{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015337423312883436, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012269938650306749, 'mean_word_length': 5.401960784313726, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Design Spaces, Generic Capabilities and Research Policy

How can the beneficiaries of generic technologies be identified and persuaded to share the costs? • Who should own the results? Each of these questions gives rise to considerable controversies, as illustrates by the protracted debates about the Advanced Technology Program in the United States (Branscomb and Keller 1999; Wessner 2001). This paper aims to contribute to the clarification of some of these issues by exploring the notion of generic technological capability in the context of a particular model of technological growth which interprets the latter as the evolution of design spaces.