Linknovate, discover innovation trends and new technologies
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
2 likes•1,466 views
Linknovate aims to fundamentally change the way scientists and companies interface. http://linknovate.com/
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Linknovate, discover innovation trends and new technologies
Similar to Linknovate, discover innovation trends and new technologies (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Linknovate, discover innovation trends and new technologies
- 1. CONFIDENTIAL link. innovate. info@linknovate.com | +1 650.391.6216 1
- 2. 5 full-time engineers Manuel Noya, co-founder 2.5y at SRI Int. MSc in Materials Eng. ’10 BSc in Materials Eng. ’09 BSc in Chemical Eng. ‘06 Javier Cambon, co-founder 2 Bay Area start-ups 4y at BCG Stanford MBA ’12 Dual BSc in Mechanical Eng. ‘06 Leandro Boscariol, employee #1 Back-end engineer Stefan’s friend and former co-worker Uxio Fuentefria, employee #2 Back-end engineer Stefan George, co-founder Django since ’08 Kino1.to and start-ups MSc in IT-Systems Eng. ’13 BSc in IT-Systems Eng. ‘10 2
- 4. Why do companies need Linknovate? To dig into scientific data Hard to find relevant data from documents 16,400 results in 0.07 sec Online production “Last time I was looking for an expert, I ended up spending 15 hours on Google Scholar and blasting an email to my whole engineering group, without much success.” Tech Manager, NASDAQ-100 Semiconductors corp. Offline production “We hire interns to help us with technology scouting. There’s nothing really useful out there for us“ Advanced Technology Engineer, BMW And information keeps growing exponentially 4
- 5. Context: Companies search for relevant experts and technologies with a similar structure to the old HR Bilateral agreements Inside • Former colleagues / students network • Friends of friends Outside • Conferences vs. Career fairs network • Literature vs. CVs 5
- 6. The pace of innovation 6
- 9. Linknovate is easy to use: we simply take industry needs to where scientific expertise is Search Discover Profiles are created automatically from online sources. Not limited to a “community of solvers” Review 9
- 10. Better technology scouting with Linknovate Refine your search by clicking on relevant/non-relevant publications (User relevance feedback algorithms) Discover experts, research groups and companies. 10
- 11. Linknovate profiles look like this… 11
- 13. LKN: Tell a story with scholarly data 13
- 14. Quality brings quantity University side Company side 14
- 15. CONFIDENTIAL link. innovate. info@linknovate.com | +1 650.391.6216 15
Editor's Notes
- High pitchWe are bridging the gap between science in academia and its practical application in the world.Scientists spend as much as 30% of their time looking for funding and writing proposals. (Everybody in science knows this.)Storytelling about Manu: Materials Science PhD drop out (to co-found Linknovate) : he was working as a PhD student in an Institute of technology in Spain. He saw the problem of scientists and researchers to market their very specific know-how to companies, and find funding opportunities.He thought it was a local problem, in Spain, but when he moved to SRI International (former Stanford Research Institute) he realized that even in a top Research Center this is a problem. In fact SRI does 'client sponsored research', so they are pretty much hired by companies or government agencies to perform specific developments with tights schedules (industry-kind of timelines).On the other hand, companies have a really hard time finding the technical experts to solve their technical challenges, consult with them and save time and money exploring the adequates lines of development, and troubleshooting difficulties that the scientist may have experienced before in previous projects. Javier, MBA Stanford Univ, felt this pain in his job as a consultant in BCG, where he worked in Oil&Gas with Repsol and YPF (Argentina) as clients. He found it almost impossible to find a Professor to consult with, or even a Postdoc or PhD student in specific areas of the process that would have been helpful for him to understand it in detail.
- TeamThe team is completed with me. Talk about your experience.And once we had figured out the product we wanted to build, you engaged 2 more HPI guys who are committed to be full time when the seed round is done.Marketing advisors include: Steve Ciensinski (VP Mktg at SRI International), Anna Sidana (15+ years of experience in startups as VP of Mktg, and ex-executive at eBay).Scientific advisors: Dr. Angel Sanjurjo, Materials Research lab director (SRI International) Technical advisors: group of Natural Language Processing at University of Alicante (SPAIN) with Prof Andres Montoyo. They run a workshop in the ACL congress, annually! http://aclweb.org/portal/content/3rd-workshop-computational-approaches-subjectivity-and-sentiment-analysis Apart from that we have engaged Dr. Terry Winograd (former advisor of Google founders! and rockstar at Stanford CS Dept. Human-machine interaction and machine learning) and Jury Leskovec (one of the youngest Professors at the CS Dept in Stanford, and specialist in social networks and 'Mining and modeling of large real-world social and information networks').
