AGV Motion Planning Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
A patent landscape review of automated guided vehicle motion planning: filing trends since 2015, the concentration of filings among leading companies, technology composition across IPC classes, and the most-cited prior a
Filing growth = 2021 (3 records) → 2024 (3); 2024 is the last year we treat as complete. Top-5 share = the 5 largest assignees ÷ all 41 records in scope (CR5), not the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This review covers 41 published records at the intersection of automated guided vehicle operation and motion or path planning, filed between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off. The scope combines a targeted title/abstract search for AGV motion planning with an IPC filter on B25J, G05D1 and G05D, so the set captures documents that explicitly frame path or trajectory planning as part of AGV control rather than every AGV-adjacent filing in general robotics.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years in the trend chart will always look thinner than they eventually turn out to be. Read the concentration and technology figures below as a description of where claim space currently sits, not a verdict on where the field is heading next.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 41 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which control and navigation classes carry the claim language.
A peak in 2017, then a flatter plateau
Filings hit their high point in 2017 at 7 records. Comparing the two most recent complete years, 2021 and 2024, filing volume held flat at 3 records each — 0% growth over that span. That is a plateau, not a decline: recent years are still filling in as publications catch up with filing dates.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in. Growth rates on this page therefore end at 2024; running them to the last bar would understate the field.
Concentration in one control class
G05D (control of non-electric variables) appears on 95.1% of the 41 records in scope, confirming that AGV motion planning is overwhelmingly filed as a control-systems problem. G01C (navigation and gyroscopes) follows at 24.4%, with B60L, G05B and G06Q each in single-digit-to-low-double-digit territory — signalling that propulsion, business-layer dispatch and manipulator integration are still comparatively open.
Shares are the percentage of the 41 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Automated Guided Vehicle Motion Planning Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about automated guided vehicle motion planning patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited prior art
CN112578782A — Task path planning method and device for automated guided transport vehicle
The filing describes a dispatch server that receives a task, selects the AGV to execute it, reads vehicle-restriction information configured on road segments or nodes of the AGV map, and plans a task path from the vehicle's current position to the target point using only the segments that vehicle is permitted to traverse.Machine-translated from the original Chinese filing; wording follows the source abstract closely.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20140371973A1 | Automated Guided Vehicle And Method Of Operating An Automated Guided Vehicle | 37 |
| 2 | US20210200240A1 | Automated guided vehicle management system and method | 32 |
| 3 | CN109976320A | 一种基于时间窗在线修正的多AGV路径规划方法 | 29 |
| 4 | US9244463B2 | Automated guided vehicle and method of operating an automated guided vehicle | 21 |
| 5 | CN106647738A | 一种无人搬运车的对接路径确定方法及系统及无人搬运车 | 20 |
| 6 | CN114489062A | 面向车间物流的多自动导引车分布式动态路径规划方法 | 19 |
| 7 | CN111413980A | 一种用于巡检的自动导引车路径规划方法 | 18 |
| 8 | CN118034272A | 一种基于动态避障的多AGV路径规划方法及系统 | 15 |
| 9 | CN108170146A | 一种基于已知环境的路径规划方法 | 14 |
| 10 | WO2022002885A1 | An edge computing based path planning system for AGV with intelligent deviation correction algorithm | 9 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations within the searched corpus; treat them as a measure of influence, not of current commercial relevance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 numbers mean for a filing decision
Four things the raw counts imply for anyone deciding whether, and where, to file next in this space.
No single gatekeeper, but a visible cluster
The five leading assignees together hold 39.0% of all 41 records in scope, and the leader itself holds only 5. That is enough concentration to require freedom-to-operate checks against a handful of named parties, but not enough to call this a one-company field.
Filing extends into a long tail fast
Moving from the top 5 to the top 10 assignees only adds 14.7 percentage points, to 53.7% of the 41 records in scope. Roughly half the field sits outside even a top-10 grouping, spread thinly across the remaining 22 ranked companies.
Claim language clusters on control, not hardware
Almost every record in scope carries a G05D control classification, while manipulator-specific claims (B25J) sit at 4.9% and data-recognition claims (G06K) at 4.9%. That gap suggests the harder-to-design-around claims are in control logic, not the physical AGV platform.
Filing activity is regionally concentrated
China accounts for 24 of the tracked receiving-office filings, versus 7 in the United States and single or low-double digits across Europe, Canada, Taiwan and the WIPO PCT route. Anyone benchmarking freedom to operate outside China should not assume the same density of prior art applies.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to automated guided vehicle motion planning patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Where to take this analysis
The figures above describe the shape of the field. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision means going deeper on specific claims and specific competitors.
Map claims against the most-cited prior art
Start with the highest-cited records identified here and work through their independent claims line by line before drafting anything adjacent to dispatch-server path planning or multi-AGV coordination.
Explore citation chains in EurekaTrack the under-claimed branches
B25J manipulator integration and G06Q business-layer dispatch both sit well under 10% of records. Either could still be claimed cheaply, but that window narrows as filing activity from 2025 onward is published.
Monitor white space in EurekaWatch the long tail for new entrants
With over half the ranked assignees holding only single filings, new entrants keep appearing rather than consolidating around the existing leader. Set up alerts rather than relying on a one-time landscape read.
Set up assignee alerts in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
This landscape identifies 41 published records at the intersection of AGV operation and motion or path planning, filed from 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off, using a targeted search combined with an IPC filter on B25J, G05D1 and G05D. That figure reflects a scoped search string rather than every AGV-adjacent filing in general robotics, so a broader search on AGV hardware or fleet management alone would return a different, larger count. Treat 41 as the size of this specific technical slice, not of AGV patenting overall.
The ranking covers 32 companies, with the leader holding 5 of the 41 records in scope and the fifth-ranked company holding 2. The top 5 assignees together account for 39.0% of all records, and the top 10 account for 53.7% — a moderate concentration rather than a single dominant player. Over half the ranked companies hold only one or two records each, so competitive monitoring needs to extend well past the handful of most visible names.
Filings peaked in 2017 at 7 records and comparing the two most recent complete years, 2021 and 2024, volume held flat at 3 records each, a 0% change over that span. Because patent publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the years closest to the 2026 cut-off will always understate true filing activity until later publications catch up. The honest read is a plateau after an early peak, not a decline.
G05D, covering control of non-electric variables, appears on 95.1% of the 41 records in scope and is clearly the primary claim territory. G01C, covering navigation and gyroscopic sensing, follows at 24.4%, with B60L propulsion, G05B regulating systems and G06Q business-data processing each appearing on under 10% of records. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should be read as overlap, not as a breakdown of exclusive categories.
CN112578782A describes a dispatch-server method where the system receives a task, selects an AGV to perform it, reads vehicle-restriction information configured on the AGV map's road segments or nodes, and plans a task path using only the segments that vehicle is permitted to traverse. The practical effect is avoiding execution failures caused by routing an AGV through a restricted segment. Anyone building similar restriction-aware dispatch logic for multi-AGV fleets should review this filing's claim scope before finalising a routing-permission architecture.
The IPC composition points to B25J (manipulator integration, 4.9% of records) and G06Q (business-layer dispatch logic, 7.3%) as comparatively under-claimed relative to the dominant G05D control class. Geographically, filing activity is heavily weighted toward China with 24 of the tracked receiving-office filings, while the United States, Europe, Canada, Taiwan and the WIPO PCT route each carry far fewer — suggesting less crowded prior art outside China for equivalent claim language. Neither observation guarantees a clean filing, but both indicate where density is lowest today.
Research Automated Guided Vehicle Motion Planning Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole automated guided vehicle motion planning 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.