Fault Isolation Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- One clear leader, then a long tail. the top-ranked assignee holds 19 records against a fifth-place count of 4 and a tenth-place count of 2, across 28 ranked companies.
- Filings are accelerating, not fading. 2021 to 2024 filings grew +400%, and 2022 remains the peak year at 7 filings so far.
- Measurement and materials classes dominate claim space. G01R and G01N each cover more than a third of the 66 records in scope, with H01L close behind at 31.8%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (1 records) with 2024 (5) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field.
What this landscape covers
Fault isolation and failure localization sits at the intersection of electrical measurement, materials analysis and semiconductor device engineering. The search set combines core technique terms — photon emission microscopy, lock-in thermography, laser stimulation — with the physical-access problem every technique eventually runs into: backside access and sample preparation. That pairing is deliberate. A method claim for detecting a defect is only useful if it also survives contact with a real, packaged die.
The scope covers 66 published records filed between 2015 and 2026, with the most recent year necessarily undercounted because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months. The assignee ranking behind this page lists 28 companies, not a top-50 or top-100 cut — it is the complete set the data endpoint returns for this search.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 66-record set: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filing trend: acceleration after a slow start
Annual filings ran at 5 in 2017, rose unevenly, and peaked at 7 in 2022. The evidence set also shows a sharper recent signal: 2021 (1 filing) to 2024 (5 filings) is a +400% increase over that three-year span, using 2024 as the last year that can be treated as complete before publication lag thins out the count.
IPC composition: measurement and materials analysis lead
G01R (electric and magnetic measurement) appears in 40.9% of the 66 records and G01N (material analysis and testing) in 36.4%, with H01L (semiconductor devices) at 31.8%. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add to more than 100% by design; H01J, H10W, H10D, H10N and H10P each sit in the 9-17% band, marking narrower but still active claim territory around electron-tube instrumentation and general semiconductor device structures.
Shares are the percentage of the 66 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Fault Isolation and Failure Localization with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about fault isolation and failure localization and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records and a recent representative filing
US20240219460A1 — Enhanced e-beam apparatus with nano-scale probe tips for fault isolation
This disclosure describes systems, methods, and devices related to electron beam and nanoprobing techniques with probe tips for fault isolation in integrated circuits. A method may include generating a signal at a circuit device under test while a probe tip electrically interacts with a transistor of the circuit device under test; detecting, based on the signal and the laser at the transistor, an electrical output of the circuit device under test; and identifying, based on the electrical output, a location of a fault at the circuit device under test.Filed by Intel Corporation, published 2024-07-04.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20060012385A1 | Integration of photon emission microscope and focused ion beam | 85 |
| 2 | US20040207396A1 | Scanning magnectic microscope having improved magnetic sensor | 77 |
| 3 | US7145330B2 | Scanning magnetic microscope having improved magnetic sensor | 54 |
| 4 | US20110297829A1 | Three-dimensional hot spot localization | 41 |
| 5 | WO2011156527A1 | Three-dimensional hot spot localization | 35 |
| 6 | US20130174301A1 | Method and apparatus for in SITU preparation of serial planar surfaces for microscopy | 23 |
| 7 | US6245586B1 | Wire-to-wire bonding system and method | 23 |
| 8 | US8742347B2 | Three-dimensional hot spot localization | 21 |
| 9 | US20080142711A1 | Methods and systems of performing device failure analysis, electrical characterization and physical character… | 21 |
| 10 | US7842920B2 | Methods and systems of performing device failure analysis, electrical characterization and physical character… | 18 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate references — read them as a signal of influence on the field, not a ranking of current relevance.
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 data means for a filing decision
Three read-outs from the numbers above, framed around where claim space is occupied and where it is thinning out.
One assignee well ahead, then a sharp drop-off
The leading assignee's 19 records are nearly five times the fifth-ranked company's 4, and the tenth-ranked company holds only 2. That gap suggests a single filer has built a defensive perimeter around core technique claims, while the rest of the 28 ranked companies are filing narrower, more opportunistic applications rather than competing head-on.
Growth is real, but 2025-26 will read low until data catches up
Filings rose from 1 in 2021 to 5 in 2024, a genuine acceleration rather than noise. Treat 2025 and 2026 counts as provisional: publication lag means recent applications are still working through the pipeline, not that activity has cooled.
