The metric of cited references in patent "quality" discussions

Of the comment on IPBiz on the Ocean Tomo article asserting an increase in patent quality, the IAM blog wrote:

As far as I have seen, there have not been any other criticisms of the Malackowski and Barney piece yet; although – to be fair – there is a lot to digest in the article and a full critique will take time to produce.

IPBiz notes that criticism of the use of the metric of "cited references" in a US patent to make substantive inferences (here, more cited references indicate increased patent quality) did not originate in the July 2008 discussion.

More than a decade ago, we had the same discussion over things that CHI Research was doing. Been there, done that... Perhaps people are not writing about this because they wrote about it more than 10 years ago, or, more likely, they just don't care. The IP profs don't bother to respond to criticisms of their positions on patent reform, and most practicing IP lawyers don't have the time.

See also

http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2008/07/patent-quality-arguments-of-ocean-tomo.html