Fiber Sensing Pipeline Security Patents: Leaders & Trends 2026
- Sensing hardware dominates the claim space. 44 of 49 families sit in G01D and 37 in G01H, while AI-based classification (G06N, G06F, G06V) each stay in single digits — the interpretation layer is far less claimed than the sensing layer.
- Filings peaked in 2023 at 17, then flattened. Growth from 2 filings in 2017 to a 2023 peak looks like it's cooling into 2026, though publication lag means the last two years are understated.
- No single filer controls the field. Across 49 families, recent-year momentum shows only one assignee, Eagle Technology, still filing multiple applications in the latest year — most named players show zero.
A sensing-hardware field with a thin, growing classification layer
Fiber sensing for pipeline and perimeter security sits at the intersection of photonic hardware and event interpretation: an optical fiber laid along a pipeline or fence line acts as a continuous sensor, and a phase-sensitive OTDR interrogator turns vibration and acoustic disturbance along that fiber into a signal that can flag a leak, a dig-in, or an intrusion. The patent record in this space, 49 families spanning 2015 through mid-2026, is weighted heavily toward the sensing and measurement hardware itself rather than toward how that signal gets classified into an actionable alert.
That weighting matters for anyone entering the field now: the calibration and amplification methods that make long-distance distributed acoustic sensing viable are already densely claimed and anchored by a small number of heavily-cited filings, while the machine-learning layer that turns raw fiber signal into a labeled event — gunshot, leak, intrusion — is comparatively open. Filing activity rose steadily through the late 2010s, peaked in 2023, and has since flattened, though the newest years in any patent dataset are always undercounted relative to actual filing activity because of publication lag.
Filing trends and technology composition
Filings in this dataset run from 2015 through the partial 2026 year, with the technology composition skewing heavily toward core distributed sensing hardware over the software layers built on top of it.
A peak in 2023, then a pullback
Filings rose from 2 in 2017 to a peak of 17 in 2023, with the 2022 midpoint at 12. That trajectory is flat-to-declining into 2026, though the most recent year is always undercounted because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months.
Sensing hardware still dominates the IPC mix
G01D (measuring and recording, 44 of 49 records) and G01H (vibration and sound measurement, 37) anchor the dataset, with G01V geophysics sensing a distant third at 9. The AI-adjacent classes — G06N, G06F, G06V, G06T — each sit in single digits, showing the classification layer is present but nowhere near as densely claimed as the fiber-optic sensing core.
Shares are the percentage of the 49 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Fiber Sensing for Pipeline and Perimeter Security with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about fiber sensing for pipeline and perimeter security and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe filings shaping this field
Distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) system for acoustic event detection based upon covariance matrices and machine learning
A distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) system may include an optical fiber, a phase-sensitive OTDR (ϕ-OTDR) coupled to the optical fiber, and a processor cooperating with the ϕ-OTDR. The processor may be configured to generate a series of covariance matrices for DAS data from the ϕ-OTDR, determine acoustic events based upon the covariance matrices and a machine learning network, and generate an acoustic event report from the acoustic events.Filed by Eagle Technology, LLC (2024-10-31); the newest highly-cited filing in this dataset, marking the current edge of the classification-layer claim frontier.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20180180451A1 | Calibrating a Distributed Fibre Optic Sensing System | 22 |
| 2 | CN112162312A | 用于极浅海域地层横波速度结构探测的光纤多道地震系统 | 14 |
| 3 | US20190288475A1 | Long-distance fiber optic distributed acoustic sensing amplification system and method thereof | 7 |
| 4 | US20230400350A1 | Gunshot detection via classification using deep learning and fiber sensing technologies | 5 |
| 5 | US20240361177A1 | Distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) system for acoustic event detection based upon covariance matrices and mac… | 5 |
| 6 | US20240361175A1 | Distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) system for acoustic event detection based upon covariance matrices and rel… | 4 |
| 7 | WO2019148061A1 | High speed frequency hopping das interrogation using AOM-gated re-circulating loop and frequency-shifted rece… | 4 |
| 8 | US10378928B2 | Calibrating a distributed fibre optic sensing system | 4 |
| 9 | WO2025193269A2 | Fiber optic distributed acoustic sensing and classification | 3 |
| 10 | US20240361176A1 | Distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) system for acoustic event detection using machine learning network selecte… | 3 |
Ranked by citation count within the searched corpus; older filings accumulate citations simply by being available longer, so treat this as a map of influence rather than current importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 filing pattern actually tells you
Citation concentration and IPC spread point to a field where the physical sensing layer is mature intellectual property, while the interpretation layer built on top of it is still being staked out.
Calibration IP anchors the field
US20180180451A1's calibration method for distributed fibre optic sensing carries more than three times the citations of the next-most-cited record, meaning a large share of later filings likely build on or route around this specific calibration approach.
Sensing hardware outweighs AI classification nearly 7-to-1
The gap between core measurement IPCs and AI-model IPCs shows the classification layer is present in the art but nowhere near as densely occupied — there is more room to differentiate a machine-learning approach than a fiber-optic sensing approach.
