Formation Testing Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- One filer dominates. the leading assignee holds 242 families against a fifth-place figure of 94 and a tenth-place figure of 15 — a steep drop-off, not a level field.
- Filing has cooled from its peak. annual filings peaked at 42 in 2020 and the last complete year (2021→2024) shows a -13% change, though 2025-26 figures are still incomplete due to publication lag.
- Optical and AI-based analysis are minority classes. G01J (radiation/light measurement) sits at 5.3% of the 659 records and G06N (AI-based computing) at 3.6% — both far behind the core E21B and G01N classes.
Filing growth compares 2021 (23 records) with 2024 (20) — 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
This dataset tracks 659 published patent families filed against a search built around wireline formation testers, downhole fluid analysis and formation pressure gradient measurement, cross-referenced against sampling and analysis methods including dual packers, focused sampling probes, optical fluid analysis, gas-oil ratio determination, asphaltene onset pressure, and interval pressure transient testing. Coverage runs from 2015 through the mid-2026 data cut-off, spanning the tools operators run downhole to characterise reservoir fluid before committing to full production infrastructure.
The field sits at the intersection of mechanical sampling hardware and fluid-property inference software: pressure gauges and probes described under E21B sit alongside the material-analysis methods classified under G01N and the optical and AI-based inference layers under G01J and G06N. Reading the IPC mix together with the assignee ranking shows not just who files, but which parts of the workflow — hardware acquisition versus downstream interpretation — are seeing renewed claim activity.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology mix
Two views of the same 659-record set: the year-by-year filing count, and how records distribute across IPC subclasses (a record can carry more than one class, so shares add to over 100%).
Filings by year, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 11 in 2017 to a peak of 42 in 2020, then eased; the 2021-to-2024 span — the last stretch with complete publication data — shows a -13% change (23 to 20). 2025 and 2026 counts will keep rising as publications catch up with the roughly 18-month filing-to-publication lag.
IPC subclass distribution
E21B (earth and rock drilling) covers 81.6% of the 659 records, confirming that most filings are anchored in downhole tool hardware. G01N (material analysis) at 34.0% and G01V (geophysics) at 23.5% follow; the smaller classes — G06F, G01J, G06N, G02B, F15D — mark the digital-processing and optical-sensing layers built on top of that hardware base.
Shares are the percentage of the 659 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Formation Testing and Fluid Analysis with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about formation testing and fluid analysis and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited prior art and a recent representative filing
Determination of asphaltene onset condition of reservoir fluids during downhole fluid analysis (US20250101867A1)
Systems and methods for identifying a likelihood of problematic reservoir fluid containing asphaltene and/or an asphaltene onset pressure (AOP) using downhole fluid analysis data are provided. A method may include retrieving downhole fluid analysis data corresponding to a reservoir fluid obtained by a downhole acquisition tool positioned in a wellbore, then using a statistical model trained on historical downhole fluid analysis data and laboratory measurements to identify, from the in-situ data, a likelihood that the fluid contains asphaltenes or its asphaltene onset pressure.Filed by Schlumberger Technology Corporation, published March 2025 — illustrates the shift toward statistical/ML inference layered on existing downhole fluid analysis hardware.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6437326B1 | Permanent optical sensor downhole fluid analysis systems | 255 |
| 2 | US6178815B1 | Method to improve the quality of a formation fluid sample | 198 |
| 3 | US20030134426A1 | Hydrogen sulphide detection method and apparatus | 196 |
| 4 | US20070119244A1 | Methods and apparatus for the downhole characterization of formation fluids | 176 |
| 5 | US6343507B1 | Method to improve the quality of a formation fluid sample | 160 |
| 6 | US20110088895A1 | Downhole measurement of formation characteristics while drilling | 156 |
| 7 | US20090288881A1 | Methods and apparatus to form a well | 138 |
| 8 | US6939717B2 | Hydrogen sulphide detection method and apparatus | 138 |
| 9 | US20060241867A1 | System and methods of characterizing a hydrocarbon reservoir | 118 |
| 10 | US7461547B2 | Methods and apparatus of downhole fluid analysis | 116 |
Citation counts accumulate over time and favour older filings; treat them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not as a marker of current technical 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 filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once the assignee ranking, filing trend and IPC mix are read together.
One filer, then a steep drop
The leading assignee's family count of 242 dwarfs the fifth-place figure of 94, which in turn is well ahead of the tenth-place figure of 15. New entrants are not competing against an even field — they are competing against one filer's decades of continuation filings plus a mid-tier cluster.
