Intellectual knowledge conception management system

Abstract

The present invention relates to an intellectual knowledge conception management system (1000), comprising a research abstract creation system (100), characterized in that it further comprises: a knowledge creation system (150), comprising a methodology for making personal intellectual decisions based on specific agreed rules between a user and the knowledge creation system (150) leading to the completion of a knowledge creation process; a document preparation and retrieval system (200) for publication, comprising a methodology for forming a publication from document preparation and retrieval of a user's intellectual input; and an evaluation system (300), comprising a methodology for predicting the novelty strength of potential knowledge created prior to externalization of future intellectual property protection of the potential knowledge created from the user's intellectual input. The above configuration is advantageous because the present invention guides a user to gradually achieve their milestones and intellectual maturity in research studies, or to complete their research paper within a specified time with minimal problems.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to a methodology for managing the automated documentation of new knowledge generation and systematic conceptualization processes in research projects, for subsequent publication and for tracking the evaluation of their potential novelty. More specifically, this invention relates to a system for capturing users' individual intellectual decisions as early as the planning stage of a research project for subsequent publication. Background Technology

[0002] The complex process of academic research can be overwhelming for many, including students. For many, it involves navigating a complex process from the outset while simultaneously learning the rules of survival until graduation. While each student has a mentor or advisor, the traditional supervisory process encourages students to be as independent as possible. Intellectual maturity depends on how well a student manages all these complexities and how well they graduate successfully as a scholar.

[0003] The general approach to conducting research projects includes identifying the research question, setting research objectives, conducting research surveys, carrying out literature reviews, designing research methodologies, collecting relevant data, analyzing data, validating results, and publishing reports. A well-planned research design helps pave the way for the successful completion of each task in the research project. When appropriate, experienced researchers develop their strategic methodologies to achieve their desired results. Ultimately, their successful research methods are passed on to novice researchers, who will follow their successful procedures. Regarding established procedures, traditional research design has been divided into three main approaches: quantitative, qualitative, and hybrid. While there are general work plans for designing and completing research projects based on individual methods, each approach emphasizes unique academic steps to produce validated academic output. These multiple research methods have caused considerable confusion for novice researchers because each component may require different weights and perceptual interpretations. For many novice researchers who are conducting their research and are not confident of obtaining any clear results, any unforeseen challenges have caused, and will continue to cause, many students to give up early in the process.

[0004] In light of the aforementioned early research design challenges, Ibrahim (2008) proposed using a three-research-question (RQ) framework (i.e., "WHO," "WHAT," and "HOW") to set the main research question. "WHO" is defined as the element that will be affected by or used in the research; "WHAT" is the information needed to solve the problem; and "HOW" is defined as the impact on the elements or information in the research or the measures to be taken regarding those elements or information. Later, Ibrahim (2010 and 2011) extended this idea to the development of control over research design by creating a research design framework. Ibrahim (2011) reiterated that a good research question determines the quality and academic level of the research, i.e., whether it is at the master's or doctoral level. Ibrahim, Mustafa Kamal & Sithravel (2016) and Ibrahim & Mustafa Kamal (2018) reported comparative studies on the impact of cultural differences on research projects conducted by novice researchers in Malaysia and Indonesia. They found that Indonesian novice researchers had higher levels of appreciation when they were able to know the expected research outputs and expected knowledge contributions they would receive in the process of solving their research problems. This comparative study used structured modules based on the research design framework table of Ibrahim (2011). Building on these previous works, Ibrahim & Mustafa Kamal (2016) proposed four potential innovative interventions to improve novice researchers' ability to capture key intellectual outcomes when planning their research projects. The four innovative interventions proposed are: (1) using the RQ framework to construct and set up research topics; (2) completing a research design framework table; (3) using a starting point (POD) tree diagram to develop the theory; and (4) visually inspecting the research process. Another study by Ibrahim & Mustafa Kamal (2017) reports how manual visualization methods can work for novice researchers.

