated as C level.

Then, in response to the above calculation, the closed area display means 23 displays the closed area 25d at a predetermined position on the display means 25 (S110 '). The closed region 25d is preferably displayed by the identification display means 24 in a color (for example, yellow) corresponding to the evaluation of the B level, hatching, or the like. Further, in the present embodiment, the criterion for evaluating the A, B, and C levels is, in order, (total maximum score Tmax, etc.-total minimum score).
Tmin, etc.), the upper 30%, 40%, and 30% of the values are used.
It can be appropriately changed to 0%, 50%, and 30%.
In addition, if it is not desired to evaluate the invention very strictly, it may be possible to change the order to 40%, 40%, and 20%.

That is, when the changed ratio is input in the order of the A, B, and C levels from the input means 26 on the menu screen of FIG. 10 or an appropriate screen or the like, the value of the input ratio becomes the evaluation level reference value. The change unit 20b records (stores) the data in the data recording unit 27b or an appropriate development area (working area) of the storage unit 10.

Since the invention evaluation in the second embodiment is basically based on the sum of the respective evaluation items P ₁ , P ₂ ,..., The judgment level value calculated as the total value is determined. β and the like are determined in the determination level value display area 25.
c is the corresponding maximum level value (corresponding total maximum score Tm
ax etc.) may be displayed on the display means (FIG. 1)
6 to 21).

[0088] Specifically, examples of Figure 18 does not consider itemized importance coefficient K _1, K _2, etc., since cases of no correction, evaluation items P _1, P _2, evaluation value P _v1 in ..., P
The maximum value of each of _v2 , ... is 3 points. Therefore,
In the ten items in this case, the maximum value of the total of the evaluation values P _V1 , P _V2 ,... Is 3 points × 10 items = 30 points. The maximum total value of 30 points may be treated as the "maximum level value" and displayed on the display means 25 together with the "23 points" of the judgment level value β. However, if you have applied the correction,
The corresponding maximum level value Lmax 'is displayed in a predetermined area of the display means 25 together with the corrected determination level value (determination level value β').

FIG. 19 shows a specific example of the C-level evaluation in the second embodiment. The evaluation comment displayed in the evaluation comment display area 25f is a predetermined comment corresponding to a combination of the evaluation levels such as A, B, and C, the judgment level value, the shape of the closed area 25d, etc. It is stored or recorded in the data recording means 27b. Then, appropriate comment sentence data is displayed in accordance with the determination result of S111 ′ or the like in FIG.
8 and is controlled by the MPU 31 so as to be displayed in the evaluation comment display area 25f (S113).
etc).

FIG. 16 shows a display of the display means 25 when the invention is evaluated by the invention evaluation system of the present invention when “patentability” included in the category of the patentability evaluation item is not input as an evaluation item. State. By entering the patentability first endpoint P ₁ "inventive step" in the "novelty" and patentability second endpoint P _2, since these may become substantially "patentability".

The invention evaluation system of the present invention is similar to that of FIG.
As shown in FIG. 2, the technical evaluation items T ₁ , T ₂ ,... May be omitted. That is, the evaluation items may be the first patentability evaluation item P ₁ , the second patentability evaluation item P ₂ , the first economic evaluation item E ₁ , the second economic evaluation item E ₂ , and so on. For example, "inventive value level" may be regarded as patentability.

Further, there is a case as shown in FIG. That is, the patentability first evaluation item P ₁ is “newness”, the patentability second evaluation item P ₂ is “inventive step”, and the patentability third evaluation item P
₃ is “problem and effect saliency”, the technical evaluation items T ₁ , T ₂ ,... Are omitted, and the economic evaluation items E ₁ ,
E ₂ ,... Even in this case, some of the technical evaluation items can be regarded as patentability evaluation items, so that the invention evaluation can be sufficiently performed.

Next, as a third embodiment, a plurality of invention evaluation systems of the present invention are connected to a LAN such as ETHERNET,
FIG. 24 shows an invention evaluation system in a case where the evaluation results by a plurality of evaluators are comprehensively evaluated. First invention evaluation system P
C ₁ , the second invention evaluation system PC ₂ , and the third invention evaluation system PC ₃ each have the same network (Local Area Network).
a network, Ethernet, or a network substantially connected by a router, a bridge, or the like). The comprehensive invention evaluation system SVR can communicate with the first, second, and third invention evaluation systems, and is connected to the network. Therefore, each invention evaluation system
It is assumed that hardware required for network connection such as HER POERT and ETHER CARD is provided.

When one evaluator independently evaluates and evaluates each of the evaluation values P _V1 , P _V2 ,... When evaluating a certain invention, the evaluation of the invention is governed by the subjectivity of the evaluator, and It is assumed that it is no longer an evaluation. Therefore, at least one or more invention evaluation systems are connected on the same network, and evaluators corresponding to the number of the evaluation systems independently input rating values P _V1 , P _V2,. Each result (evaluation) is transmitted to the comprehensive invention evaluation system SVR via the network.

The comprehensive invention evaluation system SVR comprises the first invention evaluation system PC ₁ and the second invention evaluation system PC
The average of the results received from the _second and third invention evaluation systems PC ₃ is calculated, and “A”,
Evaluation levels such as “B” and “C” are displayed as “overall evaluation level” in the evaluation level display area 25b. At this time, the judgment level value (overall judgment level value) serving as the basis for judging the evaluation level is displayed in the judgment level value display area 25.
c, or a comprehensive evaluation comment as a corresponding comment may be displayed in the evaluation comment display area 25f.

