Lane Keeping Assistance Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
Filing growth compares 2021 (110 records) with 2024 (77) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 1,207 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the lane keeping assistance patent record shows
Lane keeping assistance sits at the intersection of steering control, sensor fusion and traffic-scene interpretation, and the patent record reflects that spread. Filings under this search cover 1,207 published records from 2015 through the middle of 2026, with activity concentrated in vehicle control and steering classes rather than in the perception layer alone. The earliest widely cited architecture in this space, US20070233343A1 from Subaru, already set out the now-standard pattern of lane-marking detection, lateral distance measurement and a control loop steering the vehicle back toward a travel target point — a structure many later filings still build on.
Recent activity has broadened past the original automakers into tier-one suppliers and newer entrants, but filing volume itself has pulled back from its 2021 peak. That pullback should be read against publication lag: records from 2025 and 2026 are still arriving, so the most recent years in any trend chart will always look thinner than they eventually turn out to be.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
The figures below break the 1,207 records in scope by filing year and by IPC subclass, showing where claim density is heaviest and which branches still carry comparatively light coverage.
A 2021 peak followed by a measured pullback
Filings rose from 65 in 2017 to a peak of 110 in 2021, then eased to 77 by 2024 — a -30% change over that span. Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025-2026 figures shown are still incomplete and should not be read as a continued decline.
Vehicle control and steering dominate the class mix
B60W (hybrid/joint vehicle control) appears on 60.1% of records and B62D (motor vehicles & steering) on 24.7%, confirming that most filings frame lane keeping as a control-systems problem. G08G (traffic control systems) reaches 18.6%, while B60R, G05D, B60K, G06V and B60Q each sit below 11%, marking narrower and potentially less contested claim territory.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,207 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Advanced Driver-Assistance Systems: Lane Keeping Assistance Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about advanced driver-assistance systems: lane keeping assistance patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaFoundational filings and the most-cited records
US20070233343A1 — Lane keeping assistance equipment for automotive vehicles (Subaru, 2007)
A lane keeping assistance equipment is provided, for traveling while accurately following a lane marking, without any accompanying temporary stoppages or causing discomfort to the driver. The equipment combines a lane-marking detecting means, a sideways distance detecting means measuring the distance between the vehicle and the lane marking, and a control means that creates a travel target point and transmits a signal to steer the vehicle toward that point.Filed by Subaru Corporation, published 2007-10-04 — one of the earliest filings in this dataset to combine detection, distance measurement and closed-loop steering control in a single claim structure.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20200294401A1 | A Method and Apparatus for Collecting and Using Sensor Data from a Vehicle | 615 |
| 2 | US20200389469A1 | System and method for tunnel-based malware detection | 532 |
| 3 | US20150271201A1 | Device for detection and prevention of an attack on a vehicle | 280 |
| 4 | WO2017149526A2 | A method and apparatus for cooperative usage of multiple distance meters | 252 |
| 5 | US20120083947A1 | Integrated framework for vehicle operator assistance based on a trajectory and threat assessment | 238 |
| 6 | US20050228588A1 | Lateral guidance assistance for motor vehicles | 223 |
| 7 | US9555803B2 | Driver assistance system for vehicle | 203 |
| 8 | US20100222976A1 | Driving assistance system having presence monitoring | 170 |
| 9 | US10037689B2 | Apparatus and system to manage monitored vehicular flow rate | 156 |
| 10 | US9604652B2 | Method for a driver assistance system for autonomous longitudinal and/or lateral control of a vehicle | 154 |
Citation counts are drawn from within this searched corpus and favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations — treat them as a signal of influence, not of current technical importance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the concentration and citation data mean for strategy
Three patterns in this dataset matter more than the raw ranking: how tightly filings concentrate at the top, where the citation weight sits, and which classes carry the lightest claim density.
