Book a demo

Compute-in-Memory Patent Landscape 2026

Compute-in-Memory Patent Landscape 2026
https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/compute-in-memory-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Semiconductors
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%.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
2,460
Published Records
71%
Top-5 Share of Top-100 Filers
+20%
3-Yr Growth (lag-adjusted)
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Published byPatsnap Research··8 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

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 volume by year, 2017–2026
  1. 1Micron Technology, Inc.351
  2. 2Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.150
  3. 3Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (TSMC)128
  4. 4Qualcomm Incorporated125
  5. 5Intel Corporation81
  6. 6Teyi Intelligent Technology80
  7. 7Macronix International Co., Ltd.80
  8. 8SK hynix Inc.70
  9. 9International Business Machines Corporation (IBM)54
  10. 10Peking University54
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Compute-in-Memory covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Numbers

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.

A decade of filing, with a 2024 peak and a 2026 cool-down010020030040069201720182019202020212022202338920242025472026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

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.

Memory classing still leads, but AI-model classing is catching upG11C · Static & digital memories1,82839.7%G06F · Electric digital data processing1,44531.4%G06N · Computing based on AI models61313.3%H03K · Pulse technique & logic circuits1413.1%H01L · Semiconductor devices982.1%H10B · Memory device manufacture982.1%H03M · Coding & code conversion671.5%H10N · Other electric solid-state devic…531.2%Other2625.7%
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Compute-in-Memory covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

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 Eureka
Key Patents

The most-cited compute-in-memory records

Representative recent filing
WO2025122550A12025-06-12

WO2025122550A1 — Systems and methods for input reference generation technique for in-memory computing array

ENCHARGE AI, INC.

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.

WO2025122550A1 — patent drawing 1WO2025122550A1 — patent drawing 2
View full filing
Most-cited records in the corpus
#PatentCitations
1Compute in memory circuits with multi-VDD arrays and/or analog multipliers233
2Apparatuses and methods for converting a mask to an index190
3Apparatuses and methods for data transfer from sensing circuitry to a controller155
4In-memory multiply and accumulate with global charge-sharing124
5Neural network hardware accelerator architectures and operating method thereof110
6Compute in memory circuits with time-to-digital computation104
7Apparatuses and methods for compute enabled cache104
8Apparatuses and methods for data movement103
9Shared memory space among devices95
10Computer systems with lightweight multi-threaded architectures95

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.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Compute-in-Memory covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself

Put your own technology through the same analysis

 
Where to run it
Fastest

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 →
For builders

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 →
Insights

Reading the filing pattern

Four cuts of the same dataset that matter for anyone deciding where to file, litigate or design around.

Trend shape
389 in 2024
peak year

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.

Filing trend, 2017–2026
Technology mix
1,828 vs 613
G11C vs G06N records

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.

IPC composition
Geography
1,022 US filings
leading receiving office

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.

Receiving offices
Collaboration
10 co-assignee pairs
strongest pair count

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.

Co-assignee pairs
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?

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.

Find the white space →
Foundry-university pairs lead what little co-filing exists
AssigneeCo-assigneeShared families
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (TSMC)National Tsing Hua University10
Peking UniversityBeijing Northern Integrated Circuit Technology Innovation Center Co., Ltd.8
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.Sungkyunkwan University Research & Business Foundation5
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.Yonsei University Industry Foundation4
International Business Machines Corporation (IBM)IBM (China) Company Limited4
International Business Machines Corporation (IBM)IBM ISRAEL SCI & TECH LTD4
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.President and Fellows of Harvard College3
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.SNU R&DB Foundation3

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.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Compute-in-Memory covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players

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.

Momentum leader by volume
5 filings, -64% YoY
latest year

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.

Recent-year momentum
Sharpest decline
-94% YoY
latest year

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.

Recent-year momentum
Exception to the pattern
+100% YoY
latest year

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.

Recent-year momentum
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas worth a closer look
Pockets of the CIM claim space that sit outside the dense G11C/G06F core and show comparatively thin filing density.
Global charge-sharing accumulation circuitsMask-to-index conversion for sensing arraysMulti-VDD analog multiplier arraysReference-voltage generation for CIM arraysCoding/conversion schemes at the memory-compute boundary (H03M)
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year momentum by assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Peking University5-64%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (TSMC)2-88%
Qualcomm Incorporated2+100%
Teyi Intelligent Technology1-94%
International Business Machines Corporation (IBM)1-67%
Micron Technology, Inc.0
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.0-100%
Intel Corporation0-100%
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Compute-in-Memory covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next

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 Eureka

Watch 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 Eureka

Map 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 Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Compute-in-Memory covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions about compute-in-memory patenting

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Compute-in-Memory covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

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.

Try Eureka

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.

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.