Further, the judgment level value relating to each evaluator's evaluation may be displayed in a predetermined area of the display means 25 for each evaluator. Specifically, as shown in FIG. 25, displays the determination level value first evaluator calculated by the inventive evaluation system PC _1, the corresponding evaluator based display region 25j. Similarly, the decision level value second evaluator was calculated by the inventive evaluation system PC _2, and a determination level values third evaluator calculated by the inventive evaluation system PC _3, the corresponding evaluator based display region 25j Respectively.

FIG. 25 is a diagram showing an example in which the calculation method of the sum of the evaluation values P _V1 , P _V2 ,... _Used as the judgment level value β adopted in the second embodiment of the present invention is applied to this embodiment. The state of the display means 25 when the invention evaluation is executed is shown. The first evaluator has 16 points, the second evaluator has 15 points, and the third evaluator has 1 point.
7 points and the invention were evaluated, and the average was (1
6 + 15 + 17) ÷ 3 = 16 points. The value of 16 points is calculated as the total judgment level value. Further, the total evaluation level A is also displayed on the display means 25. Here, the sum of the judgment level values β of each evaluator, that is, 16 points, 1
48 points as a total of 5 points and 17 points may be displayed in the total judgment level value display area 25k.

FIG. 26 is a diagram showing an example in which the calculation method for determining the average value of the evaluation values P _V1 , P _V2 ,... Adopted as the judgment level value β in the first embodiment according to the present invention is applied to this embodiment. The state of the display means 25 when the invention evaluation is executed is shown. The first evaluator had 2.33 points, the second evaluator had 2.33 points, and the third evaluator had 2.30 points.
16 points and the invention were evaluated, and the average of these three values was (2.33 + 2.33 + 2.16) / 3 = about 2.27 points.
The value obtained by expressing the value of 2.27 points in two significant figures is calculated as the overall judgment level value. Further, it is displayed on the display means 25 as the overall evaluation level B. Here, the sum of the judgment level values β of each evaluator, that is, 2.33 points, 2.33 points, 2.16 points
6.82 points as a total of points may be displayed in the total determination level value display area 25k.

In the present embodiment, since there are a plurality of evaluators of the invention, it is necessary that all the evaluation items match. Specifically, when the invention evaluation is to be performed for ten evaluation items, the first evaluator, the second evaluator, and the third evaluator each evaluate the same evaluation value P for the same ten evaluation items. _V1 , _PV2 , ... must be entered.

In the first, second and third embodiments according to the invention evaluation system of the present invention, the evaluation of the invention
%, 40%, and 30% at three levels of A, B, and C. However, the evaluation is not limited to this and may be performed at four or more levels. For example, 10%, 20%, 40%,
At 10% and 20%, there are cases where the evaluation is made in five levels of special A, A, B, special C, and C levels. Some examples of the result displayed on the display means 25 in the case of the five stages are as follows.
FIG. 20 and FIG. In the case of FIG. 20, the evaluation level is characteristic A, and in the case of FIG. 21, the characteristic C is displayed.

In the invention evaluation system of the present invention as described above, the various processes and operations described above are realized as an invention evaluation program to be executed by a computer, and the invention evaluation program is provided by being recorded on a recording medium. You. For example, as shown in FIG.
ompact Disk), floppy disk 27g (Floppy Dis
k, Flexible Disk), Hard Disk 27e (Hard Disk)
, RAM (Random Access Mempry) or ROM (Read O
nly Memory) 27c, PROM (ProgrammableROM), E
PROM (Erasable PROM), EEPROM (Electric Er)
The program is provided by being recorded in a computer-readable manner on an erasable or rewritable programmable ROM 27d such as an asable PROM or FROM (Flash ROM) or any other recording medium.

In this specification, “operation level value”
Is the patentability rating value P _v1 input for each item,
The average value calculated from the technical evaluation value T _V1 or the like, the economic evaluation value E _V1 or the like, or a value obtained by applying an item-specific importance coefficient K ₁ , K ₂ ,. Simple average, geometric average, geometric mean, arithmetic mean, moving average, and other average values), total value, and other values that can be calculated by any statistical calculation method.

The “judgment level value” in this specification is
By comparing the evaluation level reference values N _AB and N _BC with the magnitude relation,
This is a value for outputting an invention evaluation depending on the result of the determination. Therefore, the “judgment level value” is not limited to the average value or the total value derived from a plurality of numerical values in the first and second embodiments according to the present invention, but is a numerical value that can be derived by any statistical means. And includes the case of being calculated based on the calculation level value.

In addition to displaying the evaluation levels such as A, B, and C on the display means 25, the judgment level value β and the like serving as the basis thereof, and the maximum level value for user's reference.
When Lmax or the like is also displayed, the main flow relating to the processing of the invention evaluation system of the present invention is performed before or after the level display processing such as S113 in FIG. 3 or S113 ′ in FIG.
Processing for displaying the judgment level value β or the like on the display means 25 and processing for displaying the maximum level value Lmax on the display means 25 may be added as appropriate.

The invention evaluation system of the present invention may be provided with a speech synthesis storage means 29 so that the evaluation level (invention evaluation level) can be notified by voice such as a human voice. In such a case, when controlling to display the evaluation level on the display unit 25, the MPU 31 appropriately reads out the corresponding audio signal from the voice synthesis storage unit 29 such as a voice synthesis LSI or the like, and outputs the voice signal from a speaker or the like. Control for outputting a sound corresponding to the unit 30 may be performed.

