Cluster Scheduling for Accelerators Patents: Who Files, Who Leads
Concentrated at the top. The five most active filers together hold 42.9% of all 126 records in scope, with a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants behind them. Filings moved from a single record in 2017 to a peak of 15 in 2025, with the reliable comparison being the 2021-to-2024 span: 12 filings growing to 14, a 17% increase. Treat 2025 and 2026 as undercounts rather than a peak followed by a drop, since recent filings are still working through publication.
- 1INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINE CORPORATION25
- 2ENFABRICA CORP10
- 3MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC8
- 4LANCIUM LLC7
- 5GM CRUISE HOLDINGS LLC4
See the full cluster scheduling for accelerators analysis in Eureka
- The complete ranking, not just the top five
- Every IPC branch with its share of the corpus
- The most-cited records, and where claim space is still thin
Common questions about this landscape
Who holds the most patents in cluster scheduling for accelerators?
One assignee leads the ranked list with 25 of the 126 records in scope, well ahead of the rest of the field. The next four companies combined bring the top five to 42.9% of all records. Beyond that, filings spread across a long tail of 53 ranked companies, many holding only one or two records, so the field is concentrated at the top but not dominated by a single monopoly.
Is patent filing in this area still growing?
Yes, based on the complete filing years available: filings grew from 12 in 2021 to 14 in 2024, a 17% increase over that span. The 2025 count of 15 looks like a peak, but because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, both 2025 and the partial 2026 figures are undercounts rather than a true picture of a slowdown. Treat the 2021–2024 window as the reliable growth signal.
What technology areas do these patents actually cover?
The overwhelming majority, 85.7% of the 126 records, carry a G06F classification for general electric digital data processing, which is the broad bucket covering most cluster and job scheduling logic. Digital transmission (H04L) appears in 16.7% and AI-model computing (G06N) in 9.5%, with healthcare, wireless, speech and even sports-equipment classes appearing in only a handful of records each. That drop-off between the top class and everything else shows where claim density is genuinely thin.
Disclaimer. This analysis is based on Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent records and is provided for general information and reference only. Patent data carries inherent limitations — recent filings are under-counted because of publication lag, counts may be on a record or family basis, classification and applicant-name data may contain errors or duplicates, and the underlying search query defines the scope shown — so the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing here is an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Verify independently and review with qualified patent and legal professionals before acting on it.
Method: Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cluster Scheduling for Accelerators covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish. Every share divides by all records in scope. Data: Patsnap Eureka. See the full landscape report.