FMCW LiDAR Coherent Detection Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- Concentrated at the top. the top 5 assignees hold 47.3% of all 146 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 67.8%.
- Filing has cooled since 2021. activity peaked at 26 records that year and had fallen to 13 by the 2022 midpoint, with no sign of a rebound in the years since.
- Radar-class claims dominate. 95.2% of records sit in G01S, while laser-source claims under H01S appear in just 6.8% — a gap between ranging claims and source-hardware claims.
Filing growth compares 2021 (26 records) with 2024 (14) — 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. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 146 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape draws on 146 published records matching FMCW LiDAR and coherent detection claim language, filtered to documents that address instantaneous velocity measurement, laser linewidth, chirp linearity, interference immunity, point rate, integration time or silicon photonics integration. The scope runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, though the most recent filing year is necessarily incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
Coherent FMCW detection sits at the intersection of radar-style signal processing and laser source engineering, which is why the dataset spans IPC classes as different as G01S positioning, H01S laser hardware and G06N AI-based processing. Reading the assignee concentration alongside the IPC spread shows not just who is filing, but which parts of the stack — ranging algorithms, source linewidth control, or downstream vehicle control — are getting claimed most heavily.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 146-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim language.
Filings rose to a 2021 peak, then declined
Annual filings climbed from 10 in 2017 to a peak of 26 in 2021, then dropped to 13 by the 2022 midpoint. The pattern reads as a filing wave tied to early commercialisation pushes rather than sustained, compounding growth — treat the final year or two as understated given publication lag.
G01S dominates; source-hardware classes trail
G01S (radar, sonar and positioning) appears in 95.2% of the 146 records, confirming that most claims are framed around ranging and detection methods rather than the underlying laser hardware. H01S (lasers) at 6.8% and G06N (AI-based computing) at 4.8% mark much thinner claim coverage, which is where the remaining stack elements are least contested.
Shares are the percentage of the 146 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on FMCW LiDAR Coherent Detection with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about fmcw lidar coherent detection and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this dataset
System for Emulating an Environment for Testing a Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave (FMCW) LiDAR System
A system for emulating an over-the-air environment for testing a LiDAR unit under test. It comprises a lens system that receives light from the unit under test and a plurality of optical processing chains, generating light into free space based on the processed optical signals. The system processes received light optically to maintain coherence with light from the unit under test and can process all points in a LiDAR image simultaneously, covering time-of-flight, FMCW and flash LiDAR units under test.Filed by National Instruments Corporation, published 2021-11-18.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6085151A | Predictive collision sensing system | 449 |
| 2 | US20190317219A1 | Control of Autonomous Vehicle Based on Environmental Object Classification Determined Using Phase Coherent LI… | 134 |
| 3 | US7986397B1 | FMCW 3-D LADAR imaging systems and methods with reduced Doppler sensitivity | 105 |
| 4 | US20200011994A1 | FMCW lidar methods and apparatuses including examples having feedback loops | 54 |
| 5 | US20200241139A1 | Processing temporal segments of laser chirps and examples of use in FMCW lidar methods and apparatuses | 50 |
| 6 | WO2019070751A1 | Processing temporal segments of laser chirps and examples of use in FMCW lidar methods and apparatuses | 39 |
| 7 | WO1998032030A1 | Predictive collision sensing system | 32 |
| 8 | US20220121080A1 | Optical beam scanning based on waveguide switching and position-to-angle conversion of a lens and applications | 28 |
| 9 | US20200326418A1 | Radar based system and method for detection of an object and generation of plots holding radial velocity data… | 28 |
| 10 | WO2018170478A1 | FMCW lidar methods and apparatuses including examples having feedback loops | 28 |
Citation counts reflect an older-skews-higher effect within the searched corpus and are a signal of influence, not 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 numbers mean for a filing decision
Three read-outs from the dataset that matter more than the raw counts on their own.
The field has an identifiable core, not an open field
Just five assignees account for 47.3% of all 146 records in scope, rising to 67.8% across ten. New entrants filing coherent-detection ranging claims are filing against a small set of incumbents who already hold dense prior art in that exact claim space.
Filing peaked in 2021 and has not recovered
Annual filings rose from 10 in 2017 to 26 in 2021 before falling toward 13 by 2022. That trajectory suggests an early land-grab phase that has since cooled, rather than a technology still in an accelerating filing cycle.