In the present specification, “evaluation level” means
At least three of the inventions to be evaluated must be A, B, C
This refers to the level of A, B, C, or the like when classified (ranked) into stages. When the evaluation level is displayed on the display means 25, it may be displayed together with the item "invention level" (FIGS. 6, 7, 8, 9 and the like).

In the specification, at least “patentability” and “problem and effect saliency” of the patentability evaluation items, and at least “inventive value level” of the technical evaluation items, Among the sexuality evaluation items, "Application field development", "Regional market expansion", "Life cycle", "International / industry standardization tendency", and "Global environment"
Can be evaluated based on the contents of the application specification (including the original specification of the application, the official gazette of the application, the publication of the patent, and other publications). Therefore, the person who performs the invention evaluation is not limited to the company or the like, and an agent, a patent attorney, a lawyer, and other third parties can also evaluate the predetermined items.

However, the “invention perfection level” and “in-house implementation” in the technical evaluation items, and “in-house development importance” and “competitiveness in other companies” in the economic evaluation items are described in the above-mentioned application specification. The only person who can judge from the contents described in this document is the company that performs the invention evaluation.

[0109]

According to the first aspect of the present invention, the operation level value of the input rating value is compared with an evaluation level reference value which is a reference for dividing into at least three levels such as A level, B level, and C level. Judge which rating level is applicable,
By providing the determination display means 22 for displaying the determined evaluation level on the display means 25, the evaluation of the invention can be represented by characters such as "A", "B", "C", etc.
It can also be displayed on a display of a computer or the like. As a result, the invention evaluation, which was conventionally performed subjectively, is conceptually extremely easy to understand "A",
Since it can be objectively indicated by replacing it with characters such as "B" and "C", any employee in the company's patent department or the like can clearly understand the evaluation of the invention, and can remarkably evaluate the invention. In addition, the patent strategy can be effectively formulated.

A closed area display means 23 for displaying a closed area 25d surrounded by a polygonal straight line corresponding to the input rating value on the item line of the basic graph 25e.
And the closed area 25d for each evaluation level determined earlier.
By providing the identification display means 24 for identifying and displaying the inside, the invention evaluation can be visually displayed as well as numerical values. As a result, the evaluation of the content of the invention, which was conventionally expressed in esoteric sentences, can be grasped at a glance by anyone using a graph such as a radar chart. A
It also has the advantage of being able to easily and instantly know if it is a level invention, and that it can greatly contribute to its patent strategy.

Next, according to the second aspect of the present invention, as a result of the provision of the technical evaluation item storage means 10c in the first aspect of the present invention, not only the evaluation based on patentability and economy but also from another aspect. Since the invention evaluation can be carried out, in addition to the excellent effects of the invention of claim 1, the invention can be evaluated more accurately, and an effect that a correct patent strategy can be formulated can be achieved.

According to the third aspect of the present invention, the average value of the input rating values is compared with at least the evaluation level reference value, which is a criterion for dividing into three levels of A level, B level, and C level. And a judgment display means 2 for displaying the judged evaluation level on the display means 25.
By providing 2, the invention evaluation can be obtained as a result of calculating the average value of each evaluation value.
As a result, the fairness and credibility of the invention evaluation are guaranteed based on clear calculations, so that in addition to the excellent effects of the invention of claim 1 or 2, which employees in the patent department of the company, etc. Can trust the reputation of the invention, and can make the patent strategy more effective than before.

Next, according to the invention of claim 4, as a result of the identification display means 24 identifying and displaying the inside of the closed area 25d with a color corresponding to each evaluation level,
In addition to the excellent effects of the second or third invention, the evaluation level of the invention can be known at a glance. As a result, the invention evaluation level of the invention can be instantaneously grasped without having to look into every corner of the screen, so that the discussion on the patent strategy of the company becomes extremely easy.

Next, in the invention of claim 5, the identification display means 24 identifies and displays the inside of the closed area 25d with a mesh corresponding to each evaluation level.
In addition to the effects of the second and third aspects, the invention evaluation system of the present invention can be driven even with a monochrome display that cannot perform color display. Therefore, there is an advantage that the invention evaluation system of the present invention can be configured even in an old computer or the like before the lease expires, and the resources can be effectively used.

Next, according to the invention of claim 6, as a result of outputting the evaluation level by voice, in addition to the excellent effects of the invention of claim 4 or 5, the present invention can be applied even if the user does not look at the screen. You will be able to know the invention evaluation level. As a result, even in a conference or a meeting where many people need to look at one screen, all the attendees can share the same information, that is, the invention evaluation level. It has the effect that progress is made very smoothly.

Next, according to the invention of claim 7, the patentability evaluation item P _V1 etc., the technical evaluation item T _V1 etc., and the economic evaluation item E _V1 etc. can each be a plurality of items. Any number of small items to be evaluated can be added according to each category of the three main evaluation items of patentability, technology, and economy. Therefore, in addition to the excellent effects of the invention of claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6, in a company that emphasizes sales, 10 items are patentable, 5 items are technical, and economics are 5 items. There may be a need to provide 20 evaluation items for gender, but the invention evaluation system of the present invention has an advantage that it can immediately meet this need.

Next, according to the invention of claim 8, not only the evaluation levels determined at the A, B, C levels and the like are displayed on the display means 25, but also the determination level which is a numerical value of the basis of the evaluation level. With the configuration in which the values are also displayed, in addition to the excellent effects of the inventions of claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8, the inventions related to the evaluation are determined to be at that level. This makes it clear at a glance that when compared with the evaluations of other inventions, it is possible to objectively and immediately grasp which of the inventions has the higher evaluation, even if the evaluation is at the same level. It works.