[0005] Prior to this, all the aforementioned work involved paper-based tools, which novice researchers would retype or copy using computers. Ibrahim and Mustafa Kamal first reported in 2018 an attempt to automatically generate research summaries from Ibrahim's (2011) research design framework. The expectation of automating the knowledge-creating process of research could be useful for those not inclined towards higher education. However, in particular, such automation raises questions about individual intellectual maturity, which is required to allow doctoral students, especially those to be awarded a doctorate at the end of their journey. Part of the doctoral process is ensuring that candidates complete the necessary research tasks until they are able to defend their novel findings to the current knowledge system using proven evidence. In light of the above, there is a need for an invention that supports novice researchers in systematically developing their thinking abilities. This invention aims to progressively increase the intellectual maturity of novice researchers, enabling them to confidently defend their knowledge-creating process and its subsequent outputs in their final oral examination.

[0006] One example of prior art is US20200065924, which discloses embodiments of the invention including a system and method for systematically evaluating the quality of ideas according to specified rules. Furthermore, such evaluation can also be used to initiate workflows to improve the quality of a given idea. Some embodiments can provide a real-time assessment of the novelty of an idea (e.g., during the innovation or conception phase). This initial assessment can be further updated in real-time as the idea is discussed further. This assessment can rely on voice-activated and intelligently driven searches from various data sources to identify the context of the idea, thereby providing an objective basis for the evaluation.

[0007] However, the aforementioned existing technology has some drawbacks. While feasible in small groups, it is unsuitable for research students whose tasks are individual. With the deployment of artificial intelligence, it does not truly help develop researchers' intellectual capacity in their knowledge-creating process, one of the most crucial components of their doctoral journey. The existing technology does not provide students with a structured process and code of conduct to follow during their research. Thought processes and codes of conduct are essential, especially when defending their knowledge-creating process and its subsequent outputs during their final oral examination. The existing technology also only provides novelty assessment when needed / on request. Therefore, there is a potentially high risk that an individual's research focus or objective (i.e., generating novel ideas) may become skewed.

[0008] Therefore, an invention is needed to address these shortcomings. Summary of the Invention

[0009] According to one aspect of the invention, the invention provides a structured guideline for thought processes for users / researchers throughout their research journey.

[0010] According to another aspect of the invention, the invention provides an integrated system from the conceptualization stage of an idea, or research, or project, to the novelty assessment.

[0011] According to another aspect of the present invention, an intellectual knowledge conception management system (1000) is provided, which includes a research summary creation system (100). The research summary creation system (100) includes: a research summary formation methodology unit (101); and a research summary creation interface (101a), wherein the research summary creation interface (101a) further includes commands requiring the user to perform the following steps: selecting a research category type; determining a problem statement for starting a research project; setting the main research topics; completing the research framework; and generating a research summary; characterized in that the intellectual knowledge conception management system (1000) further includes: a knowledge creation system... The system (150) includes a knowledge creation system (150) comprising a methodology for making individual intellectual decisions based on specific agreed-upon rules between the user and the knowledge creation system (150) that lead to the completion of the knowledge creation process; a document compilation and retrieval system (200) for publication, which includes a methodology for forming publications from document compilation and retrieval of the user's intellectual input; and an evaluation system (300) which includes a methodology for predicting the novelty strength of the potentially created knowledge before the externalization of future intellectual property protection of the knowledge expected from the user's intellectual input.

[0012] The document compilation and retrieval system (200) for publication also includes the following methodologies: identifying research questions (201); setting research topics (RQ) (203); automating research summaries (205); establishing a review database (207); synthesizing new theories (209); implementing research methodologies (213); and disseminating data selection (215).

[0013] The evaluation system (300) also includes the following methodology: determining the category of the research (301); determining the completeness ratio from the research framework (303); determining the theoretical strength by dividing the total number of completed critical reviews by a minimum of 300 (305); determining the potential novelty index (PNI) by multiplying the results of the steps (301)*(303)*(305) (307); if the theory of the research is already complete, multiplying the PNI by [the number of completed subtopic compositions + 1] (309); and reporting the PNI (311). If the PNI is satisfied, then publish the PNI (313); if the theory of the study is not yet completed, then report the PNI by multiplying the PNI by [the number of completed sub-topic synthesis] (310); if the PNI is not satisfied and a new sub-topic is added, then move to the establishment of a commentary library (317); if the PNI is not satisfied, no new sub-topic is added but a new article is added, then move to the establishment of a commentary library (319); and if the PNI is not satisfied, no new sub-topic is added and no new article is added, then publish the PNI (321).

