3 ms·

A sophisticated algorithm for drug design. A sophisticated algorithm for simulating turbulent flow near jet engines. A sophisticated algorithm for optimizing

by hugh3 15y ago

A sophisticated algorithm for drug design. A sophisticated algorithm for simulating turbulent flow near jet engines. A sophisticated algorithm for optimizing [some complicated industrial process]. If you want a specific example, this is just what I got from a google patent search for "rational drug design", but: http://www.google.com/patents?id=3b8kAAAAEBAJ&zoom=4&dq=rational%20drug%20design&pg=PA2#v=onepage&q&f=false http://www.google.com/patents?id=3b8kAAAAEBAJ&zoom=4&#38...

l_dopa 15y ago
I was under the impression that algorithms are specifically not patentable http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patentable_subject_matter#The_algorithm_exception_and_the_patent-eligibility_trilogy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patentable_subject_matter#The_a...
- iano 15y ago
  Applications of algorithms are patentable, not the algorithms themselves. (un-cited e.g. using machine learning for handwriting recognition)
  - BrandonM 15y ago
    > e.g. using machine learning for handwriting recognition This is one of the problems with software patents. Using machine learning for handwriting recognition is a pretty obvious "innovation" to anyone with a little background in AI who has thought about the problem at all. If we allow people to patent "using machine learning for X" for all activities X, that blocks a lot of innovation. The field is moving so fast right now that people are thinking of new ideas all the time; we don't need patents to encourage that. There are some non-obvious algorithms that are worthy of patenting (that is, if algorithms were actually patentable). One that comes to mind is the fast inverse square root algorithm (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fast_inverse_square_root https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fast_inverse_...). In our field, trade secret (e.g. compiled source code) is usually sufficient to provide protection against a competitor stealing a novel algorithm, rendering patents largely unnecessary.

by hugh3 15y ago

l_dopa 15y ago

I was under the impression that algorithms are specifically not patentable http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patentable_subject_matter#The_algorithm_exception_and_the_patent-eligibility_trilogy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patentable_subject_matter#The_a...

iano 15y ago
Applications of algorithms are patentable, not the algorithms themselves. (un-cited e.g. using machine learning for handwriting recognition)
- BrandonM 15y ago
  > e.g. using machine learning for handwriting recognition This is one of the problems with software patents. Using machine learning for handwriting recognition is a pretty obvious "innovation" to anyone with a little background in AI who has thought about the problem at all. If we allow people to patent "using machine learning for X" for all activities X, that blocks a lot of innovation. The field is moving so fast right now that people are thinking of new ideas all the time; we don't need patents to encourage that. There are some non-obvious algorithms that are worthy of patenting (that is, if algorithms were actually patentable). One that comes to mind is the fast inverse square root algorithm (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fast_inverse_square_root https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fast_inverse_...). In our field, trade secret (e.g. compiled source code) is usually sufficient to provide protection against a competitor stealing a novel algorithm, rendering patents largely unnecessary.