Next, according to the ninth aspect of the present invention, there is provided an evaluation level reference value changing means 20b capable of arbitrarily changing the evaluation level reference value.
In addition to the excellent effects of the invention of 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8, in addition to A, B,
The C level can be redefined. Therefore, the criteria of the evaluation level of the invention can be customized according to the policy of the company that performs the invention evaluation, so that there is an advantage that the invention evaluation needs can be met for each company.

Next, according to the tenth aspect of the present invention, an evaluation comment corresponding to each of the evaluation levels is displayed on the display means 2.
As a result of providing the evaluation comment display means 28 for displaying the
In addition to the excellent effects of the invention of claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9, not only can the evaluation level of the invention be understood, but also simple advice can be received in writing. Therefore, there is an advantage that information as a very useful guideline in the patent strategy can be obtained, especially in a place where sufficient patent representatives are not allocated such as small and medium-sized companies.

Next, in the invention of claim 11, the judgment display means 22 reads out the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... From the item-specific importance coefficient storage means 10e, and the corresponding rating. As a result of performing a predetermined calculation on the value P _{V1 and the} like, all the evaluation items are uniformly evaluated by the same standard (weighting). Based on the patent strategy policy, the invention can be evaluated by weighting only specific evaluation items. Therefore, the invention can be more finely evaluated according to the needs of the company,
This has the advantage that it is possible to provide highly appropriate and accurate invention evaluations for various patent strategies that differ from company to company.

Next, according to the twelfth aspect, A, B, C
In addition to displaying the determined evaluation level such as the level and the determination level value β or the like which is the numerical value of the basis of the evaluation level on the display means 25, the highest determination level value β or the like that can be obtained in the determination. In other words, by displaying the maximum level value Lmax or the like, which is the judgment level value when it is assumed that each of the rating values P _{V1 and the} like of all the items has obtained the highest score of three points, the claim 8 or 11 is provided. In addition to the excellent effects of the invention of the invention, it is clear at a glance how many judgment level values β and the like can be taken by the invention according to the evaluation,
In addition to the evaluation levels such as A, B, and C, the invention according to the evaluation can clarify, by numerical values, what percentage of the points obtained with respect to the full score. as a result,
Even at the same level of evaluation, there is an excellent advantage that it is possible to numerically grasp whether the evaluation is higher or lower, and to examine the patent strategy more finely.

Next, according to the thirteenth aspect of the present invention, the total value (judgment level value β, etc.) of the input rating value P _{V1 and the} like is compared with the evaluation level reference value to judge which level is applicable. By providing the determination display means 22 for displaying the determined level and the total value (the determination level value β or the like) on the display means 25, the evaluation of the invention can be represented by a total value that is extremely easy to understand. At the same time, it can be displayed on a display or the like. As a result, the fairness of the invention evaluation is ensured, and it can be shown objectively, so that any employee in the company's patent department or the like can clearly grasp the evaluation of the invention, and it is much better than before. In addition, the patent strategy can be effectively formulated.

Further, on the item line of the basic graph 25e, a closed area 25d surrounded by a straight line corresponding to the input rating value P _V1 or the like is displayed, and the closed area 25d is determined for each of the previously determined levels. By providing the identification display means 24 for identifying and displaying the inside, the invention evaluation can be visually displayed as well as numerical values. As a result, the evaluation of the content of the invention, which was conventionally expressed in esoteric sentences, can be grasped at a glance by anyone using a graph such as a radar chart. Can easily and instantly know whether it is an A-level invention and has the advantage that it can greatly contribute to its patent strategy.

Next, according to the invention of claim 14, as a result of distinguishing and displaying the determined evaluation level on the display means 25 in a color corresponding to the evaluation level,
In addition to the excellent effects of the third invention, the evaluation level of the invention can be known at a glance. as a result,
Since the invention evaluation level of the invention can be instantly grasped without having to look into every corner of the screen, it is extremely easy to discuss the patent strategy of the company.

Next, in the invention of claim 15, the display means 25 is used as a mesh corresponding to each of the determined evaluation levels.
As a result, in addition to the effect of the thirteenth aspect, the invention evaluation system of the present invention can be driven even with a monochrome display that cannot perform color display. Therefore, there is an advantage that the invention evaluation system of the present invention can be configured even in an old computer or the like before the lease expires, and the resources can be effectively used.

Next, according to the sixteenth aspect of the present invention, as a result of outputting the evaluation level by voice, in addition to the effects of the fourteenth or fifteenth aspect, the invention of the present invention can be realized even if the user does not look at the screen. You will be able to know the evaluation level. As a result, even in a conference or a meeting where many people need to look at one screen, all the attendees can share the same information, that is, the invention evaluation level. It has the effect that progress is made very smoothly.

Next, according to the seventeenth aspect, the patentability evaluation item, the technical evaluation item, and the economic evaluation item can each be a plurality of items.
In addition to the excellent effects of the invention of 4, 15 or 16, it is also possible to add an arbitrary number of small items to be evaluated according to the respective categories of the three main evaluation items of patentability, technology and economy. it can. Therefore, in the case of a company that emphasizes sales, there may be needs to provide 10 items for patentability, 5 items for technology, and 20 items for economic efficiency. The invention evaluation system of the invention has an advantage that can immediately respond to this need.