[0014] The above provision is advantageous because the invention provides continuous novelty assessment as long as the user completes the criteria used for evaluation. The above provision is also advantageous because the invention provides a higher level of behavioral guidelines during research by deploying a methodology for building a review library (207), rather than simply aggregating all inputs matching a given keyword during the search process. Attached Figure Description

[0015] The invention will be fully understood from the accompanying drawings and the detailed description given below, the drawings of which are shown below:

[0016] Figure 1 A block diagram of a general system for the intellectual knowledge conception management system of the present invention is shown.

[0017] Figure 2 A flowchart of the document compilation and retrieval system (200) for publication of the present invention is shown.

[0018] Figure 3 A flowchart of the method for establishing a comment library (207) according to the present invention is shown.

[0019] Figure 4 A flowchart of the method for synthesizing the new theory (209) of the present invention is shown.

[0020] Figure 5 This is a flowchart of the implementation research methodology (213) of the present invention.

[0021] Figure 6 A flowchart of the evaluation system (300) of the present invention is shown. Detailed Implementation

[0022] Generally, the present invention relates to an intellectual knowledge conception management system (1000), which includes a research summary creation system (100), comprising: a research summary formation methodology unit (101); and a research summary creation interface (101a), wherein the research summary creation interface (101a) further includes commands requiring the user to perform the following steps: selecting a research category type; describing the problem background before determining the problem statement for user input needs and objectives to start the research project, the user inputting the needs and objectives to start the research project; setting the main research topics; completing the research framework; and generating a research summary; characterized in that the intellectual knowledge conception management system (1000) includes a research summary creation system (1000), which includes: a research summary formation methodology unit (101); and a research summary creation interface (101a), wherein the research summary creation interface (101a) further includes commands requiring the user to perform the following steps: selecting a research category type; describing the problem background before determining the problem statement for user input needs and objectives to start the research project, the user inputting the needs and objectives to start the research project; setting the main research topics; completing the research framework; and generating a research summary; characterized in that the intellectual knowledge conception management system (1000) includes a research summary formation methodology unit (101); and a ... includes commands requiring the user to perform the following steps: selecting a research category type; describing the problem background before determining the problem statement for user input needs and objectives to start the research project, the user inputting the needs and objectives to start the research project; setting the main research topics; completing the research framework; and generating a research summary; characterized in that the intellectual knowledge conception management system (1000) includes The knowledge conception management system (1000) further includes: a knowledge creation system (150) comprising a methodology for making individual intellectual decisions based on specific agreed-upon rules between the user and the knowledge creation system (150) leading to the completion of the knowledge creation process; a document compilation and retrieval system (200) for publication comprising a methodology for forming publications from document compilation and retrieval of the user's intellectual input; and an evaluation system (300) comprising a methodology for predicting the novelty strength of the potentially created knowledge before the externalization of future intellectual property protection of the knowledge expected from the user's intellectual input. This configuration in Figure 1 As shown in the image.

[0023] The knowledge creation system (150) also includes a theory formation methodology unit (153); wherein the theory formation methodology unit (153) includes a theory formation interface unit (153a). Users will input intellectual decisions through the interface in response to required input. These interfaces cover everything from initial problem identification, theory synthesis, research design and planning, and the dissemination of input.

[0024] This invention improves the preparation of the Ibrahim (2011) research design framework by allowing users to change the order of rows in the RQ (Research Question) structure, based on the user's priority order of needs. For example, "What 2" can be above "What 1," or "How 2" can be above "How 1." A method for assessing the novelty of the research is also added, which can measure the completeness of the research framework.

[0025] The theory formation interface unit (153a) also includes commands requiring the user to perform the following steps: build a personal review library; synthesize a theory from selected literature reviews; and propagate the input into a tangible, formatted document. Theory synthesis is built upon multiple knowledge components derived from systematic reviews of published articles (e.g., but not limited to journal articles, books, or other literature).

[0026] At each interface, users are guided to make certain intellectual decisions before they can directly enter text as their response to a cell. Furthermore, some input cells require users to select from a list of information. If information is unavailable, users can also add data for others to use. In this way, the invention forces users to focus on the information needed to respond, rather than being overwhelmed by complex research methodologies. With increasing repetition frequency, users are expected to improve their intellectual capacity, as indicated by the increasing user potential novelty index (PNI) embedded in the system, where a higher PNI reflects improved intellectual capacity.

[0027] The document compilation and retrieval system (200) for publication also includes the following methodologies: identifying research questions (201); setting research topics (RQ) (203); automating research summaries (205); establishing a review database (207); synthesizing new theories (209); implementing the research methodology (213); and selecting dissemination data (215). This configuration in... Figure 2 The flowchart is shown.

[0028] To divert the user's attention from published literature and guide them toward key components for creating new knowledge, this invention prioritizes capturing key information during the key information creation process. The created data is semi-processed, rather than direct information (e.g., but not limited to, actual journal articles). This semi-processed data reduces the need for subsequent rereading of the same tangible source. For example, a user may be asked to enter citations for a selected article, which they can obtain online or through photocopy references. Another example is that during a user's commentary on a selected published article, the user enters data based on their answers determined after reading the original tangible data. When this data is retrieved, the user does not need to return to the original literature. This action speeds up the referencing process by sparing the user from another critical commentary when they wish to use the published article in the future. Preferably, the published articles are from journals, but not limited to books or collections of papers.

[0029] like Figure 3As shown in the flowchart, the method for establishing the commentary database (207) further includes: classifying commentary topics based on the RQ framework (207a); adding published articles (207b); conducting article commentary (207c); assigning commentary categories (207d); adding more articles for another article commentary if additional articles are needed (207e); starting a new theory synthesis process if no more articles are added (207f); adding more articles for another article commentary if additional articles are needed (207g); and reclassifying the commentary topics if it is necessary to reflect the articles being commented on (207h).

[0030] The automated document preparation process begins with building a user commentary library. While building this library, users are guided to expand the RQ framework to a minimum of one subtopic and a maximum of three subtopics. For example, a master's thesis might have a maximum of nine subtopics, while a doctoral thesis might have a maximum of twelve. For both report categories, there is a final synthesis that considers all syntheses from previously processed materials.

[0031] Users can search and select journal articles from available databases using the internet. In the quick browsing method, users comment on articles based on available abstracts, but not limited to, those available for the published articles. Before continuing to comment on published articles, users will enter reference citation data (e.g., but not limited to, cataloging information from the Library of Congress). When commenting on published articles, this invention requires users to comment on them in a way that allows them to draw conclusions about how their research questions can be solved. The conclusion statement is referred to as the user's point of departure (POD). All parts of the commentary are color-coded to remind users of their role in the critical commentary.

[0032] The captured review data is compiled into a paragraph referred to as "Literature Review Level 1" or "LR 1". Other information may include, but is not limited to, theoretical models, research variables, details of the chosen research methodology, results, and opportunities for future reporting. Since conducting advanced systematic reviews takes more time, this invention encourages users to complete as many LR Level 1 theoretical blocks as possible for each RQ framework before conducting detailed systematic reviews that capture additional research methodology information. The threshold number for these LR Level 1 blocks is a minimum of 300 from well-founded doctoral dissertations.

[0033] like Figure 4As shown in the flowchart, the method for synthesizing a new theory (209) further includes: selecting which RQ framework to synthesize the new theory from (209a); selecting the sub-themes to be synthesized (209b); selecting article reviews to include in the synthesis process (209c); summarizing the starting points (PODs) into groups (209d); combining the sums into PODs of the sub-themes (209e); naming the synthesis POD1 (209f); selecting the sub-themes to be synthesized (209g); selecting article reviews to include in the synthesis process (209h); summarizing the starting points (PODs) into groups (209i); combining the sums into PODs of the sub-themes (209j); naming the synthesis POD1. 2 (209k); Select the sub-topic to be synthesized (209l); Select article reviews to include in the synthesis process (209m); Summarize the starting points (PODs) into groups (209n); Combine the PODs into sub-topics (209o); Name the synthesis POD 3 (209p); Combine the contents of PODs 1, 2 and 3, and summarize the contents to build POD 4 into a synthesis theory block of a corresponding RQ framework (209q); Starting from the step of selecting the sub-topic to be synthesized, select another RQ framework to synthesize the theory, and repeat the step of selecting the sub-topic to be synthesized until all RQ frameworks are completed (209r); and continue to synthesize the new theory for research (209s).

[0034] The user will select from which RQ framework topic they want to create the theory from. Then, the user will select a subtopic they want to develop in depth. Next, the user will select which commentaries they wish to include in the synthesis. After selecting the commentaries, the user will rearrange all their PODs into groups of similar topics. The user will then summarize and finalize the text that helps them propose potential solutions to their problem. The synthesized text will be named POD 1. The user will repeat the synthesis process for all remaining subtopics, naming them POD 2 and POD 3.

[0035] After completing the synthesis of all three sub-themes under an RQ framework, the user then proceeds to synthesize potential solutions by commenting on and selecting the most promising solutions from the PODs. The user will combine and summarize the content of PODs 1, 2, and 3 to build POD 4 as the synthesis theoretical block for the corresponding RQ framework. The user will need to repeat the same synthesis process for all sub-themes under all RQ frameworks. The POD for the synthesis of each RQ framework is referred to as POD 4 for the RQ framework. Each POD will be moved to the next stage with different color coding and renamed as Synthesis 1, 2, and 3 for each corresponding RQ framework.

[0036] like Figure 4As shown in the flowchart, the method for synthesizing new theories for research (209s) further includes: filling each POD box with the corresponding POD 4 for each RQ framework and renaming them Synthesis 1, Synthesis 2 and Synthesis 3 (209sa); combining the contents of Synthesis 1, Synthesis 2 and Synthesis 3 and summarizing the contents to establish Synthesis 4 as a theoretical statement for research (209sb); confirming the final Synthesis 4 as a theoretical statement for research (209sc); and continuing to implement the research methodology (209sd).

[0037] After obtaining POD 4 for all three RQ frameworks, the user proceeds to rename these syntheses, respectively, as Synthesis 1, Synthesis 2, and Synthesis 3, before performing further synthesis on these syntheses at the research level. The same synthesis process is repeated, with commentary and selection of the most promising solutions from these syntheses. The user combines the contents of Synthesis 1, 2, and 3 and summarizes them to build Synthesis 4. The final Synthesis 4 is the theoretical statement used for the proposed research.

[0038] The theoretical statements are used to guide users in determining how they plan to collect evidence to support their intellectual claims. For each theoretical framework extracted from the theoretical statements, users will determine the sources of data, what to collect, what values ​​to use to measure the data, how to collect the data, how to analyze the collected data, how to validate the results, and what expected outputs as evidence they will obtain. With this information, users can proceed to plan and design their user research, and then continue with the actual fieldwork in their user research.

[0039] like Figure 5 As shown in the flowchart, the method of implementing the research methodology (213) further includes: selecting a theoretical framework from the theoretical statements of the research (213a); determining the source of data (213b); determining what data to collect (213c); determining what values ​​to use to measure the data (213d); determining how to collect the data (213e); determining how to analyze the collected data (213f); determining how to validate the results (213g); determining what expected outputs will be obtained (213h); selecting another theoretical framework and repeating the steps of determining the source of data until all theoretical frameworks are completed (213i); and preparing the research methodology design for the research (213j).

[0040] Throughout the exercise, users will be able to print out predetermined information that may be useful for their research. The system will retrieve selected data into a specified format (e.g., but not limited to, a research framework, research abstract, a list of review articles, manuscript components from theoretical works, review manuscripts, or chapters from papers). These components can be combined together or used individually as raw data for publication.

[0041] The system of this invention has an embedded evaluation method that predicts the novelty strength of indications regarding the potential creation of the intended research if the user completes the research plan. This potential novelty index indicates the potential externalization (if any) of future intellectual property generated from a research. The difference in the potential novelty index between the early concept stage and the advanced stage indicates the user's corresponding intellectual maturity in creating new knowledge as they develop from a novice researcher to a respected scholar. For example, at the end of the concept research planning stage, a PhD user who has completed the minimum requirements has a PNI of 2. If the same user has completed the theoretical synthesis of two sub-topics, their advanced PNI is 4, where the larger number indicates an increase in their intellectual maturity. Furthermore, if a master's student achieves a PNI higher than the average master's level score, the user / researcher may want to consider changing their research status from master's to doctoral.

[0042] The Potential Novelty Index (PNI) is defined as the probability factor of intellectual property emerging from a research program. In the early research concept phase, three novelty indicators are determined from data obtained through the structured methodology of this invention: paper classification, research framework completeness, and theoretical strength. These novelty indicators are derived from data sources within the research framework tools. In a more advanced phase prior to field data collection, another novelty indicator is formal theoretical synthesis.

[0043] like Figure 6As shown in the flowchart, the evaluation system (300) also includes the following methods: determining the category of the survey study (301); determining the completeness ratio from the survey framework (303); determining the theoretical strength by dividing the total number of completed critical reviews by a minimum of 300 (305); determining the potential novelty index (PNI) by multiplying the results of the steps (301)*(303)*(305) (307); multiplying the PNI by [the number of completed subtopic compositions + 1] if the theory of the study is already complete (309); and reporting the PNI. (311); If the PNI is satisfied, then publish the PNI (313); If the theory of the study is not yet complete, then report the PNI by multiplying the PNI by [the number of completed sub-topic synthesis] (310); If the PNI is not satisfied and a new sub-topic is added, then move to the establishment of a commentary library (317); If the PNI is not satisfied, no new sub-topic is added but a new article is added, then move to the establishment of a commentary library (319); And if the PNI is not satisfied, no new sub-topic is added and no new article is added, then publish the PNI (321).

[0044] Therefore, the potential novelty index of a research program used in the concept phase can be determined as follows:

[0045] PNI RP =NI TC x NI RFC x NI TS

[0046] in,

[0047] PNI = Potential Novelty Index

[0048] RP = Research Plan

[0049] NI = Novelty Index

[0050] TC = Paper Classification

[0051] RFC = Completeness of the Research Framework

[0052] TS = Theoretical Strength

[0053] Furthermore, the potential novelty index for research programs used in advanced stages can be determined as follows:

[0054] PNI ADV =NI TC x NI RFC x NI TS x NI FTS

[0055] in,

[0056] PNI = Potential Novelty Index

[0057] ADV = Advanced Research Plan

[0058] NI = Novelty Index

[0059] TC = Paper Classification

[0060] RFC = Completeness of the Research Framework

[0061] TS = Theoretical Strength

[0062] FTS = Formal Theoretical Synthesis

[0063] Thesis Classification (TC) is based on the type of research conducted by the user, where doctoral research topics ensure second-level intellectual processing during doctoral studies. Therefore, the research process yields a higher probability of producing novel results. Thus, a value "1" is assigned to master's research or any research that utilizes the basic research question (RQ) framework to construct its main research topic. The basic RQ framework consists of one "WHO," one "WHAT," and one "HOW" (see Ibrahim (2008 and 2011)). A value "2" is for doctoral research or any research with a combination of four RQ frameworks. Doctoral research has two optional combinations. The first combination has one "WHO," two "WHAT," and one "HOW." The second combination has one "WHO," one "WHAT," and two "HOW." The presence of two "WHAT" or two "HOW" frameworks in the main research topic allows for dual intellectual processing during the research process. When two different pieces of information are combined, this activity is expected to increase the probability of creating new knowledge systems. Furthermore, if a master's student achieves a PNI score above the average master's level score, the user / researcher may want to consider changing their research status from master's to doctoral.

