Comparative Study of University, Industry, and Government Cooperation Model in Artificial Intelligence Scientific Research of Iran, China, and America

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 PhD. in Management, University of Naples Federico, Head of Artificial Intelligence Monitor, Part AI Research Center, Tehran, Iran

2 PhD. in Management of Technology, University of Tehran; Researcher of Artificial Intelligence Monitor, Part AI Research Center, Tehran, Iran

3 PhD. in Information Technology Management, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University; Researcher of Artificial Intelligence Monitor, Part AI Research Center, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Objectives: By identifying the scientific researches of artificial intelligence carried out by universities, industry and the government, this paper seeks to outline the research situation of Iran in the field of this technology in comparison with China and the United States as the two leading countries in artificial intelligence. Based on this perception, the main goal of the current research is to extract the interactive model of university, industry, and government as the main actors in the scientific research collaboration of artificial intelligence in the three studied countries.
Methods: This research was conducted based on the scientometric method and the use of the Scopus database in the time domain of the last two decades. Countries were ranked based on the number of documents and citations to the top 1000. Then the documents were separated based on organizational affiliations into academic, industrial, government, and international groups. On this basis, the co-authoring network of Iran's documents was drawn based on organizational collaboration. Through mutual information analysis, the quality of cooperation in Iran was compared with the other two countries. For this purpose, a meaningful examination of the arrangement of categories was done through Shannon's entropy calculations.
Results: With a small difference, China and America had the most documents and Iran was in the 30th position. In the citation, America, with a significant difference, was first, China was second, and Iran was 17th. By normalizing the number of studies in terms of population and GDP, the United States was placed in a much higher position than China, and the distance between Iran and China in the normalized results was also much smaller. In the uncertainty and synergy of interactions, the same order was maintained. Among the players in Iran, Tehran University, followed by the Amirkabir University of Technology the and Sharif University of Technology, have had the most scientific productions. University, industry, and government data in Iran were experimentally manipulated. The highest output based on the least input change was achieved through increased industry research.
Conclusions: The most important difference in the cooperation model of Iranian actors with the other two countries is the level of industry participation. Among the three countries, America shows the most industrial research collaborations. In the case of Iran, it was also concluded that the policy of encouraging the industry to participate in artificial intelligence research will be most effective. This result is also supported by experimental manipulation of values.
 