Growth has plateaued after a 2023 high
Filings rose from 2 in 2017 to 12 at the 2022 midpoint and 17 at the 2023 peak, then appear to soften — a pattern consistent with either a genuine slowdown or simple publication lag in the newest years.
Filing activity concentrates in the US
Half of all records in this dataset were filed through the US receiving office, with WIPO (PCT) and Europe well behind — a strong signal that commercial deployment and litigation risk concentrate in the US market first.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to fiber sensing for pipeline and perimeter security, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Université Libre de Bruxelles | The Regents of the University of Michigan | 2 |
Only one co-assignee pairing in this dataset shares more than a single family — Université Libre de Bruxelles and the University of Michigan Board, with two shared families — indicating most patent activity here comes from single-assignee R&D rather than joint ventures.
Who is filing, and where the activity has cooled
Assignee activity in this dataset splits between a handful of specialist sensing firms with sustained filing histories and a longer tail of single-family entrants, including academic institutions filing jointly.
One filer is still actively pressing claims
Eagle Technology is the only named assignee in this dataset's momentum data with more than zero filings in the most recent year, centered on machine-learning event detection built on ϕ-OTDR covariance-matrix data.
Several established filers show no recent activity
Prysmian Photonics, NEC Laboratories America, SubCom, AVA Risk Group and University of Electronic Science and Technology of China all show zero filings in the latest year covered, despite prior activity — a pattern consistent with either a shift in R&D focus or simply publication lag masking newer filings.
Cross-institution filing is the exception, not the rule
The only co-assignee pairing sharing more than a single family in this dataset is Université Libre de Bruxelles and the University of Michigan Board — most other activity in this dataset comes from single-assignee filings.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Eagle Technology, LLC | 2 | — |
| Prysmian Photonics | 0 | — |
| NEC Laboratories America, Inc. | 0 | — |
| SubCom, LLC | 0 | — |
| AVA Risk Group Limited | 0 | — |
| University of Electronic Science and Technology of China | 0 | — |
| EXFO Inc. | 0 | — |
| Université Libre de Bruxelles | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
This landscape shows where sensing-hardware IP is dense and where the classification layer is still open — the next step is testing a specific claim or filer against the full family record.
Check freedom to operate on a specific classification approach
If a new filing depends on a specific feature-extraction method for DAS event classification, compare it against the covariance-matrix and deep-learning claims already staked out by the most active recent filers.
Run a claim check in EurekaTrack the calibration and amplification foundational patents
The most-cited records in this dataset claim core signal-conditioning steps that many downstream filings depend on; monitor their status and any continuation activity before committing to a hardware architecture.
Set up patent monitoring in EurekaWatch for the 2025–2026 publication catch-up
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the apparent post-2023 slowdown may reverse as more recent applications publish — revisit this trend on a later data pull.
Explore updated filing trends in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
The core patents in this space claim phase-sensitive OTDR (ϕ-OTDR) systems coupled to an optical fiber that detect acoustic and vibration events along a pipeline route, then classify those events to flag leaks or third-party intrusion. Foundational calibration and amplification patents, such as the highly-cited distributed fibre optic sensing calibration filing, sit underneath much of the later application-specific work. Most of this activity is filed under IPC classes G01D and G01H rather than under security-specific codes, because the claims center on the sensing method itself rather than its end use.
Filing activity in this 49-family dataset is led by a mix of specialist sensing companies and a longer tail of single-filing entrants, with academic co-filing also present. Eagle Technology is the most active filer in the most recent year covered by this dataset, while several other named assignees show no filings in that latest year, suggesting activity has cooled or shifted for them. No single filer holds a dominant share of the total 49 families, which points to a moderately fragmented field rather than one locked up by a handful of players.
DAS hardware claims cover the physical sensing chain: the optical fiber, the ϕ-OTDR interrogator, amplification, and calibration methods that produce a usable acoustic signal from the fiber. Event-classification claims sit downstream, covering how that raw signal is turned into a labeled event — a leak, an intrusion, a gunshot — typically using machine learning on features like covariance matrices or spectrograms. In this dataset the hardware layer (G01D, G01H) is far more densely filed than the classification layer (G06N, G06F, G06V), meaning there is more room to differentiate on the interpretation side than on the sensing hardware itself.
Filings rose steadily through the observed period and peaked at 17 in 2023 before falling off into 2024–2026, but that recent decline needs to be read cautiously. Patent publication typically lags the actual filing date by around 18 months, so the 2025 and 2026 figures in any dataset pulled today are understated and will rise as more applications publish. A flattening trend after a 2023 peak is consistent with either a genuine slowdown in new filing or simply an artifact of that publication lag, and the two cannot be fully distinguished until later data cuts arrive.
The thinnest branches in this dataset are the ones downstream of the raw sensing signal: image/video-based event interpretation (G06T) and direct alarm/signalling integration (G08B) each have only a handful of records against 44 for core measurement claims. That gap suggests under-claimed opportunity in how a classified DAS event triggers a tiered physical-security response, and in fusing DAS output with camera-based verification, rather than in the fiber sensing hardware itself, which is comparatively crowded and anchored by long-standing calibration and amplification patents.
Research Fiber Sensing for Pipeline and Perimeter Security in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole fiber sensing for pipeline and perimeter security 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.