Next, according to the eighteenth aspect of the present invention, A, B, C
A structure in which not only the determined evaluation level such as the level is displayed on the display means 25 but also a determination level value β or the like which is a numerical value of the basis for determining the evaluation level is displayed. In addition to the excellent effects of the inventions of 14, 15, 16 or 17, it is clear at a glance why the invention according to the evaluation was judged to be at that level, so that it is at the same level when compared with the evaluations of other inventions. With this evaluation, it is possible to objectively and immediately grasp which invention has a higher evaluation.

Next, according to the nineteenth aspect of the present invention, the evaluation level reference value changing means 20b capable of arbitrarily changing the evaluation level reference value is provided.
In addition to the excellent effects of the invention of 15, 16, 17 or 18, in addition to A,
The B and C levels can be redefined. Therefore,
Since the criteria of the evaluation level of the invention can be customized by the policy of the company that performs the invention evaluation, there is an advantage that the invention evaluation needs can be met for each company.

Next, in the twentieth aspect of the present invention, an evaluation comment corresponding to each of the determination levels is displayed on the display means 2.
As a result of providing the evaluation comment display means 28 for displaying the
In addition to the excellent effects of the invention according to claims 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 or 19, not only the evaluation level of the invention can be easily understood but also simple advice can be received in the form of text. In places where there are not enough patent officers, such as companies, there is an advantage that information can be obtained as a very useful guide in patent strategy.

Next, in the invention according to claim 21, the judgment display means 22 reads out the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,... From the item-specific importance coefficient storage means 10 e and performs the corresponding evaluation. As a result of performing a predetermined calculation on the value P _{V1 and the} like, all evaluation items are uniformly evaluated by the same standard (weighting). Based on the patent strategy policy, the invention can be evaluated by weighting only specific evaluation items. Therefore, the invention can be more precisely evaluated according to the needs of the company, and therefore, there is an advantage that it is possible to provide an extremely appropriate and accurate invention evaluation for various patent strategies different for each company.

Next, according to the twenty-second aspect, A, B, C
The display means 25 displays the determined evaluation level such as the level, and a determination level value which is a numerical value of the basis of the evaluation level.
In addition to the highest judgment level value in the judgment, that is, the maximum level value Lmax which is the judgment level value when it is assumed that each of the evaluation values P _V1 etc. of all items is the highest point. Is also displayed, in addition to the excellent effects of the invention of claim 18 or 21, it becomes clear at a glance how many judgment level values the invention according to the evaluation can take. In addition to the evaluation levels such as A, B, and C, the invention according to the evaluation can clarify, by a numerical value, what percentage of the points obtained with respect to the full score. As a result, even if the evaluation is at the same level, whether it is higher or lower is numerically understood,
There is an excellent advantage that the patent strategy can be examined more finely.

Next, in the invention of claim 23, the essential part of the program executed by the invention evaluation system of the present invention is recorded on a computer-readable recording medium. The minimum driving of the evaluation system can be secured.
Therefore, for example, when a patent member of a company discusses a patent strategy with a patent attorney, if a notebook personal computer reads the recording medium according to the present invention, the invention can be evaluated immediately regardless of time and place. Since the system can be driven, the meeting is visual and objective, and the effect is that the content can be discussed more densely.

Also, for example, C /
In an S-type LAN (Client / Server type Local Area Network), by placing the recording medium according to the present invention on a server, any client can freely access the invention evaluation system of the present invention, and can evaluate the invention. Such information sharing can be realized. As a result, all members of the patent department can have a high mind on the evaluation of inventions, which has the advantage that it can greatly contribute to the planning of patent strategies.

Next, according to the invention of claim 24, a computer-readable recording program for recording an invention evaluation program having a step of storing the technical evaluation items T ₁ , T ₂ ,... In the technical evaluation item storage means 10c. As a medium, in addition to the excellent effects of the invention of claim 1, in addition to the patentability and economic efficiency, it is possible to obtain an evaluation based on the execution result of the invention evaluation program for not only the patentability and the economic efficiency but also the technology. It is possible to carry out highly credible invention evaluation.

Next, according to the twenty-fifth aspect of the present invention, as a recording medium recording an invention evaluation program to which a step of considering the item-specific importance coefficients K ₁ , K ₂ ,. In addition to the excellent effects of the present invention, an invention evaluation program for weighting desired items can be freely carried. As a result, any computer can drive an invention evaluation system that can make corrections for any item. Therefore, for example, when a patent officer of a company discusses a patent strategy with a patent attorney, if a notebook-type personal computer is made to read the recording medium according to the present invention, the correction processing can be performed immediately regardless of time and place. , The accuracy of the meeting can be increased, the visual and objective can be achieved, and the contents can be discussed with a higher density.

Also, for example, C /
S type LAN (Client / Server type Local Area Network)
In, by placing the recording medium according to the present invention on a server, any client can freely access the invention evaluation system capable of correcting any item of the present invention, and share information relating to the invention evaluation. Can be realized. As a result, all members of the patent department can have a high mind on the evaluation of inventions, which has the advantage that it can greatly contribute to the planning of patent strategies.

Next, according to the invention of claim 26, as a result of using a computer-readable recording medium on which an invention evaluation program is recorded in which a step of displaying the judgment level value as the basis of the evaluation level is also displayed on the display means 25, A, B,
26. A structure in which not only the determined level such as the C level is displayed on the display means 25, but also a determination level value which is a numerical value of the basis of the determination level is displayed. In addition to the excellent effects of the invention of the invention, since it becomes obvious at a glance why the invention according to the evaluation was determined to be at that level, even when compared with the evaluation of other inventions, even if the evaluation of the same level, Which invention is more highly evaluated can be objectively and immediately grasped.