Keywords

References

Abedi, H., Babalhavaeji, F. & Hassanzadeh, M. (2018). Synergy in the Iranian innovation systems at regional and national levels in the Triple-Helix context. International Journal of Information Science and Management (IJISM), 16(1).
Bergek, A. & et al. (2015). Technological innovation systems in contexts: Conceptualizing contextual structures and interaction dynamics. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 16: 51-64. DOI: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.07.003
Cai, Y. & Etzkowitz, H. (2020). Theorizing the Triple Helix model: Past, present, and future. Triple Helix, 7(2-3): 189-226.
Champenois, C. & Etzkowitz, H. (2018). From boundary line to boundary space: The creation of hybrid organizations as a Triple Helix micro-foundation. Technovation, 76: 28-39.
Cheng, Y., Liu, Y., Fan, W., Yan, Z. & Ye, X. (2019). Triple helix on globalization: A case study of the China International Nanotech Innovation Cluster. Information Development, 35(2): 272-289.
D’este, P. & Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3): 316-339.
Dwivedi, Y.K. & et al. (2021). Artificial Intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 57: 101994.            
DOI: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.08.002
Ebadollah, J., Sharif Mogadam, H. & Ziaei, S. (2019). Comparative study of scientific products indexed by Iran and Turkey in relation to cloud computing in Web of Science. Science and Techniques of Information Management, 5(1): 163-178. [in persian]
Etzkowitz, H. & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Triple Helix--University-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge based economic development. EASST review, 14(1): 14-19.
Farzin Yazdi, M. & Rezaei Sharifabadi, S. (2017). Scientific publications in the subject area of Artificial Intelligence in Middle Eastern countries during 1996 to 2014. Scientometrics Research Journal, 3(6): 97-114. [in persian]
Fosso Wamba, S., Bawack, R.E., Guthrie, C., Queiroz, M.M. & Carillo, K.D.A. (2021). Are we preparing for a good AI society? A bibliometric review and research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 164: 120482.        
DOI :https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120482
Gao, F., Jia, X., Zhao, Z., Chen, C.-C., Xu, F., Geng, Z., & Song, X. (2021). Bibliometric analysis on tendency and topics of artificial intelligence over last decade. Microsystem Technologies, 27(4): 1545-1557. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00542-019-04426-y
Gazni, A., Sugimoto, C.R. & Didegah, F. (2012). Mapping world scientific collaboration: Authors, institutions, and countries. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(2): 323-335.
Gertner, D., Roberts, J. & Charles, D. (2011). University‐industry collaboration: a CoPs approach to KTPs. Journal of knowledge management, 15(4): 625-647.
Granstrand, O. & Holgersson, M. (2020). Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition. Technovation, 90-91: 102098. 
DOI: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2019.102098
Hekkert, M.P., Suurs, R.A.A., Negro, S.O., Kuhlmann, S. & Smits, R.E.H.M. (2007). Functions of innovation systems: A new approach for analysing technological change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 74(4): 413-432.        
DOI: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2006.03.002
Hood, W.W. & Wilson, C.S. (2001). The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informetrics. Scientometrics, 52(2): 291-314.
Jowkar, T. & Morovati, M. (2016). Triple helix of University-Industry- Government in the Scientific Articles of Iran. Journal of Science & Technology Policy, 9(3): 71-84. [in persian]
Jowkar, T. & Vara, N. (2020). The triple helix of university, government and industry in the field of veterinary science in Iran: Comparison of ISC and WOS publications. International Journal of Information Science and Management (IJISM), 18(1): 73-91.
Kaplan, A. & Haenlein, M. (2019). Siri, Siri, in my hand: Who’s the fairest in the land? On the interpretations, illustrations, and implications of artificial intelligence. Business Horizons, 62(1): 15-25.
Kwon, K.-S., Park, H.W., So, M. & Leydesdorff, L. (2012). Has globalization strengthened South Korea's national research system? National and international dynamics of the Triple Helix of scientific co-authorship relationships in South Korea. Scientometrics, 90(1): 163-176.
Leydesdorff, L. & Park, H.W. (2014). Can synergy in Triple Helix relations be quantified? A review of the development of the Triple Helix indicator. Triple Helix, 1(1): 1-18.
Leydesdorff, L. (2003). The mutual information of university-industry-government relations: An indicator of the Triple Helix dynamics. Scientometrics, 58(2): 445-467.
Leydesdorff, L. (2021). Evolutionary and Institutional Triple Helix Models. In: The Evolutionary Dynamics of Discursive Knowledge (pp. 89-113). Springer.
Leydesdorff, L., Park, H.W. & Lengyel, B. (2014). A routine for measuring synergy in university–industry–government relations: Mutual information as a Triple-Helix and Quadruple-Helix indicator. Scientometrics, 99(1): 27-35.
Liu, N., Shapira, P. & Yue, X. (2021). Tracking developments in artificial intelligence research: constructing and applying a new search strategy. Scientometrics, 126(4): 3153-3192.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03868-4
Massaro, M., Handley, K., Bagnoli, C. & Dumay, J. (2016). Knowledge management in small and medium enterprises: a structured literature review. Journal of knowledge management, 20(2): 258-291.
Porto-Gomez, I., Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M. & Leydesdorff, L. (2019). Innovation systems in México: A matter of missing synergies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 148: 119721. DOI: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119721
Russell, S.J. & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. Pearson. Available at: https://books.google.com/books?id=B4xczgEACAAJ.
Shin, J.C., Lee, S.J. & Kim, Y. (2012). Knowledge-based innovation and collaboration: a triple-helix approach in Saudi Arabia. Scientometrics, 90(1): 311-326.
Singh, V.K., Singh, P., Karmakar, M., Leta, J. & Mayr, P. (2021). The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 126(6): 5113-5142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03948-5
Sobhani, F., Ebrahimi, S. & Jowkar, A. (2017). Scientific interactions between university, industry and government in the field of agriculture in Iran: based on Triple Helix Model. Institute for Research and Planning in Higher Education, 23(3): 21-41. [in persian]
Web of Science. (2022). Available at: https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/solutions/web-of-science/
Webb, A. (2021). 2021 Tech Trends Report. F. T. Institute. Available at:
https://futuretodayinstitute.com/trends/
WIPO. (2019). WIPO Technology Trends 2019 – Artificial Intelligence. G. W. I. P. Organization. Available at: https://www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4386
Yang, S., Yuan, Q. & Dong, J. (2020). Are Scientometrics, Informetrics, and Bibliometrics Different? Data Science and Informetrics, 1(01): 50.
Zhang, X., Wang, X., Zhao, H., Ordóñez de Pablos, P., Sun, Y. & Xiong, H. (2019). An effectiveness analysis of altmetrics indices for different levels of artificial intelligence publications. Scientometrics, 119(3): 1311-1344. 
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03088-x
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image
Sciences and Techniques of Information Management
Volume 8, Issue 4
December 2022
Pages 45-74

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics