# A Study on Finding Partners through Patent Network Analysis of UAM (Urban Air Mobility)
## 3 Analysis
### Network Analysis
#### 3.4.3 Implications for Network Analysis  
After downloading 36,150 UAM-related patents [Table 5], we organized them by UAM technology field (Appendix D) and conducted network analysis by identifying the relationship between joint applications. In addition, by reflecting technology strength [Table 10] as a weight factor in network analysis, we derived companies/schools that conducted joint research with leading companies that have strong technology (Appendix E) \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Category** & **2000–2004** & **2005–2009** & **2010–2014** & **2015–2019** \\ \hline A (propulsion system) & 0.0199 & 0.0150 & 0.0225 & 0.0786 \\ B (aerodynamic design) & 0.0113 & 0.0121 & 0.0407 & 0.0711 \\ C (material/structure) & 0.0437 & 0.0169 & 0.0541 & 0.0615 \\ D (battery) & 0.1429 & 0.0266 & 0.0173 & 0.0857 \\ E (control/safety) & 0.0028 & 0.0054 & 0.0151 & 0.0767 \\ F (navigation/communication) & 0.0319 & 0.0203 & 0.0397 & 0.1029 \\ G (cybersecurity) & 0.0996 & 0.3333 & 0.1818 & 0.2857 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 13: Degree centrality by technology. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Category** & **2000–2004** & **2005–2009** & **2010–2014** & **2015–2019** \\ \hline A (propulsion system) & 0.00011 & 0.00042 & 0.00067 & 0.00423 \\ B (aerodynamic design) & 0.00000 & 0.00018 & 0.00409 & 0.00810 \\ C (material/structure) & 0.00074 & 0.00011 & 0.00076 & 0.00058 \\ D (battery) & 0.00000 & 0.00025 & 0.00059 & 0.00313 \\ E (control/safety) & 0.00004 & 0.00003 & 0.00034 & 0.00336 \\ F (navigation/communication) & 0.00030 & 0.00014 & 0.00088 & 0.00196 \\ G (cybersecurity) & 0.00292 & 0.00000 & 0.00404 & 0.00893 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 14: Betweenness centrality by technology. and identified whether these players were leading the patent competition. The company information quantified and visualized by network analysis is reported automatically. As shown in Figure 10, in the case of aerodynamic design technology, it was confirmed that much of the technology from AIRBUS HELICOPTERS has been applied, and if you check the cooperative relationship, you can see that the contribution of ONERA (the French Aerospace Lab) is high. National institutions and universities perform a lot of cooperative research, so conducting similar tasks can be a strategy to secure the necessary technology. In addition, as shown in Figure 11, it has been identified that there is a cooperative relationship with Michelin Research and Technology, a private company, so it is possible to obtain parts through that company or solve problems quickly through open innovation. Analyzing co-applicants of patent data can help identify partnerships. We can assume that company A is trying to acquire cloud server technology for UAM map data management. When selecting a target company for technology cooperation, if we check the company information regarding a history of joint research with Google and Amazon through patent data and identify the connection between the partner companies in a virtual 3D space through network analysis, we can see the rankings of companies that have conducted joint research with Google and Amazon numerically. In UAM network analysis, we conducted network analysis to find universities/companies with a history of joint patent applications with BOEING and AIRBUS to acquire the necessary technology. Companies try to avoid patent infringement by competitors (Design Around), but they find professors who have conducted industry-university cooperation with competitors to obtain necessary information or carry out similar projects. Even if they are not directly connected to Company A, start-ups and venture companies that have joint patent applications with renowned companies (Google, Amazon, etc.) are monitored as collaborating companies as they are assigned a weight factor in network analysis. Figure 10: Network Analysis of Cooperative Relationships. Figure 12 below captures a part of the results of network analysis with the betweenness centrality value.