The field is led but not locked up
The top five filers combine for 27.9% of all 1,207 records, and the top ten reach 41.7%. That leaves well over half the dataset spread across a long tail of filers below tenth place, which typically means freedom to operate exists in specific claim language even where the broad architecture is crowded.
A pullback from peak, not a closed field
Filing volume dropped from a peak of 110 records in 2021 to 77 in 2024. That is a real three-year decline, but 2025-2026 filings are still being published, so the trend line's final years understate current activity rather than confirming the field has cooled further.
Control-systems claims are the densest ground
B60W hybrid/joint vehicle control appears on 60.1% of the 1,207 records, well ahead of steering (B62D, 24.7%) and traffic systems (G08G, 18.6%). Filing into a fresh control-loop architecture means competing against the largest single class in the dataset.
Citation leadership sits with older sensor-data filings
The most-cited record in this dataset, on collecting and using vehicle sensor data, has 615 citations — well ahead of the next tier. High citation counts inside a searched corpus tend to favour older filings that have simply had more years to accumulate them, so they mark influence on subsequent filers rather than present-day relevance.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to advanced driver-assistance systems: lane keeping assistance patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, partnership scouting or claim drafting.
Map claim boundaries in the dense classes
With B60W and B62D carrying the heaviest claim density, a freedom-to-operate review should start there rather than in the field generally, isolating which control-loop and steering-actuation claims are broad versus narrowly drafted.
Explore B60W and B62D claims in EurekaTrack filers below the top ten
With 41.7% of records held by the top ten filers, the remaining majority sits with a long tail of entrants worth screening individually for emerging technical approaches or acquisition targets.
Screen the full assignee ranking in EurekaWatch the incomplete recent years
Because 2025-2026 filings are still being published, re-checking the trend in six to twelve months will give a truer read on whether 2021's peak was a high point or a plateau.
Set a filing-trend alert in EurekaCommon questions about the lane keeping assistance patent landscape
The assignee ranking in this dataset covers 100 companies, with the leading filer holding 120 records and the fifth-placed filer holding 42. Together the top five account for 27.9% of all 1,207 records in scope, and the top ten reach 41.7%. That leaves a substantial majority of filings spread across a long tail of smaller filers, so leadership at the top does not mean the field is closed to new entrants.
Filing volume rose from 65 records in 2017 to a peak of 110 in 2021, then declined to 77 by 2024, a -30% change over that three-year span. Publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so the 2025 and 2026 figures in any trend chart are still incomplete and should not be read as continued decline. The honest read is a pullback from a 2021 peak, with the most recent trend still unresolved.
B60W, covering hybrid and joint vehicle control, appears on 60.1% of the 1,207 records in this dataset, making it the single densest classification. B62D (motor vehicles and steering) follows at 24.7% and G08G (traffic control systems) at 18.6%. Classes tied more closely to perception, such as G06V image and video recognition at 6.0%, carry noticeably lower density, which can indicate comparatively open claim space rather than lower technical relevance.
US20070233343A1, filed by Subaru and published in 2007, describes lane keeping equipment combining a lane-marking detection means, a sideways distance detection means measuring the gap between the vehicle and the lane marking, and a control means that sets a travel target point and steers the vehicle toward it. This detect-measure-steer structure is foundational to how many later filings in the dataset frame the same problem. Anyone drafting new claims in this space should check overlap with this structure before assuming a control-loop approach is novel.
The lowest-density classes in this dataset relative to the 1,207-record total are G06V image/video recognition at 6.0%, B60Q vehicle lighting and signalling at 5.7%, and B60K vehicle propulsion and drive at 7.4%. These lower shares suggest narrower claim coverage in perception-driven and signalling-integrated approaches compared to the dominant control-systems classes. That does not guarantee an easy filing, but it does mark where prior art density is comparatively lighter.
Research Advanced Driver-Assistance Systems: Lane Keeping Assistance Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole advanced driver-assistance systems: lane keeping assistance patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.