Next, according to the twenty-seventh aspect, a computer-readable recording medium storing an invention evaluation program having a step of displaying the maximum level value Lmax and the like on the display means 25 is provided. , 25 or 2
In addition to the excellent effects of the invention of the sixth aspect, it is clear at a glance how many judgment level values the invention according to the evaluation can take, so that the invention according to the evaluation is the same as A, B, C, etc. In addition to the evaluation level, it is possible to clarify, by numerical values, the percentage of the score obtained with respect to the perfect score. As a result, even if the evaluation is at the same level, there is an excellent advantage that it is possible to numerically grasp whether the evaluation is higher or lower, and that the patent strategy can be examined more finely.

Next, in the twenty-eighth aspect, the evaluation comment corresponding to the evaluation level is displayed on the evaluation comment display means 2.
23. A computer-readable recording medium on which an invention evaluation program having a step of displaying on an display means 25 is added.
In addition to the excellent effects of the invention of 26 or 27, A,
It is possible to freely carry a recording medium storing an invention evaluation program capable of displaying a predetermined comment corresponding to an evaluation level such as B or C. Therefore, even micro-enterprises and SMEs who are not familiar with patents will be able to determine a certain policy for future patent acquisition with most of their PCs, etc., and will be able to judge whether or not to apply for a patent. Has excellent effects.

[Brief description of the drawings]

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is an execution flowchart of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 3 (A) is an execution flowchart of the invention evaluation system of the present invention. (B) is a legend relating to an execution flowchart of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 4A is a flowchart of a subroutine in which the invention evaluation system of the present invention weights the importance coefficient for each item. FIG. 4B is a subroutine in which the invention evaluation system of the present invention changes the setting of the evaluation level reference value. Flowchart

FIG. 5 is a calculation formula for the invention evaluation system of the present invention to apply the weight of the item-specific importance coefficient to the rating value.

FIG. 6 is a state diagram of the display means when the invention evaluation system of the present invention makes a judgment of the invention without applying the weighting of the item-specific importance coefficient.

FIG. 7 is a state diagram of the display means when the invention evaluation system of the present invention makes a judgment of the invention by applying the weighting of the item-specific importance coefficient.

FIG. 8 is a state diagram of the display means when the patentability first and second evaluation items are novelty and inventive step, respectively, in the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 9 is a state diagram of the display means when the evaluation level is determined to be C in the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 10A is a state diagram of a menu screen in the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention. FIG. 10B is a state diagram of a menu screen in the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

11A is a state diagram of a display screen according to a second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention. FIG. 11B is a state diagram of a display screen according to the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 12 (A) is an execution flowchart of a second embodiment according to the invention evaluation system of the present invention. (B) is a legend related to an execution flowchart of the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 13 is a flowchart of a subroutine for weighting an item-based importance coefficient by the second embodiment according to the invention evaluation system of the present invention;

FIG. 14 is a calculation formula for the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention to apply the weighting of the item-specific importance coefficient to the rating value.

FIG. 15 is a conceptual diagram of a calculation formula and a level division for applying the weighting of the item-based importance coefficient to the rating value according to the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 16 is a state diagram of the display means when the patentability first and second evaluation items are “newness” and “inventive step” in the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 17 is a state diagram of the result of executing the invention evaluation by applying the weighting of the item-based importance coefficient according to the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 18 is a state diagram of the result of executing the invention evaluation without applying the weighting of the item-specific importance coefficient according to the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 19 is a state diagram of the display means when the evaluation level is determined to be C in the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 20 is a state diagram of the display means when the evaluation level is determined to be the “special A” level when the evaluation level is divided into five levels in the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 21 is a state diagram of the display means when the evaluation level is determined to be the “special C” level when the evaluation level is divided into five levels in the second embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 22 is a state diagram of the display means when the invention evaluation is performed without the technical evaluation items in the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 23 is a state diagram of the display means when the invention evaluation is performed without the technical evaluation items in the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 24 is a conceptual diagram of a third embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 25 is a state diagram of the display means when the invention evaluation is executed by the calculation for obtaining the total value employed in the second embodiment in the third embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 26 is a state diagram of the display means when the invention evaluation is executed by the calculation for calculating the average value employed in the first embodiment in the third embodiment of the invention evaluation system of the present invention.

FIG. 27 is an example of a recording medium in which an invention evaluation program executed by the invention evaluation system of the present invention is recorded in a computer-readable manner.

[Explanation of symbols]

