Compute-in-Memory Patent Landscape 2026
- Filing has plateaued, not grown. 2024's peak of 389 families sits well above the 2022 midpoint of 337, but the two years either side show flat-to-declining momentum rather than a clean upward curve.
- G11C dominates, but G06N is rising fast underneath it. 1,828 records sit in static/digital memory classing versus 613 in AI-model computing (G06N) — a secondary layer worth tracking as accelerator architectures mature.
- Momentum is concentrated and mostly cooling. Every leading assignee tracked except Qualcomm shows a year-on-year decline in the latest partial year, with drops as steep as -94%.
What the compute-in-memory filing record shows
Compute-in-memory (CIM) patenting spans memory-cell design, analog multiply-accumulate circuitry and the digital processing paths that feed neural network accelerators. The search set captures 2,460 patent families filed between 2015 and the 2026 cut-off, concentrated in G11C (static and digital memories) and G06F (electric digital data processing), with a meaningful and growing overlap into G06N (AI-model computing). That overlap is the tell: CIM is no longer just a memory-architecture story, it is increasingly filed as an AI-accelerator story.
Filing activity rose from 69 families in 2017 to a peak of 389 in 2024, but the climb was not steady — 2022's count of 337 already sat close to the eventual peak, and the most recent full year shows deceleration rather than a continued run-up. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the final one or two years in any such trend will always look thinner than they eventually turn out to be; the plateau reading here should be treated as provisional for 2025–2026 specifically.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 2,460-family dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those families split across the IPC subclasses that define the CIM claim space.
A decade of filing, with a 2024 peak and a 2026 cool-down
From 69 families in 2017 to a peak of 389 in 2024, the trend line is front-loaded toward the middle of the decade. The midpoint year, 2022, already logged 337 families — within striking distance of the eventual peak — which means the 2023–2024 run was more of a plateau than a breakout. The drop to 47 in 2026 reflects both a partial year and normal publication lag, not necessarily a real collapse in filing.
Memory classing still leads, but AI-model classing is catching up
G11C (1,828 records) and G06F (1,445) remain the two largest subclasses, confirming that most CIM art is still filed as memory or digital-processing hardware rather than as software. G06N's 613 records is the subclass to watch: it marks filings that frame CIM explicitly around AI-model computation, and its size relative to H03K, H01L and H10B suggests the accelerator framing is where new claim activity is landing.
Go deeper on Compute-in-Memory with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about compute-in-memory and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited compute-in-memory records
WO2025122550A1 — Systems and methods for input reference generation technique for in-memory computing array
A device can include a compute-in-memory (CIM) array of computing cells, including a plurality of rows and a plurality of columns, each computing cell including a memory cell, a computing circuitry, and a capacitor for storing a result of computation, wherein the computing cell receives a pair of activation voltages that are representative of an input analog voltage to be multiplied with data stored in the memory cell. A reference voltage circuit receiving a first set of voltages and a second set of voltages, the reference voltage circuit configured to: during a Reset duration, select a voltage of a first value from the first set of voltages as a first of the pair of activation voltages and…Filed by Encharge AI, Inc. — published 2025-06-12.


| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Compute in memory circuits with multi-VDD arrays and/or analog multipliers | 233 |
| 2 | Apparatuses and methods for converting a mask to an index | 190 |
| 3 | Apparatuses and methods for data transfer from sensing circuitry to a controller | 155 |
| 4 | In-memory multiply and accumulate with global charge-sharing | 124 |
| 5 | Neural network hardware accelerator architectures and operating method thereof | 110 |
| 6 | Compute in memory circuits with time-to-digital computation | 104 |
| 7 | Apparatuses and methods for compute enabled cache | 104 |
| 8 | Apparatuses and methods for data movement | 103 |
| 9 | Shared memory space among devices | 95 |
| 10 | Computer systems with lightweight multi-threaded architectures | 95 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside this corpus — read this table as a map of influence on later filers, not as a ranking of current commercial importance.
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 →Reading the filing pattern
Four cuts of the same dataset that matter for anyone deciding where to file, litigate or design around.
The peak has already happened, provisionally
Filing rose from 69 in 2017 to 389 in 2024, with 2022 already at 337 — close enough to the peak that the 2023–2024 run reads as a plateau rather than a new wave. Given an 18-month publication lag, 2025–2026 figures will firm up, but the shape so far does not look like sustained acceleration.
Memory classing still outweighs AI-model classing three to one
G11C's 1,828 records dwarf G06N's 613, but G06N sitting ahead of H03K, H01L and H10B combined signals where incremental claim activity is concentrating: at the boundary between memory-cell design and AI-accelerator architecture.
US and China dominate receiving offices, Europe and PCT trail
United States (1,022) and China (495) together account for the large majority of receiving-office activity, with EPO (260) and WIPO/PCT (218) well behind. Taiwan (105) and South Korea (99) round out a filing footprint that tracks closely with global memory and foundry manufacturing capacity.
