Autonomous Train Operation Patents: Who Leads, Long Tail 2026
- Filing peaked in 2017 at 4 families and has not returned to that level since, with the midpoint year 2022 recording zero filings in this corpus — a flat-to-declining signal rather than a growth curve.
- Japan is the single largest receiving office at 10 records, ahead of the United States at 8 and China at 4, pointing to where examination history and prior art are deepest.
- The two most-cited records date to 1994-2000 and carry 285 and 65 citations respectively, meaning the foundational ATO control claims are two decades old and still anchor freedom-to-operate analysis today.
What the automatic train operation patent record shows
Autonomous train operation — variously claimed as automatic train operation, driverless operation or by grade-of-automation level — sits at the intersection of railway traffic control and onboard vehicle autonomy. This landscape covers 32 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026, drawn from filings classified under B61L (railway traffic control) and adjacent propulsion and control subclasses. The dataset is small relative to broader autonomous-vehicle landscapes, which itself is informative: this is a specialised, systems-engineering field rather than a mass-filing one.
Publication lags filing by roughly eighteen months, so the 2025-2026 count in any trend line understates real activity. Read the recent-year figures as a floor, not a ceiling.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 32-family dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim weight.
A peak in 2017, then a flat line
Filings hit 4 in 2017, the high point of the observed window. The 2022 midpoint shows zero, and the trend does not recover to peak levels afterward — consistent with a field where the core control architecture was claimed early and subsequent filing has been sparse and sporadic rather than compounding.
B61L dominates; B60L is the largest secondary class
Every record in this set touches B61L (railway traffic control), confirming that is the anchor classification for the search. B60L (electric vehicle propulsion) appears in 13 of 32 records, the clearest secondary cluster — a sign that traction control and train control are frequently claimed together. Braking (B60T, B61H), perception (G06T), and general control (G05D, G05B, G06F) each appear only once or twice, marking them as thin rather than saturated.
Shares are the percentage of the 32 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Autonomous Train Operation Technology Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about autonomous train operation technology landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records anchor the prior art
Automatic train operation apparatus incorporating security function with improved reliability
An automatic train operation apparatus capable of realizing an optimal train operation with an improved reliability. The apparatus includes: an ATO/C system including a plurality of ATO/C units redundantly provided, each ATO/C unit having a fail safe configuration formed by a plurality of execution processors and a supervisor processor for monitoring normal operations of the execution processors, each execution processor being capable of executing an automatic train operation program, and all of the execution processors in the plurality of ATO/C units executing an identical automatic train operation program simultaneously; and a majority logic circuit for selecting an output.Filed by Toshiba; granted 1996. Still one of the two most-cited records in this landscape.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6135396A | System and method for automatic train operation | 285 |
| 2 | US5583769A | Automatic train operation apparatus incorporating security function with improved reliability | 65 |
| 3 | CN106828540A | 基于列车运行等级的列车运行控制方法 | 45 |
| 4 | US20140222259A1 | Speed profile creation device and automatic train operation apparatus | 43 |
| 5 | WO2013057969A1 | Traveling plan creation device and automatic train operation apparatus | 37 |
| 6 | JP2003079011A | On-vehicle device | 35 |
| 7 | CA2281683A1 | A system and method for automatic train operation | 19 |
| 8 | JP2019004587A | Automatic train operation system | 14 |
| 9 | US7050890B2 | Safety system to detect and annunciate the loss of occupancy detection in transit systems | 9 |
| 10 | JP2021101613A | On-board apparatus for automatic train operation system | 6 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings; treat these as markers of influence on later drafting, not indicators 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 filing strategy
Three signals stand out once the raw counts are put in context: a small, concentrated corpus, a citation base that is old, and a technology mix that has not diversified much beyond core control.
A niche, systems-engineering field
32 families across more than a decade is a small corpus by patent-landscape standards. That is consistent with autonomous train operation being a specialised systems discipline governed as much by rail-signalling standards and safety certification as by open patent races.
Foundational claims are two decades old
The most-cited record, US6135396A, and the second most-cited, US5583769A, both predate 2015. New entrants drafting around automatic train control still have to clear prior art laid down in the mid-to-late 1990s.