10a ... Evaluation value storage means 10b ... Patentability evaluation item storage means 10c ... Technological evaluation item storage means 10d ... Economic evaluation item storage means 10e ... Item importance coefficient storage means 20a ... Item importance coefficient change means 21 ... base graph drawing means 22 ... judgment display section 23 ... closed region display means 24 ... identification unit 25 ... display unit 25d ... closed region 25e ... base graph 25f ... evaluation comment display area 26 ... input means 28 ... evaluation comment display means P ₁ , P ₂ , P ₃ , ... Patentability evaluation items T ₁ , T ₂ , T ₃ , ... Technical evaluation items E ₁ , E ₂ , E ₃ , ... Economic evaluation items P _V1 , P _v2 , P _v3 , ... Patentability rating values T _V1 , T _v2 , T _v3 , ... Technology rating values E _V1 , E _v2 , E _v3 , ... Economic rating values K ₁ , K ₂ , K ₃ , ... Item-specific importance factors S100 ... Patents Steps for entering sex evaluation items S101: Step of inputting technical evaluation items S102: Step of inputting economic evaluation items S103: Step of displaying basic graphs of a number corresponding to the number of evaluation items on display means S104: Step of inputting patentability evaluation values S105: Step of inputting a technical evaluation value S106: Step of inputting an economic evaluation value S109: Step of determining a judgment level value from each of the input evaluation values and the item-specific importance coefficient S110: Input Drawing a closed area by connecting the positions on the basic graph corresponding to each of the evaluation values with a straight line S111, S114... The determined determination level values are the A-level evaluation level reference value and the B-level evaluation level reference. value,
Steps S112, S115, S117 for comparing with the evaluation level reference value of the C level. Steps for identifying and displaying the inside of the closed area by mesh display, coloring, etc. S113, S116, S118... Step S201, S202, S203... For inputting an item-specific importance coefficient S205... The item-specific importance coefficient changing means of the setting value changing unit sets a default item-specific importance coefficient to the display means. Steps of rewriting to a new value S301, S302: Step of inputting an evaluation level reference value S303: Step of rewriting a default evaluation level reference value to a new value by an evaluation level reference value changing means of a set value changing unit

────────────────────────────────────────────────── ───

[Procedure amendment]

[Submission date] November 27, 1998 (1998.11.
27)

[Procedure amendment 1]

[Document name to be amended] Statement

[Correction target item name] 0021

[Correction method] Change

[Correction contents]

Next, the rating value storage means 10a stores the rating values Pv _{1 and the} like inputted from the input means 26 for each of the above-mentioned evaluation items. In the present embodiment, the rating value Pv ₁ or the like is a numerical value in three stages of 1 or more and 3 or less. For example,
For the "life cycle" of economic efficiency third evaluation item E _3, which is stored in the economic evaluation item storage means 10d,
If it is “life cycle within 2 or 3 years”, 1 is set, if “life cycle is about 4 to 6 years”, 2 is set, and if “life cycle is 7 years or more”, 3 is set. As described above, a numerical value that is input by rating one aspect of the present invention is referred to as a “rated value” in this specification. However, the evaluation value can be in any range such as 0 or more and 5 or less, 0 or more and 10 or less, or can be a value in any of 5 or 10 levels. As a form for inputting the rating value Pv ₁ or the like from the input means 26, a case where a value such as 1, 2, or 3 is directly input, or an item of “life cycle of 7 years or more” is selected. Therefore, there is a case where 3 is input indirectly.

Claims (28)

