BIM Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Filing is still accelerating. the trend runs from 1 record in 2017 to a peak of 3 in 2025, with the 2022 midpoint at just 1 — growth has not levelled off.
- Concentration is real but shallow. the top 5 assignees account for 61.5% of all 13 records in scope, yet the ranked leaders extend to 25 companies with most filing only once.
- India and the US dominate filing offices. of the tracked receiving offices, India accounts for 6 records and the United States for 5, ahead of China and the EPO at 1 each.
What this dataset covers
This landscape draws on 13 published records matching Building Information Modeling search terms — including clash detection, level of development, model federation and as-built handover — restricted to IPC classes covering data processing, business/admin computing and construction equipment. It is a narrow, claims-focused slice of the wider BIM literature rather than a survey of every BIM-adjacent filing.
Because the search is scoped tightly around specific workflow terms and IPC codes, the record count is small relative to BIM software patenting overall. That makes single filings and small assignee clusters more visible, and it means the concentration and white-space patterns below should be read as signals within this scope, not as the full BIM patent universe.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 13 records: when they were filed, and which IPC subclasses they carry. Because a single record can sit in more than one IPC subclass, the composition shares add up to more than 100%.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings begin at 1 record in 2017, sit at 1 by the 2022 midpoint, and climb to a peak of 3 in 2025 — the most recent year, 2026, is necessarily partial given typical publication lag of around 18 months.
IPC subclass composition
G06F (electric digital data processing) and G06Q (business/admin data processing) each cover 76.9% of the 13 records, confirming this scope sits at the intersection of computational modeling and workflow/commerce logic. G06T (image processing) reaches 15.4%, and B02C (crushing/grinding, construction equipment) appears in a single record — a marker of physical-process crossover rather than a claim cluster.
Shares are the percentage of the 13 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Building Information Modeling (BIM) with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about building information modeling (bim) and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records in this dataset
Systems and methods for sustainability and social interaction analysis in building information modeling
The filing describes transforming a BIM model by flattening solid-volume geometry for space-bounding elements into thin-walled thermal-zone boundaries: determining wall volumes, collapsing them to single surface walls, deriving center surfaces and end points, aligning and trimming those walls to close spaces, connecting the closed spaces vertically into a single watertight volume, and building interfaces between the resulting zones.Filed by the Governing Council of the University of Toronto, published 2021-10-28.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | EP4339857A1 | System and method for automatically calculating quantity and construction cost of railway facilities based on… | 16 |
| 2 | US20180374052A1 | Method of improviding building information modeling | 15 |
| 3 | US20210334422A1 | Systems and methods for sustainability and social interaction analysis in building information modeling | 14 |
| 4 | US20220391553A1 | Building information modeling systems and methods | 11 |
| 5 | US20240320393A1 | Building information modeling-based simulation of construction robots in wood frame assembly process | 2 |
| 6 | US11270036B2 | Systems and methods for sustainability and social interaction analysis in building information modeling | 2 |
Citation counts inside a bounded corpus like this one favour older publications that have had more time to accumulate citations — treat them as a signal of influence within this scope, not as a measure of current technical importance.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (6 of 6 rows); 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 say about this field
Three figures matter most for a filing or freedom-to-operate decision in this space: how fast the field is moving, how concentrated ownership is, and which computational layer carries the claim density.
Filing is accelerating, not plateauing
The midpoint year, 2022, still sits at just 1 record. Most of the growth in this scope has happened since then, and 2026 — already at 3 — is an undercount given typical 18-month publication lag.
Leadership is thin, not locked in
Eight of the 13 records in scope come from five assignees, but the ranking runs to 25 companies, and most of those file only a single record. That is a field with an early lead, not an entrenched incumbent.
Claims sit on computation and workflow logic
Both G06F and G06Q cover more than three-quarters of the 13 records, showing that BIM patenting in this scope is concentrated on digital-processing and business/commerce logic rather than physical construction equipment.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to building information modeling (bim), with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The assignee ranking spans 25 companies and institutions, from a two-record leader down to single-filing entrants at fifth and tenth place. That long tail, combined with a receiving-office mix skewed to India and the United States, points to a field still being staked out rather than owned.
A narrow lead, not a moat
The top-ranked assignee holds 2 of the 13 records in scope — enough to lead the ranking, but far short of the kind of concentration that would close off the field to new entrants.
Most assignees file once
Both the fifth-place and tenth-place positions in the ranking sit at a single record, confirming that beyond the leader this is a field of one-off filers — academic labs, individual inventors, and regional institutes.
India and the US carry the filing volume
Of the tracked receiving offices, India leads with 6 records and the United States follows with 5; China and the EPO each register 1. Any freedom-to-operate check in this scope should prioritise those two jurisdictions first.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| SRI KRISHNA COLLEGE OF ENG & TECH | 1 | — |
| Purdue Research Foundation | 0 | — |
| The Governing Council of the University of Toronto | 0 | — |
| NAT INST OF TECH DURGAPUR | 0 | -100% |
| Korea Railroad Research Institute | 0 | — |
| Shenzhen University | 0 | — |
| Shandong Jianzhu University | 0 | — |
| TANUJA D V | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this from here
The dataset points to an accelerating but still fragmented field. The next steps depend on whether the goal is filing strategy, freedom-to-operate, or tracking a specific competitor.
Check freedom-to-operate against the cited leaders
Start with the most-cited records in this scope, particularly the University of Toronto and Purdue-linked filings, before drafting claims in geometry-transformation or sustainability-analysis workflows.
Explore citation network in EurekaWatch the long tail for new entrants
With 25 assignees ranked and most filing only once, new entrants are still appearing. Track the recent-year momentum data rather than relying on the historical leader alone.
Set up assignee alerts in EurekaPrioritise India and US filing strategy
Given the 6-to-5 split between India and United States receiving offices, any regional filing or opposition strategy in this scope should treat those two jurisdictions as the primary battleground.
Run a jurisdiction comparison in EurekaCommon questions about BIM patents
Within this tightly scoped search — combining BIM-specific terms like clash detection and model federation with IPC classes for data processing and construction equipment — there are 13 published records. This is a narrow slice defined by specific claim language, not a count of every patent that mentions BIM; broader searches on BIM software generally would return a much larger set. The scope here is chosen to surface claims that combine modeling terminology with concrete workflow steps.
The ranking in this dataset spans 25 assignees, with the top-ranked holder filing 2 of the 13 records in scope. Academic institutions and university research foundations feature prominently near the top, alongside individual inventors and regional technical institutes further down the ranking. No single assignee holds a dominant share; the top 5 combined account for 61.5% of all records, which is meaningful but not close to market control.
It is still accelerating within this scope. Filings ran from 1 record in 2017 to a midpoint of 1 in 2022, then rose to a peak of 3 in 2025. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent year's count is understated, so the true growth rate is likely higher than the raw trend line shows.
The technology composition shows heavy concentration in core digital-processing and business-workflow classes (G06F and G06Q, each covering 76.9% of the 13 records), with much thinner coverage in areas like as-built handover verification, model-federation conflict resolution, and digital-delivery-mandate compliance automation. These adjacent branches see occasional filings rather than sustained claim-building, which is where new entrants have room to establish a first position.
Among the receiving offices tracked in this dataset, India leads with 6 records and the United States follows closely with 5, while China and the EPO each register a single record. Anyone assessing freedom-to-operate or planning a filing strategy in this space should treat India and the United States as the primary jurisdictions, since together they account for the large majority of the activity captured here.
Research Building Information Modeling (BIM) in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole building information modeling (bim) 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.