Co-filing is rare and mostly foundry–university
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, the strongest being a foundry-university pairing filing together 10 times, followed by two further university-linked pairs. Co-filing here looks like a research-pipeline signal rather than a broad industry norm.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to compute-in-memory, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (TSMC) | National Tsing Hua University | 10 |
| Peking University | Beijing Northern Integrated Circuit Technology Innovation Center Co., Ltd. | 8 |
| Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | Sungkyunkwan University Research & Business Foundation | 5 |
| Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | Yonsei University Industry Foundation | 4 |
| International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) | IBM (China) Company Limited | 4 |
| International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) | IBM ISRAEL SCI & TECH LTD | 4 |
| Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | President and Fellows of Harvard College | 3 |
| Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | SNU R&DB Foundation | 3 |
The strongest co-assignee pair links a major foundry with a research university at 10 joint filings; the next strongest pairs are similarly anchored around one industry or government lab plus one academic partner, rather than industry-to-industry alliances.
Who is filing, and where momentum is cooling
Assignee activity in CIM is concentrated at the top, with a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants. What stands out in the latest year is not who leads, but how broadly momentum has turned negative.
北京大学 (Peking University) still files the most, but slower
Peking University logged 5 filings in the latest tracked year, more than any other assignee in the momentum list, yet that is a 64% drop from the prior year — consistent with the broader plateau in the overall trend.
特忆智能科技 shows the steepest pullback
Dropping to a single filing in the latest year from a much higher prior base, this is the sharpest year-on-year decline of any tracked assignee, though the small absolute numbers involved mean a single quarter's filing can move the percentage substantially.
高通股份有限公司 (Qualcomm) is the one assignee moving up
Qualcomm is the only tracked assignee with positive year-on-year momentum, doubling its filing count to 2 in the latest year. It is a small absolute number, but it runs against every other assignee in the momentum table.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Peking University | 5 | -64% |
| Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (TSMC) | 2 | -88% |
| Qualcomm Incorporated | 2 | +100% |
| Teyi Intelligent Technology | 1 | -94% |
| International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) | 1 | -67% |
| Micron Technology, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| Intel Corporation | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this next
The filing data points to specific follow-up work rather than a single conclusion.
Track the G06N overlap year by year
If G06N's share of CIM filings keeps growing relative to G11C, that is the clearest signal that CIM claims are migrating from memory-hardware framing toward AI-accelerator framing.
Explore IPC trends in EurekaWatch whether the 2024 peak was real or an artefact of lag
Because 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in, confirming whether filing genuinely plateaued after 2024 needs another one to two publication cycles of data.
Run a fresh trend pull in EurekaMap the under-claimed sub-areas against active accelerator programmes
Reference-voltage generation and charge-sharing accumulation circuits show thinner filing density than the core memory-cell claims — worth checking against known commercial CIM chip programmes.
Search white space in EurekaCommon questions about compute-in-memory patenting
This dataset uses a search across compute-in-memory, in-memory computing, processing-in-memory, and analog in-memory compute terminology, restricted to IPC classes G11C7, G06F15 and G11C13. That means it captures memory-array circuit claims, digital data-processing claims, and static/dynamic memory claims that specifically implement or support in-memory computation. It excludes general memory patents that do not touch compute functionality, and it will miss filings that use different terminology and were classed outside those three IPC codes, so any single search string should be treated as one lens rather than the full picture.
A single invention can generate multiple documents through continuations, divisionals, and parallel filings in different jurisdictions, which inflates raw document counts without reflecting additional invention. Counting by patent family, as this landscape does with 2,460 families, neutralises that effect and gives a fairer sense of how many distinct inventions are actually being protected. It is particularly important in CIM, where large semiconductor assignees routinely file continuation chains around a single core architecture.
The trend shows growth from 69 families in 2017 to a peak of 389 in 2024, but the midpoint year 2022 already reached 337, and the two years around the peak show a flattening rather than continued acceleration. The apparent drop to 47 in 2026 is partly a data artefact: patent publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent one to two years in any filing trend always look thinner than they eventually will. The honest read is a plateau since around 2022, pending confirmation once 2025–2026 data fully publishes.
Filing activity in the latest tracked year is led in absolute terms by Peking University at 5 filings, though that is down 64% year-on-year, alongside foundry and memory-vendor names each filing in the low single digits. Nearly every tracked assignee shows a year-on-year decline in the most recent partial year, with the notable exception of Qualcomm, which doubled its count to 2 filings. That pattern — high concentration at the top, broad cooling beneath it — suggests the field's most active filers are consolidating existing claim positions rather than opening new ones.
The core claim space around static/digital memory circuitry (G11C) and general digital processing (G06F) is dense, with 1,828 and 1,445 records respectively, so filing directly into that core is likely to run into crowded prior art. Thinner areas include reference-voltage generation circuitry for CIM arrays, global charge-sharing accumulation schemes, and coding/conversion approaches at the memory-compute boundary classed under H03M, which has only 67 records. These are not guarantees of patentability, but they are areas where the filing density is measurably lower than the core.
Research Compute-in-Memory in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole compute-in-memory 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.