[Claims] 1. An input means such as a mouse or a keyboard, a patentability evaluation item storage means for storing patentability evaluation items input from the input means, and an economic evaluation item input from the input means. Economic evaluation item storage means, display means such as a character display and a liquid crystal display, and a rating for storing each of the evaluation items in at least three levels in accordance with an input from the input means Value storage means, and comparing the calculated level value calculated from each of the input rating values with at least an evaluation level reference value which is a reference for dividing into three levels of A level, B level, and C level. And a judgment display means for displaying the judged evaluation level on a display means, based on each of the input evaluation items. Basic graph drawing means for drawing a radial basic graph as this item; and a closed area for displaying a closed area surrounded by a polygonal straight line corresponding to the input rating value on an item line of the basic graph. An invention evaluation system comprising: a display unit; and an identification display unit configured to identify and display the inside of the closed area for each of the evaluation levels determined earlier. 2. The invention evaluation system according to claim 1, further comprising a technical evaluation item storage means for storing a technical evaluation item input from said input means. 3. An input means such as a mouse or a keyboard, a patentability evaluation item storage means for storing patentability evaluation items input from the input means, and a technicality evaluation item input from the input means. A technical evaluation item storage means, an economic evaluation item storage means for storing the economic evaluation items inputted from the input means, a display means such as a character display, a liquid crystal display, and the like. Rating value storage means for storing the rating values, which are the values rated in accordance with the input from the input means, and the average of the input rating values being stored in at least three levels of A level, B level and C level Comparing with the evaluation level reference value, which is the standard for classifying into the category, determining which level is applicable, and displaying the determined evaluation level on the display means Display means, basic graph drawing means for drawing a radial basic graph with the input evaluation item as a basic item, and a polygonal straight line corresponding to the input rating value on an item line of the basic graph An invention evaluation system comprising: a closed region display unit for displaying a closed region surrounded by a circle; and an identification display unit for identifying and displaying the inside of the closed region for each of the evaluation levels determined earlier. 4. The display device according to claim 1, wherein the identification display means identifies the inside of the closed area with a color corresponding to each of the evaluation levels determined earlier on the display means. Characteristic invention evaluation system. 5. The display device according to claim 1, wherein the identification display means displays the inside of the closed area as a mesh for each of the evaluation levels determined earlier on the display means. Invention evaluation system. 6. The invention evaluation system according to claim 4, wherein the identification display means outputs the evaluation level by voice in addition to color or mesh display. 7. The invention evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein said patentability evaluation item, technical evaluation item or economic evaluation item is a plurality of items. . 8. The judgment display device according to claim 1, wherein the judgment display means displays the judged evaluation level on the display means and makes a judgment based on the evaluation level. An invention evaluation system characterized by displaying a level value. 9. An evaluation level reference value according to claim 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8, which is a reference for the A level, B level, and C level determined by said determination display means. An invention evaluation system comprising an evaluation level reference value changing means that can be arbitrarily changed. 10. The method according to claim 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,
10. The invention evaluation system according to 8 or 9, further comprising an evaluation comment display means for displaying an evaluation comment corresponding to each of the evaluation levels on the display means. 11. The method of claim 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
8, 9, or 10, wherein an item importance coefficient storage means for storing an item importance coefficient corresponding to the importance of an arbitrary evaluation item among the evaluation items is provided, and wherein the judgment display means comprises: An invention evaluation system, wherein an item-based importance coefficient is read from an importance coefficient storage means, and a predetermined operation is performed on the corresponding rating value to determine the evaluation level. 12. The display device according to claim 8, wherein the judgment display means displays the judged evaluation level and the judgment level value on the display means, and also displays the maximum level value on the display means. Invention evaluation system. 13. An input means such as a mouse and a keyboard;
Patentability evaluation item storage means for storing patentability evaluation items input from the input means, and technical evaluation item storage means for storing technical evaluation items input from the input means,
An economic evaluation item storage means for storing an economic evaluation item input from the input means;
Display means such as a liquid crystal display; rating value storage means for storing rating values, which are values obtained by rating each of the evaluation items in at least three stages, in accordance with an input from the input means; Is compared with the difference between the total maximum score and the total minimum score, and at least A
A judgment display means for judging which of the three levels of level, B level and C level the evaluation level corresponds to, and displaying the judged evaluation level on a display means; Basic graph drawing means for drawing the obtained radial basic graph, and closed area display means for displaying, on an item line of the basic graph, a closed area surrounded by a polygonal straight line corresponding to the input rating value. An identification display means for identifying and displaying the inside of the closed area for each of the evaluation levels determined earlier. 14. The invention according to claim 13, wherein the identification display means displays the inside of the closed area on the display means in a color corresponding to each of the previously determined evaluation levels. Evaluation system. 15. The invention evaluation system according to claim 13, wherein the identification display means identifies the closed area in the display means as a mesh for each evaluation level determined earlier. 16. The invention evaluation system according to claim 14, wherein the identification display means outputs the evaluation level by voice in addition to color or mesh display. 17. The invention evaluation system according to claim 13, wherein the patentability evaluation item, the technology evaluation item, and the economic evaluation item are each a plurality of items. 18. The method of claim 13, 14, 15, 16 or 1.
7. The invention evaluation system according to claim 7, wherein the determination display means displays the determined evaluation level on the display means, and also displays a determination level value on which the evaluation level is based. 19. The method of claim 13, 14, 15, 16, or 17.
Or the evaluation level reference value changing means capable of arbitrarily changing an evaluation level reference value serving as a reference for the A level, B level, and C level determined by the determination display means. Invention evaluation system. 20. Claims 13, 14, 15, 16, 1
In the description of 7, 18, or 19, the judgment display means includes:
The invention evaluation system, wherein evaluation comments corresponding to the respective evaluation levels are displayed on the display means. 21. Claims 13, 14, 15, 16, 1
7, 18, 19, or 20, an item-specific importance coefficient storage unit that stores an item-specific importance coefficient according to the importance of an arbitrary item among the evaluation items is provided, and the determination display unit includes: An invention evaluation system, wherein an item-based importance coefficient is read from another importance coefficient storage means, and a predetermined operation is performed on the corresponding rating value to determine the evaluation level. 22. The invention evaluation system according to claim 18, wherein the judgment display means displays the judged evaluation level and the judgment level value on the display means, and also displays the maximum level value. . 23. A step of storing the patentability evaluation item in the patentability evaluation item storage means, a step of storing the economic evaluation item in the economic evaluation item storage means, and storing the patentability evaluation item in at least three levels. Storing the patentability rating value in the rating value storage unit, storing the economic rating value in the rating value storage unit in which the economic evaluation item has at least three levels of values, Calculating each of the rating values to determine a judgment level value, and the closed area display means draws a polygonal closed area on the display means by connecting the positions on the basic graph corresponding to each of the rating values with a straight line. And an evaluation level reference value serving as a criterion for classifying the judgment level value into at least three evaluation levels of A level, B level, and C level. Comparing and judging which evaluation level corresponds to the judgment step; identifying display means for identifying and displaying the inside of the closed area with a mesh, color, or the like corresponding to the evaluation level; A computer-readable recording medium on which is recorded an invention evaluation program for causing a computer to execute the step of displaying an evaluation level relating to the result on a display means. 24. The method according to claim 23, wherein the technical evaluation item is stored in the technical evaluation item storage means, and the technical evaluation value in which the technical evaluation item has at least three levels is stored in the evaluation value storage means. A computer-readable recording medium storing an invention evaluation program for causing a computer to execute the program further including a storing step. 25. The method according to claim 23, further comprising: inputting an item-specific importance coefficient according to the importance of any of the evaluation items; storing the item-specific importance coefficient; Reading an importance factor, performing a predetermined calculation on the corresponding evaluation value and determining the evaluation level, and causing the computer to execute the invention evaluation program. 26. The display device according to claim 23, wherein the evaluation level is displayed on a display means.
A computer-readable recording medium that records an invention evaluation program to be executed by a computer, the method further including a step of displaying, on a display unit, a determination level value that is a basis of the evaluation level. 27. The invention according to claim 23, 24, 25 or 26, further comprising a step of displaying the evaluation level and the judgment level value and a step of displaying the maximum level value on a display means. A computer-readable recording medium recording an evaluation program. 28. Claim 23, 24, 25, 26 or 2
7. A computer-readable recording medium according to claim 7, further comprising a step of displaying an evaluation comment corresponding to the evaluation level on a display means and causing the computer to execute the invention evaluation program.