Explore the vast range of titles available.

Within chapters on important canonical and popular verse forms, she gives particular attention to such topics as women's use of religious poetry to express candid ideas about patriarchy and rape; the continuing evolution and important role of the supposedly antiquarian genre of the friendship poetry; same-sex desire in elegy by women as well as by men; and the status of Charlotte Smith as a key figure of the long eighteenth century, not only as a Romantic-era poet.

IntroductionThe protection of intellectual property (IP) is one of the fundamental elements in the process of medical device development. The significance of IP, however, is not well understood among clinicians and researchers. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current status of IP awareness and IP-related behaviors among EAES members.MethodsA web-based survey was conducted via questionnaires sent to EAES members. Data collected included participant demographics, level of understanding the need, new ideas and solutions, basic IP knowledge, e.g., employees' inventions and public disclosure, behaviors before and after idea disclosures.ResultsOne hundred and seventy-nine completed forms were obtained through an email campaign conducted twice in 2019 (response rate = 4.8%). There was a dominancy in male, formally-trained gastrointestinal surgeons, working at teaching hospitals in European countries. Of the respondents, 71% demonstrated a high level of understanding the needs (frustration with current medical devices), with 66% developing specific solutions by themselves. Active discussion with others was done by 53%. Twenty-one percent of respondents presented their ideas at medical congresses, and 12% published in scientific journals. Only 20% took specific precautions or appropriate actions to protect their IPs before these disclosures.ConclusionsThe current level of awareness of IP and IP-related issues is relatively low among EAES members. A structured IP training program to gain basic IP knowledge and skill should be considered a necessity for clinicians. These skills would serve to prevent the loss of legitimate IP rights and avoid failure in the clinical implementation of innovative devices for the benefit of patients.

Theories of scientific and technological change view discovery and invention as endogenous processes 1 , 2 , wherein previous accumulated knowledge enables future progress by allowing researchers to, in Newton’s words, ‘stand on the shoulders of giants’ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 – 7 . Recent decades have witnessed exponential growth in the volume of new scientific and technological knowledge, thereby creating conditions that should be ripe for major advances 8 , 9 . Yet contrary to this view, studies suggest that progress is slowing in several major fields 10 , 11 . Here, we analyse these claims at scale across six decades, using data on 45 million papers and 3.9 million patents from six large-scale datasets, together with a new quantitative metric—the CD index 12 —that characterizes how papers and patents change networks of citations in science and technology. We find that papers and patents are increasingly less likely to break with the past in ways that push science and technology in new directions. This pattern holds universally across fields and is robust across multiple different citation- and text-based metrics 1 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 – 17 . Subsequently, we link this decline in disruptiveness to a narrowing in the use of previous knowledge, allowing us to reconcile the patterns we observe with the ‘shoulders of giants’ view. We find that the observed declines are unlikely to be driven by changes in the quality of published science, citation practices or field-specific factors. Overall, our results suggest that slowing rates of disruption may reflect a fundamental shift in the nature of science and technology. A decline in disruptive science and technology over time is reported, representing a substantive shift in science and technology, which is attributed in part to the reliance on a narrower set of existing knowledge.

We examine the relative merits of state (SOE) and private (POE) ownership on firm invention output in emerging as well as developed economies. Firm SOE affords a vehicle by which governments throughout the world encourage risky investment in new technological paths. Yet, from a traditional agency–theoretical standpoint, SOEs are plagued by low-powered incentives and dysfunctional involvement (e.g., wasteful budgets and political meddling), which reduces SOE performance, relative to POEs. To examine this paradox, we build an extended agency model which, rather than overlooking agency cost drivers, entertains a more balanced view, in which these so-called agency “liabilities” in fact benefit SOEs, particularly in the sphere of inventions. We argue that, given relatively higher levels of managerial autonomy, SOEs may outperform POEs in some types of inventive output. We further propose that key boundary conditions operate to modify this base effect, in that contexts lacking political constraints – a condition found in most emerging economies – increase the risk of political meddling, reducing managerial autonomy so that any SOE inventive advantages wane significantly. We also hypothesize that this negative effect of weak institutions is attenuated in high invention productivity sectors. Empirically, we track the frequency, pioneerism, and impact of patent inventions of 521 SOEs and matched POEs for 16 years, across 43 countries and 22 industries. We find empirical support for our hypotheses based on a robust set of fixed-effects regression analyses, aided by a battery of checks to assess self-selection and omitted variable bias.

Silicon has around ten times the specific capacity of graphite but its application as an anode in post-lithium-ion batteries presents huge challenges. After decades of development, silicon-based batteries are now on the verge of large-scale commercial success.

We characterize the factors that determine who becomes an inventor in the United States, focusing on the role of inventive ability (“nature”) versus environment (“nurture”). Using deidentified data on 1.2 million inventors from patent records linked to tax records, we first show that children’s chances of becoming inventors vary sharply with characteristics at birth, such as their race, gender, and parents’ socioeconomic class. For example, children from high-income (top 1%) families are 10 times as likely to become inventors as those from below-median income families. These gaps persist even among children with similar math test scores in early childhood—which are highly predictive of innovation rates—suggesting that the gaps may be driven by differences in environment rather than abilities to innovate. We directly establish the importance of environment by showing that exposure to innovation during childhood has significant causal effects on children’s propensities to invent. Children whose families move to a high-innovation area when they are young are more likely to become inventors. These exposure effects are technology class and gender specific. Children who grow up in a neighborhood or family with a high innovation rate in a specific technology class are more likely to patent in exactly the same class. Girls are more likely to invent in a particular class if they grow up in an area with more women (but not men) who invent in that class. These gender- and technology class–specific exposure effects are more likely to be driven by narrow mechanisms, such as role-model or network effects, than factors that only affect general human capital accumulation, such as the quality of schools. Consistent with the importance of exposure effects in career selection, women and disadvantaged youth are as underrepresented among high-impact inventors as they are among inventors as a whole. These findings suggest that there are many “lost Einsteins”—individuals who would have had highly impactful inventions had they been exposed to innovation in childhood—especially among women, minorities, and children from low-income families.

Using data on 800,000 corporate publications and patent citations to these publications between 1980 and 2015, we study how corporate investment in research is linked to its use in the firm’s inventions, and to spillovers to rivals. We find that private returns to corporate research depend on the balance between two opposing forces: the benefits from the use of science in own downstream inventions, and the costs of spillovers to rivals. Consistent with this, firms produce more research when it is used internally, but less research when it is used by rivals. As firms become more sensitive to rivals using their science, they are likely to reduce the share of research in R&D.

The electrolyte is an indispensable component in any electrochemical device. In Li-ion batteries, the electrolyte development experienced a tortuous pathway closely associated with the evolution of electrode chemistries.