[0064] Survey Framework Completeness (RFC) refers to the percentage of cells that users have filled out out of the required available cells in a survey framework during the planning and design phase. For Master's level, a total score of 27 is considered satisfactory completion. For Doctoral level, a total score of 35 is considered satisfactory completion. This value is reported as a percentage (%), where:

[0065]

[0066]

[0067] Theoretical strength (TS) is defined as the level of intellectual maturity of the rule statements reached regarding the investigated phenomenon, which will be subsequently confirmed through systematic and verifiable research methodological steps. Critical literature review techniques begin with basic structured review steps at Level 1. This invention identifies the output of such review literature as LR1 articles. For doctoral research, a satisfactory estimate of at least 300 critical reviews of selected publications is recommended. For master's research, a satisfactory estimate of zero critical reviews is recommended because the lack of dual intellectual processing activities, even with many LR1 reviews, will make the probability of such research producing any significant intellectual asset output very low. This value is reported as a percentage (%), where,

[0068]

[0069] For example, a PhD research project that has completed the research framework and 300 LR 1 review articles has a PNI of 2.00. Another example is a Master's research project that has completed the research framework and 100 LR 1 review articles, with a PNI of 0.33. If a Master's researcher has already completed their research framework and 300 LR 1 review articles, the researcher's PNI is 1.00. It's possible that a Master's student has already reviewed more than 300 LR 1 articles, and therefore he / she might want to consider changing his / her research to the PhD category.

[0070] Formal Theoretical Synthesis (FTS) refers to the number of syntheses completed for a sub-topic. For doctoral-level research, the total number of possible sub-topic syntheses is 12. For master's-level research, the total number of possible sub-topic syntheses is 9. Each completed sub-topic synthese has a value of "1". If the research has completed its overall theory, "1" is incremented by the number of completed sub-topics.

[0071] Although the invention has been described with reference to specific embodiments, it is to be understood that the embodiments are merely illustrative of the principles and applications of the invention. Therefore, it is to be understood that many modifications can be made to the illustrative embodiments, and other arrangements can be devised without departing from the scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims.

Claims

1. An intellectual knowledge conception management system (1000), comprising: A research summary creation system (100) includes: a research summary formation methodology unit (101) and a research summary creation interface (101a), wherein the research summary creation interface (101a) further includes commands requiring users to perform the following steps: selecting the type of research category; determining the problem statement for user input needs and objectives to start the research project; setting the main research topics; completing the research framework; and generating a research summary; The intellectual knowledge conceptualization management system (1000) is characterized in that it further includes: A knowledge creation system (150) includes a methodology for making personal intellectual decisions based on specific agreed-upon rules between the user and the knowledge creation system (150) that lead to the completion of the knowledge creation process; A document compilation and retrieval system (200) for publication, comprising a methodology for generating publications from document compilation and retrieval based on user intellectual input; and An evaluation system (300) includes a methodology for predicting the novelty strength of potentially created knowledge prior to the externalization of future intellectual property protection for knowledge expected from a user's intellectual input.

2. The intellectual knowledge conceptualization management system (1000) according to claim 1, wherein, The knowledge creation system (150) also includes: Theory Formation Methodology Unit (153); The theory formation methodology unit (153) includes a theory formation interface unit (153a).

3. The intellectual knowledge conceptualization management system (1000) according to claim 2, wherein, The theoretical forming interface unit (153a) also includes commands that require the user to perform the following steps: Establish a personal commentary database; Synthesizing theory from selected literature reviews; and Propagate the input to a tangible, formatted document.

4. The intellectual knowledge conceptualization management system (1000) according to claim 1, wherein, The document compilation and retrieval system (200) for publication also includes the following methodology: Identify the research questions (201); Set the research topic as RQ(203); Summary of Automated Survey (205); Establish a commentary database (207); A new theory of synthesis (209); Implementing research methodology (213); and Dissemination data selection (215).