Ranging claims crowd out source-hardware claims
G01S covers 95.2% of the 146 records while H01S, the laser and stimulated-emission class, covers only 6.8%. Claim density sits overwhelmingly on the detection and processing side rather than on the laser source itself.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to fmcw lidar coherent detection, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gate sits
The ranking covers 42 companies as returned by the data endpoint — it is the full ranking for this scope, not a top-50 or top-100 cut.
One assignee sits well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 19 records, roughly double the fifth-place count of 9, indicating a single company has built the deepest claim position in coherent FMCW detection to date.
A moderate long tail below the leaders
Filing counts fall from 9 at fifth place to 5 at tenth, a gentler slope than the gap to the leader. This points to a group of established players with comparable, moderate portfolios rather than a sharp cliff.
Several leading assignees show no recent-year filings
Multiple assignees in the recent-momentum data show zero filings in the latest tracked year, including year-over-year drops of -100% from the prior year. That is consistent with the broader post-2021 slowdown rather than isolated to any one company.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Robin Radar Facilities BV | 0 | — |
| Aeva Inc | 0 | — |
| Aptiv Technologies AG | 0 | — |
| Aurora Innovation Inc | 0 | — |
| Aurora Operations Inc | 0 | -100% |
| Topgolf Sweden AB | 0 | -100% |
| National Instruments Corporation | 0 | — |
| Stichting IMEC Nederland | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this next
The landscape points to a few concrete next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, competitive tracking, or identifying open claim space.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top 10
With 67.8% of the 146 records held by ten assignees, any new coherent-detection filing should be checked against that concentrated group before drafting claims.
Run an FTO screen in EurekaWatch for a filing rebound
Filings dropped from a 2021 peak of 26 toward 13 by 2022; tracking whether the slowdown continues or reverses signals whether the field is consolidating or maturing.
Track filing trends in EurekaProbe the under-claimed branches
H01S laser-hardware claims sit at just 6.8% of records against G01S's 95.2%, suggesting source-side engineering may carry less prior-art risk than ranging claims.
Explore white space in EurekaFrequently asked questions
This landscape identifies 146 published records matching FMCW LiDAR and coherent detection claim language between 2015 and the 2026-07-31 cut-off. The count is based on patent families in the assignee ranking, which is the fairer unit than raw document counts because it neutralises continuation filings and multi-jurisdiction duplicates. Note that the most recent year or two will look artificially low because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
The dataset ranks 42 companies, with the leading assignee holding 19 records against 9 for the fifth-ranked company and 5 for the tenth. The top 5 assignees together account for 47.3% of all 146 records, and the top 10 account for 67.8%, meaning the field has a clearly concentrated core rather than being evenly spread. Several of these leading assignees show zero filings in the most recent tracked year, which is consistent with the field's broader post-2021 slowdown.
No — filings rose from 10 in 2017 to a peak of 26 in 2021, then fell to 13 by the 2022 midpoint, and momentum data shows several leading assignees at zero filings and -100% year-over-year in the latest tracked year. This points to a filing wave that has already crested rather than a technology still in an accelerating patenting cycle. As always, the very last year in the window is undercounted due to publication lag, so a partial rebound could still be underway but not yet visible.
G01S, the radar, sonar and positioning class, appears in 95.2% of the 146 records, making it by far the dominant claim category. Supporting classes include G05D (control of non-electric variables) at 11.0%, G06F (digital data processing) at 9.6%, and H01S (lasers) at only 6.8%. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100%, and the low H01S share suggests laser source hardware is comparatively less contested than ranging and processing claims.
The clearest gaps sit in the classes with much thinner coverage than the dominant G01S ranging claims, notably H01S laser-hardware claims at 6.8% and G06N AI-based processing claims at 4.8% of the 146 records. Sub-areas such as chirp linearity correction hardware, silicon photonics integration for coherent receivers, and laser linewidth stabilization circuits show less claim density than the core detection algorithms. That does not mean these areas are unclaimed, but the concentration of filing effort elsewhere suggests comparatively lower prior-art risk there.
Research FMCW LiDAR Coherent Detection in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole fmcw lidar coherent detection 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.