Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/automated-directional-drilling-control-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Oilfield AutomationAutomated Directional Drilling Control Patents: Who Leads and Where Filings Are Slowing
- Concentrated at the top. the top 5 assignees hold 334 of 610 records in scope (54.8%), and the top 10 hold 79.3% — a small group has occupied most of the claim space.
- Filing peaked in 2020 at 67 records and fell sharply through the last complete year (2021's 31 down to 2024's 5, an 84% drop), though 2025-2026 figures are still filling in under publication lag.
- Control and AI classes are a minority footprint. G05B control systems sit on just 9.8% of records and G06N AI-based computing on 3.9%, even though E21B drilling mechanics covers 93.4% — the automation layer itself is comparatively lightly claimed.
610
Published Records
55%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-84%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (31 records) with 2024 (5) — 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 610 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Field Overview
What this dataset covers
This landscape tracks 610 published records matching automated drilling control terms — downhole closed loop, drilling automation, setpoint tracking, trajectory optimization — paired with core directional-drilling parameters like weight on bit and rate of penetration. The scope runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off, capturing the period in which downhole control moved from manual steering toward model-based and closed-loop systems.
Records here carry more than one IPC class on average, since a single filing can claim both a mechanical drilling assembly and a control algorithm running on it. That overlap matters for reading the composition figures: E21B dominates because nearly every record touches drilling hardware, while the smaller shares in G05B, G06F and G06N mark where the computational and control-theory claims actually sit.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Automated Directional Drilling Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Numbers
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 610-record set: how filing activity moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
A sharp rise and an equally sharp pullback
Filings climbed from 17 in 2017 to a peak of 67 in 2020, then declined through the last complete year of data: 2021's 31 fell to 2024's 5, an 84% drop. Publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 counts are understated and should not be read as a continued decline yet.
Drilling mechanics still anchors the field
E21B (earth and rock drilling) appears on 93.4% of the 610 records, confirming that most filings are grounded in physical drilling assembly claims rather than pure software. G05B control systems (9.8%), G01V geophysics (9.5%), G06F data processing (6.1%) and G06N AI-based computing (3.9%) show the automation and analytics layers are present but represent a minority share of the overall claim footprint.
Shares are the percentage of the 610 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Automated Directional Drilling Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Automated Directional Drilling Control with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about automated directional drilling control and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaPrior Art Signals
The most-cited records in this space
Representative Filing
Drilling automation using stochastic optimal control
HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES, INC.
An example method for drilling automation may comprise generating a model of a drilling system based, at least in part, on a first set of downhole measurements. The model may accept drilling parameters as inputs. A rate of penetration for the drilling system may be determined based, at least in part, on the model. The model may be simulated using a first set of values for the drilling parameters, and a control policy may be calculated based, at least in part, on the rate of penetration and the simulation results. A control signal to the drilling system may be generated based, at least in part, on the control policy.Filed by Halliburton Energy Services, published 2016-08-11 as US20160230530A1 — a model-then-control-policy architecture that recurs across later filings in this space.
Highest-citation records in scope
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7142986B2 | System for optimizing drilling in real time | 232 |
| 2 | US20040256152A1 | Real-time drilling optimization based on MWD dynamic measurements | 232 |
| 3 | US6662110B1 | Drilling rig closed loop controls | 227 |
| 4 | US7172037B2 | Real-time drilling optimization based on MWD dynamic measurements | 198 |
| 5 | US20050150689A1 | Method and apparatus for enhancing directional accuracy and control using bottomhole assembly bending measure… | 171 |
| 6 | US20110280104A1 | Dual top drive systems and methods for wellbore operations | 169 |
| 7 | US20150112488A1 | Semi-autonomous drilling control | 154 |
| 8 | US20140291023A1 | Monitoring of drilling operations with flow and density measurement | 145 |
| 9 | US20130032401A1 | Methods and systems for drilling | 116 |
| 10 | US20050034917A1 | Apparatus and method for acoustic position logging ahead-of-the-bit | 109 |
Citation counts inside this corpus reflect influence among older filings, not current filing activity — treat them as a map of foundational prior art rather than a ranking of what's newest.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Automated Directional Drilling Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Reading the Data
What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three patterns in this dataset that change where a new filing or freedom-to-operate check should focus.
Concentration
54.8%
held by top 5 of 610 records
A small bloc occupies most of the field
Five assignees account for 334 of the 610 records in scope, and the top 10 push that to 79.3%. A new entrant is filing into a space where the dominant claim territory — closed-loop control tied to drilling hardware — is already staked by a handful of oilfield services incumbents.
Ranked leaders, 84 companies total
Momentum
-84%
2021 to 2024 filing volume
Activity cooled after the 2020 peak
Filing volume fell from 67 records at its 2020 peak to 5 records in 2024, the last year treatable as complete. That drop lines up with recent-year momentum by assignee, where several leading filers show flat or negative year-over-year activity — a sign the field's most obvious control-loop claims may already be filed.
