Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Category Archives: Metrics
NIST’s “substantially fueled” premise for unleashing innovation
Here is a claim from the opening of a recent NIST report–1234–on “Unleashing American Innovation,” a “draft green paper”: The U.S. innovation system is substantially fueled by the discoveries and inventions arising from federally funded R&D at the Nation’s universities, … Continue reading
Posted in Innovation, Metrics, Policy
Tagged innovation, NIST, patents, research
Comments Off on NIST’s “substantially fueled” premise for unleashing innovation
Nine Points to Consider (with regard to AUTM’s licensing survey), 8-9
We are considering nine points with regard to AUTM’s annual licensing survey. We have got through seven points–not validated and with estimates, duplicate reporting, conflating technology and invention, activity measures giving the illusion of a process at work, no reporting … Continue reading
Nine Points to Consider (with regard to AUTM’s licensing survey), 1-7
The Association of University Technology Managers, a front group for university licensing professionals, conducts an annual survey of the universities that its members work for. The survey asks for various metrics regarding inventions, patenting, licensing, startups, and revenue. The survey … Continue reading
UW Continues to Ride Fake Startup Metrics
From 2008 to 2015, the University of Washington faked its startup metrics and won itself awards and reputation for its entrepreneurial and innovative chops. (See articles discussing UW fakery here and here and here.) Senior UW administrators concocted a story … Continue reading
Posted in Bozonet, Metrics
Tagged fake metrics, falsus, fools, innovation, UW
Comments Off on UW Continues to Ride Fake Startup Metrics
Two Published Accounts of University Licensing: WARF and Stanford
Universities generally keep secret their licensing metrics. Yes, they report the number of inventions, patents, licenses, and startups in a given year–but they don’t report how those numbers relate to one another. The inventions reported in a given year have … Continue reading
Posted in Metrics
Tagged invention, metrics, Stanford, technology transfer, university, WARF
Comments Off on Two Published Accounts of University Licensing: WARF and Stanford
AAU, APLU, and others aim to “bolster” federal technology transfer, 2
We are working through advice offered to NIST by various higher education associations on how to improve federal technology transfer by funding without oversight the “technology transfer” programs of non-federal institutions. If the gist is all you need, then don’t … Continue reading
AAU, APLU, and others aim to “bolster” federal technology transfer, 1
AAU has tweeted out its happiness with advice it and other “higher education associations” (APLU, AAMC, COGR, and ACE) have given in response to NIST’s call for public comment on ways to improve federal “technology transfer.” AAU tweets that “Bayh-Dole … Continue reading
Even the $100K/yr drugs don’t much work
Advocates for Bayh-Dole make a great deal over the number of drugs that involve university patents that have been approved since the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act. One of their measures is the number of drugs that have been developed. … Continue reading
Taking Apart APLU’s Talking Points on Bayh-Dole, 4
One more bit about Bayh-Dole in the APLU Talking Points: Before 1980, fewer than 250 patents were issued to U.S. universities annually; discoveries were rarely commercialized for the public’s benefit. By contrast, according to a recent survey by the Association … Continue reading
Lower drug development costs than industry reports–shock!
At the SciScip discussion group notice has been given to an article published in September 2017 in JAMA that has determined the median cost to develop a new cancer drug at $648m, much lower than the pharmaceutical industry reports for … Continue reading
Posted in Commons, Metrics, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Lower drug development costs than industry reports–shock!