Measurement and materials classes are the most contested
G01R and G01N together anchor the bulk of filing activity, with H01L close behind. Any new filing targeting core electrical or thermal measurement methods is filing into the densest part of the landscape; the narrower H10-series classes, each under 14%, are comparatively open.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to fault isolation and failure localization, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the activity has gone quiet
The ranking spans 28 companies, from one clearly dominant filer down to single-digit entrants; recent-year momentum shows most of the top names have paused rather than withdrawn.
Intel holds the deepest portfolio in this set
Intel's record count is well clear of the rest of the field, spanning both core fault-isolation methods and the representative 2024 e-beam probing filing. Its recent-year momentum shows 1 new filing in the latest year, indicating continued but no longer accelerating activity.
One partnership dominates the collaboration graph
Fraunhofer and FEI EFA appear together 10 times, the strongest co-assignee link in the dataset by a wide margin over the next pairs, each at 3. That points to a sustained joint research programme around photon-emission and laser-stimulation techniques rather than one-off co-filings.
Recent activity has gone quiet across most named leaders
Outside Intel's single latest-year filing, the other tracked assignees — including Fraunhofer, FEI EFA, Brown University's research foundation, Cryptography Research and Ultra Tec — show 0 filings in the latest year. Given publication lag, this reads as a reporting gap rather than confirmed withdrawal from the field.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Corporation | 1 | — |
| Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V. | 0 | — |
| FEI EFA Inc. | 0 | — |
| Brown University Research Foundation | 0 | — |
| Cryptography Research Inc. | 0 | — |
| ULTRA TEC MFG | 0 | — |
| FEI Company | 0 | — |
| SCHMIDT CHRISTIAN | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The landscape points to a concentrated core and a thinner periphery; the next steps depend on whether you are clearing a filing or scouting a gap.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leader's portfolio
With one assignee holding nearly five times the fifth-place count, any new filing in core photon-emission or laser-stimulation methods should be checked against that portfolio specifically, not just the field average.
Run a freedom-to-operate check in EurekaExplore the under-claimed branches directly
Backside sample preparation and defect-depth estimation show thinner claim density than the core measurement classes. A first claim there has more room to stand on its own.
Explore white space in EurekaTrack the Fraunhofer/FEI EFA collaboration pattern
The strongest co-assignee pair in this dataset signals an active joint research line; monitoring its continuation is a low-cost way to anticipate the next wave of filings.
Set up assignee monitoring in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
One assignee leads the 28-company ranking with 19 records, well ahead of the fifth-ranked company at 4 and the tenth at 2. That gap indicates a concentrated core of technique patents held by a single filer, with the remaining companies each holding smaller, more specialized portfolios. Anyone assessing freedom to operate in this space should check the leader's claims first, since they set the boundary most new filings will run into.
Filings grew +400% from 2021 (1 filing) to 2024 (5 filings), which is the clearest growth signal in this dataset. The peak year overall is 2022, with 7 filings. Counts for 2025 and 2026 appear lower, but that reflects publication lag of roughly 18 months rather than an actual slowdown, so those recent years should not be read as a declining trend.
The dominant IPC subclasses are G01R (electric and magnetic measurement), covering 40.9% of the 66 records in scope, and G01N (material analysis and testing) at 36.4%, with H01L (semiconductor devices) at 31.8%. Narrower classes such as H01J, H10W, H10D, H10N and H10P each cover between roughly 9% and 17% of records. Because records can carry multiple classes, these figures add up to more than 100% and should not be treated as mutually exclusive shares.
The narrower IPC classes — H10D, H10N and H10P, each around 9% of the 66 records — carry noticeably less filing density than the core measurement and materials classes. Within that, backside sample preparation for advanced packaging, defect-depth estimation modelling, and e-beam nanoprobing tip design stand out as technically specific sub-areas without a dominant portfolio holder. A first claim in these areas has more room to establish novelty than one filed directly against the core photon-emission or thermography methods.
US20240219460A1, filed by Intel and published 2024-07-04, covers an electron-beam apparatus using nano-scale probe tips for fault isolation, where a probe tip electrically interacts with a transistor under test and a fault location is identified from the resulting electrical output. It is a method-plus-apparatus claim structure tied specifically to e-beam nanoprobing rather than to fault isolation broadly. Anyone designing a competing nanoprobing tool should review its specific claim language on tip geometry and signal detection before assuming the general fault-isolation concept is blocked.
Research Fault Isolation and Failure Localization in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole fault isolation and failure localization 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.