a. Uses standard terms. For example, in optics - focus, diffraction, reflection, interference are terms recognized and interpreted precisely the same way by professionals in that field, worldwide. These terms are unambiguous and translate unambiguously into other languages.

b. Uses mathematics or concise, commonly accepted expressions to present precise relationships among the standard terms, for example F=ma in mechanics.

c. Allows for objective measurements and provides quantitative results where possible

d. Allows cooperation and disemination of results among practitioners in the field,
using a, b above.

Researchers can further advance the field building on other's work

For example, when an astronomer discovers a new meteorite, she can communicate its findings using precise data such as coordinates in space, computed orbit and location in that orbit at a specific time, etc. - so other astronomers can easily find that meteorite as well.

When a chemist performs an experiment which results in an interesting new compound, the info can be precisely communicated to others (including for example the type and quantity of materials used, temperature and pressure in the process vs. time, etc.).

Then the same experiment can be precisely reproduced by chemists around the world, and with precisely the same results.

e. Adapted for automatic (computer) processing - for design, simulation, comparison, processing of results, etc.
Which scientific discipline is presently practiced using manual labor?

Application of the above principles to patenting, the new method Patentics™:

a. Use standard terms - Where the applicant used non-standard terms demand from him a translation into, or a definition based on, standard terms. Otherwise this is Incomplete disclosure, or - translate to standard terms "as best understood ..." .

As the situation demands, additional terms may be added to the collection of standard terms. Where there is a definition of non-standard terms, use an expression comprising only standard terms to define the non-standard term. Different Technology Centers may have each a different collection of standard terms.

b. Use mathematics or a concise expression to define an invention, using relationships among the standard terms. The specific form of the expression may differ according to the characteristics of the field of the invention. It can use a mathematical expression, a mathematical-like expression, a table, special characters specific to that field, etc.

For example, an invention may be presented as a vector in a multi-dimensional space, with each feature of the invention as one component (one dimension) of that vector. Features may include analog/digital implementation (two possibilities, a binary value), wireless type RF -IR - US, etc.

Prior art technologies can also be brought into that form, by translating the terms therein into standard terms and using concise expressions to describe the inventions there.

c. Objective measurements and quantitative results - For example, when presenting an invention as a vector in a multi-dimensional space, the distance between two vectors may be computed. This is a quantitative indice of the similarity between the inventions. The presence or absence of a specific term can be measured (a binary quantitative value). Since only one term is used for each part (there are no synonyms in the standard terms collection) the measured value has a practical meaning and significance.

d. Allow cooperation and disemination of results among practitioners in the field - the definition of standard terms may be shared among examiners, patent attorneys, applicants; they all understand the invention definition, using a, b above. One examiner, when reviewing prior art, can use the "translated" version of a patent rather than the original patent itself. That version, comprising concise expressions using standard terms, may have been prepared by the same examiner or another examiner, or submitted by an applicant for example.

e. Adapted for automatic (computer) processing - the standard terms and the standard, concise expressions can be read and processed by computer, for example to compare with other inventions. The results may include an indication of similarities and differences between them, or a quatitative indice of the measure of similarity between the patents. The examiner can then review only the closest prior art, and the most similar parts therein - a better use of examiner's time.