- Google Scholar: ranking off target for companies. Based in citation count, it does not work for 2 reasons:Applied research cites basic research but not viceversa.Old publications tend to accumulate more citations over time.The user end up with a bunch of basic research, old publications.Besides, we want our results to be people, not docs!Science direct (Elsevier): designed for scientists. Great for researchers, not for companies.LinkedIn: no penetration in science. Great network effects for business, marketing, sales, investors,… but nor for scientists. Not designed for them. For sharing publications, or apply to grants. They prefer to update their own academic profile, which leads to a huge fragmentation: each UnivDept, each research group, each Professor has its own website.ResearchGate: a social network. Notable network effects amongst “2rd level” scientists – lots from India, and for young researchers that are using it as a Quora for science. They ask and respond questions from doubts about publications. No high level researchers, and definitely not connecting them to the industry. Again is definitely not useful for companies to look for experts (you can tell them: go ahead and try).
- Google Scholar: ranking off target for companies. Based in citation count, it does not work for 2 reasons:Applied research cites basic research but not viceversa.Old publications tend to accumulate more citations over time.The user end up with a bunch of basic research, old publications.Besides, we want our results to be people, not docs!Science direct (Elsevier): designed for scientists. Great for researchers, not for companies.LinkedIn: no penetration in science. Great network effects for business, marketing, sales, investors,… but nor for scientists. Not designed for them. For sharing publications, or apply to grants. They prefer to update their own academic profile, which leads to a huge fragmentation: each UnivDept, each research group, each Professor has its own website.ResearchGate: a social network. Notable network effects amongst “2rd level” scientists – lots from India, and for young researchers that are using it as a Quora for science. They ask and respond questions from doubts about publications. No high level researchers, and definitely not connecting them to the industry. Again is definitely not useful for companies to look for experts (you can tell them: go ahead and try).
- « Le monde est devenu trop rapide, trop complexe et trop connecté pour qu’une entreprise trouve toutes les solutions en interne » YochaiBenkler, Yale University.
- Product---Demo. Show the prototype. When done, show the new one. Fully automated. [Aways talk in present: we are building, we are crawling, etc versus we are going to launch, we are going to improve bblabla ;) ]
- User relevance feedback on docs, on the left, influences real-time the expert ranking on the right.Switch tabs on the right to check research groups or companies.Heat maps and other features are also available :)
- High pitchWe are bridging the gap between science in academia and its practical application in the world.Scientists spend as much as 30% of their time looking for funding and writing proposals. (Everybody in science knows this.)Storytelling about Manu: Materials Science PhD drop out (to co-found Linknovate) : he was working as a PhD student in an Institute of technology in Spain. He saw the problem of scientists and researchers to market their very specific know-how to companies, and find funding opportunities.He thought it was a local problem, in Spain, but when he moved to SRI International (former Stanford Research Institute) he realized that even in a top Research Center this is a problem. In fact SRI does 'client sponsored research', so they are pretty much hired by companies or government agencies to perform specific developments with tights schedules (industry-kind of timelines).On the other hand, companies have a really hard time finding the technical experts to solve their technical challenges, consult with them and save time and money exploring the adequates lines of development, and troubleshooting difficulties that the scientist may have experienced before in previous projects. Javier, MBA Stanford Univ, felt this pain in his job as a consultant in BCG, where he worked in Oil&Gas with Repsol and YPF (Argentina) as clients. He found it almost impossible to find a Professor to consult with, or even a Postdoc or PhD student in specific areas of the process that would have been helpful for him to understand it in detail.
- “If you always do what you always did, you will always get what you always got.” --A. EinsteinThis is also true for companies. They face many technical challenges, and only the ones that consistently invest in innovation are the ones who could be in constant change.You won, ok now change or die - anonymousCorporations can afford large multidisciplinary teams, as opposed to SMBs, which have a hard time finding talent. Besides, this talent should be on demand (outsource) and with no IP concerns (Universities may actually have less problems with this – far less than trading secrets and stuff like that when consulting with other companies)((academic versus company consultants or expert networks like GLG Research – secret trade litigation, and >1.000$/h consultation) Professors and researchers at tech centers (unless Harvard, Stanford, MIT) charge about 150-300$. ((We want to connect them, not to be a middle man!