5. The intellectual knowledge conceptualization management system (1000) according to claim 4, wherein, The method for establishing the commentary database (207) also includes: The topics of the commentary are classified based on the RQ framework (207a); Increase the number of published articles (207b); To provide commentary on the article (207c); Assignment rating category (207d); If additional articles are needed, another article review will be conducted (207e); If no more articles are added, the process of synthesizing a new theory begins (207f); If additional articles are needed, another article review will be conducted (207g); and If necessary, the topics of the commentary will be reclassified (207h).

6. The intellectual knowledge conceptualization management system (1000) according to claim 4, wherein, The method for synthesizing the new theory (209) also includes: Choose from which RQ framework to synthesize the new theory (209a); Select the sub-theme to be synthesized (209b); Select article reviews to include in the synthesis process (209c); The starting point for the group is POD(209d); Combine the main points into a sub-topic POD (209e); The synthesis was named POD 1(209f); Select the sub-theme to be synthesized (209g); Select article reviews to include in the synthesis process (209h); The starting point for grouping is POD(209i); Combine the main points into sub-topics in POD(209j); The synthesis was named POD 2(209k); Select the sub-theme to be synthesized (209l); Select article reviews to include in the synthesis process (209m); The starting point for the group is POD(209n); Combine the main points into a sub-theme POD (209o); The synthesis was named POD 3(209p); Combining sub-themes POD 1, 2 and 3, and summarizing the content to build POD 4 into a corresponding RQ framework synthetic theory block (209q); Begin by selecting another RQ framework to synthesize the theory, starting with the step of selecting a sub-theme to synthesize, and repeat the step of selecting a sub-theme to synthesize until all RQ frameworks are completed (209r); and Continue to synthesize methods for new theories used in research (209s).

7. The intellectual knowledge conceptualization management system (1000) according to claim 6, wherein, The method for synthesizing the new theory (209s) for reporting also includes: Fill each composition cell with the corresponding RQ framework POD 4 composition, and rename the corresponding RQ framework POD 4 to composition 1, composition 2 or composition 3 (209sa); Combine all syntheses 1, 2, and 3, and summarize their contents to establish synthese 4 as a theoretical statement for the study (209sb); The final synthesis 4 is confirmed as the theoretical statement of the study (209sc); and Continue to implement the research methodology (209sd).

8. The intellectual knowledge conceptualization management system (1000) according to claim 4, wherein, The methods for implementing the research methodology (213) also include: Choose a theoretical framework from the theoretical statements of the research (213a); Determine the source of the data (213b); Determine what data to collect (213c); Determine what values ​​to use to measure the data (213d); Determine how to collect the data (213e); Determine how to analyze the collected data (213f); Determine how to verify the results (213g); Determine what expected outputs will be obtained (213h); Choose another theoretical framework and repeat the steps of determining the data source until all theoretical frameworks are completed (213i); and Prepare the research methodology design (213j).

9. The intellectual knowledge conceptualization management system (1000) according to claim 1, wherein, The evaluation system (300) also includes the following methodology: Determine the category of the research (301); Determine the completeness ratio from the survey framework (303); The theoretical strength was determined by dividing the total number of completed critical reviews by a minimum of 300 (305); The potential novelty index PNI (307) is determined by multiplying the results of the steps by (301)*(303)*(305); If the research theory is already complete, then multiply the PNI by [the number of completed sub-theme compositions + 1] (309); The report mentions PNI(311); If the PNI is satisfied, then publish the PNI (313); If the research theory has not yet been completed, the PNI is reported by multiplying the PNI by [the number of completed sub-theme compositions] (310); If the PNI is not satisfied and a new subtopic is added, then proceed to build a commentary library (317); If the PNI is not met, and no new subtopics are added, but new articles are added, then the focus shifts to establishing a commentary database (319); and If the PNI is not satisfied, no new subtopics are added, and no new articles are added, then the PNI (321) is published.

Images