Examination history concentrates in Japan and the US
Japan (10) and the United States (8) together account for more than half the receiving-office activity in this set, ahead of China (4), WIPO (3), Australia (2) and Canada (2). Freedom-to-operate searches should weight those two offices first.
Control and propulsion are claimed together
Beyond the anchor B61L classification, B60L (electric vehicle propulsion) is the only secondary IPC class with meaningful depth. Perception, braking and general digital-control classes each show up once or twice, suggesting those integration points are lightly claimed relative to core train-control logic.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to autonomous train operation technology landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claim space, and where it's thin
No assignee in this dataset shows filings in the latest tracked year, which fits the flat trend line: the field's known players established their positions earlier and momentum has since stalled or moved to entities not yet visible in published records.
Toshiba, Mitsubishi Electric and signalling specialists set the baseline
Toshiba's 1996 fail-safe ATO architecture and filings from Mitsubishi Electric and Japanese signalling houses form the technical baseline most later claims must distinguish from. None of the tracked assignees show activity in the most recent year, consistent with the overall flat trend.
A small group of named inventors files together repeatedly
Three inventor pairs — Yoshimoto Koki with Ueda Kenji, Yoshimoto Koki with Takahashi Satoru, and Ueda Kenji with Takahashi Satoru — each appear together three times, suggesting a single team or lab responsible for a cluster of related filings rather than independent invention.
Chinese entities are visible but not yet dominant
Filings referencing Chinese assignees, including a university-linked record, appear in the receiving-office data but at a lower volume than Japan or the US. This is an office to watch rather than one that currently defines the field.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Nippon Signal Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| GE HARRIS RAILWAY ELECTRONICS LLC | 0 | — |
| Mitsubishi Electric Corporation | 0 | — |
| Kyosan Electric Manufacturing Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| YOSHIMOTO KOKI | 0 | — |
| UEDA KENJI | 0 | — |
| TAKAHASHI SATORU | 0 | — |
| Toshiba Corporation | 0 | — |
Where to take this landscape
The dataset points to a mature core and thinner adjacent claims. Two directions make sense depending on whether the goal is defensive clearance or offensive filing.
Run a targeted freedom-to-operate check
Given how old and highly cited the foundational ATO records are, any new automatic-train-control filing should be checked against the 1990s-era Toshiba and GE Harris Railway Electronics claims before drafting.
Explore freedom-to-operate workflows in EurekaMap the under-claimed branches before filing
Obstacle detection, image-based intrusion detection and braking-integrated speed profiles show thin IPC coverage in this dataset. That is a reasonable starting point for a claim-scope exercise before committing to a filing strategy.
Try white-space mapping in EurekaCommon questions about autonomous train operation patents
The dataset's citation and filing history point to established rail-signalling vendors, particularly Toshiba, Mitsubishi Electric and Japanese signalling specialists such as Japan Signal and Kyosan, alongside GE Harris Railway Electronics from the US side. These entities hold the earliest and most-cited automatic train operation architecture claims. No assignee in this set shows filing activity in the most recent tracked year, so leadership here reflects historical position rather than current filing volume.
This landscape identifies 32 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 under the search criteria used, anchored to IPC class B61L for railway traffic control. That is a small corpus compared with broader autonomous-vehicle fields, reflecting that automatic train operation is a specialised systems-engineering discipline governed heavily by rail safety standards rather than open patent competition.
Filing peaked at 4 families in 2017 within the observed window and has not returned to that level since; the 2022 midpoint year recorded zero filings in this dataset. That pattern reads as flat to declining rather than growing, though publication lag of roughly eighteen months means the most recent one to two years understate true filing activity. A clearer picture will only emerge once those pending applications publish.
Electric vehicle propulsion, classified under B60L, is the clearest secondary technology cluster, appearing in 13 of the 32 records in this dataset. Braking systems, image-based perception and general digital control classes each appear in only one or two records, indicating those integration points are far less densely claimed than the core train-control logic itself.
Japan is the largest receiving office in this dataset with 10 records, followed by the United States with 8 and China with 4. WIPO PCT filings, Australia and Canada make up the remainder at lower volumes. This distribution suggests Japan and the US carry the deepest examination history and prior art for anyone assessing freedom to operate in this field.
Research Autonomous Train Operation Technology Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole autonomous train operation technology 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.