Peak year: 2020, 67 records
Composition
9.8%
of records carry G05B control claims
The control layer is thin relative to drilling mechanics
E21B drilling mechanics sits on 93.4% of records, but the control and computing classes that actually deliver automation — G05B, G06F, G06N — cover single-digit to low-double-digit shares. That gap suggests the algorithmic layer is less crowded than the mechanical assemblies it runs on.
G05B 9.8%, G06N 3.9%, G06F 6.1%
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to automated directional drilling control, with the prior art for and against each one.
Co-filing patterns
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Shell Internationale Research Maatschappij BV | Shell Oil Co | 31 |
| Schlumberger Technology Corp | Schlumberger Canada Ltd | 16 |
| Schlumberger Technology Corp | Schlumberger Ltd | 16 |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | Schlumberger Ltd | 16 |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | Schlumberger Holdings Ltd | 14 |
| Schlumberger Holdings Ltd | Schlumberger Ltd | 14 |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | Schlumberger Canada Ltd | 11 |
| Schlumberger Technology Corp | Schlumberger Technology LLC | 9 |
The ten identified co-assignee pairs are dominated by intra-group filings — related entities within the same corporate family filing jointly — rather than cross-company collaboration, consistent with a field where consolidation happens through corporate structure rather than joint development.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Automated Directional Drilling Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Who's Filing
The assignee landscape
84 companies make up the ranked field, counted by patent family. Filing activity is heavily weighted toward oilfield services majors, with a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants below the top 10.
Leader
76
records filed
A single filer sets the pace
The top-ranked assignee holds 76 of 610 records — more than double the fifth-place total of 51 — establishing a wide gap between the leader and the rest of the top tier.
Leader: 76 records
Mid-field
27
records at 10th place
The drop-off past the top 5 is steep
Fifth place holds 51 records; tenth place holds 27. The gap between rank 5 and rank 10 is nearly half, showing the field thins out quickly once past the leading names.
5th: 51 · 10th: 27
Momentum
-93% to -100%
YoY change, leading filers
Even top filers have slowed
Recent-year momentum among the leading assignees shows sharp year-over-year declines, with several dropping to zero in the latest year. That's consistent with the broader trend line rather than a company-specific retreat.
Latest-year filings near zero across leaders
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Schlumberger Technology Corp | 1 | -93% |
| Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. (US) | 0 | -100% |
| Shell Internationale Research Maatschappij BV | 0 | — |
| Landmark Graphics Corp | 0 | — |
| Shell Oil Co | 0 | — |
| Baker Hughes Co | 0 | — |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | 0 | — |
| MHWirth AS (Norway) | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Automated Directional Drilling Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Next Steps
Where to take this analysis
The trend and concentration figures above answer where the field stands; the next questions are usually company- or claim-specific.
Check freedom to operate against the top 5
With 54.8% of records held by five assignees, a new filing in closed-loop drilling control should start with a claim-by-claim comparison against that group's active families.
Run a claims comparison in EurekaTrack momentum, not just totals
Several leading filers show sharp year-over-year declines into the latest year. Confirm whether that reflects real strategic pullback or publication lag before concluding the space has gone quiet.
Monitor assignee activity in EurekaExplore the thinner control and AI classes
G05B, G06N and G06F carry single-digit to low-double-digit shares of the 610 records, well below E21B's 93.4%. That gap is where a differentiated algorithmic claim is more likely to clear prior art.
Search IPC subclasses in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Automated Directional Drilling Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions on this landscape
The ranked field covers 84 companies, and the top-ranked assignee holds 76 of the 610 records in scope. The top 5 assignees together account for 334 records, or 54.8% of the field, while the top 10 reach 79.3%. This is a concentrated field: oilfield services majors and their affiliated entities hold most of the claim territory, and the ranking drops off steeply past the top 10.
No — filing peaked in 2020 at 67 records and declined through the last year treatable as complete, falling from 31 in 2021 to 5 in 2024, an 84% drop. Because publication typically lags actual filing by about 18 months, the 2025-2026 figures in this dataset are still incomplete and should not be read as evidence the field has stopped. The safest read is that the field cooled after 2020 rather than continuing to accelerate.
E21B (earth and rock drilling) appears on 93.4% of the 610 records, reflecting that most filings are anchored in physical drilling assembly claims. Control and computing classes are present but smaller: G05B control systems at 9.8%, G01V geophysics at 9.5%, G06F data processing at 6.1%, and G06N AI-based computing at 3.9%. Because records often carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% of the record total.
The classes tied most directly to the automation and control layer — G05B, G05D, G06N and B06B — carry noticeably smaller shares of the 610 records than the underlying drilling mechanics class E21B. That gap points to less-crowded claim space around AI-based trajectory prediction, non-electric variable control, and vibration-based feedback mechanisms, even as the mechanical drilling assemblies those systems run on remain densely claimed.
The most-cited records in this dataset date from the mid-2000s and reflect foundational closed-loop and real-time drilling optimization concepts, not current filing activity. High citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings simply because they've had more time to be cited, so they should be read as a map of prior art influence rather than a signal of what's commercially active today. A newer filing strategy should weight recent assignee momentum and IPC composition more heavily than citation rank alone.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Automated Directional Drilling Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Automated Directional Drilling Control in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole automated directional drilling control 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.