The dominant filer's own output has thinned
Recent-year momentum for the top assignee's various corporate entities shows sharp YoY declines, several down to zero filings in the latest year. Combined with the -13% change across 2021-2024, this reads as a filer consolidating its portfolio rather than one actively expanding it — though 2025-26 counts are still incomplete.
AI-based interpretation is a minority class
Only 3.6% of records fall under G06N (AI-based computing) and 5.3% under G01J (radiation/light measurement), against 81.6% for the core E21B hardware class. Statistical-model claims layered on downhole optical data, like the representative 2025 filing, sit in a comparatively open part of the classification space.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to formation testing and fluid analysis, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the field is still open
The assignee ranking returns 100 companies counted by family; the co-assignee pairs point to a single corporate group filing under multiple related entities rather than genuine multi-company collaboration.
A single group holds the largest share
The leading assignee's family count of 242 is filed across several related corporate entities, evidenced by the strongest co-assignee pairs in the dataset all linking variants of the same group. This fragmentation across entities means the practical claim footprint is larger than any single-entity count suggests.
A gap, then a cluster of established oilfield names
Fifth place sits at 94 families, and the ranking runs down to 15 at tenth place. Halliburton, Equinor and Baker Hughes entities appear among the ranked assignees, giving the field a familiar oilfield-services shape rather than a fragmented startup landscape.
US-centred filing with strong PCT and UK activity
United States receives the largest share of filings at 283, followed by WIPO/PCT at 98 and the United Kingdom at 72, with Europe (EPO), Canada and Norway also represented. The UK and Norway weighting reflects North Sea operating interest rather than a general international spread.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Schlumberger Technology Corporation | 1 | -83% |
| Schlumberger Technology B.V. | 0 | -100% |
| Schlumberger Holdings Limited | 0 | — |
| Services Petroliers Schlumberger | 0 | -100% |
| Schlumberger Canada Limited | 0 | -100% |
| PRAD Research and Development Limited | 0 | — |
| Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Equinor Energy AS | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing, or R&D targeting.
Check freedom-to-operate against the dominant filer's full entity group
Because the leading assignee's families span multiple related corporate names, a freedom-to-operate search limited to one entity will understate the real blocking risk.
Run an assignee-group search in EurekaProbe the under-claimed statistical-modelling layer
G06N and G01J classes remain thin relative to the hardware base, suggesting claim space for AI-trained interpretation methods built on existing optical and pressure-transient data.
Explore white space in EurekaWatch for the 2025-26 publication catch-up
Filing counts for the most recent years will keep rising as the roughly 18-month publication lag resolves; re-check the trend before concluding filing activity has genuinely slowed.
Track filing trends in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
One assignee group leads clearly, with 242 families against a fifth-place figure of 94 and a tenth-place figure of 15 among the 100 companies in the ranking. That leading position is filed across several related corporate entities rather than one single legal name, which is common for large oilfield-services groups that restructure subsidiaries over time. A freedom-to-operate check should treat the group as a whole rather than searching a single entity name.
Filings peaked at 42 in 2020 and the last fully complete comparison period, 2021 to 2024, shows a -13% change from 23 down to 20 filings. That is a real cooling, but it is not the same as the field going quiet: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 figures in any dataset will look artificially low until later filings publish. Judge momentum on 2024-and-earlier data, not on the tail years.
The dataset centres on E21B (earth and rock drilling), which appears in 81.6% of the 659 records, reflecting the downhole hardware — probes, packers, pressure tools — that does the physical sampling. G01N (material analysis, 34.0%) and G01V (geophysics, 23.5%) cover the fluid-property and formation-evaluation methods layered on that hardware, while smaller shares in G06F, G01J, G06N, G02B and F15D mark digital processing, optical sensing, AI-based inference and fluid-flow control respectively.
The classification shares point toward the interpretation layer: G06N (AI-based computing) sits at just 3.6% of records and G01J (optical/radiation measurement) at 5.3%, both far behind the 81.6% hardware share under E21B. That gap suggests claim space remains open for statistical or machine-learning methods that infer fluid properties — such as asphaltene onset pressure — from existing downhole optical and pressure-transient data, rather than for new physical sampling hardware.
US20250101867A1, filed by Schlumberger Technology Corporation and published in March 2025, claims methods for identifying the likelihood of asphaltene content or an asphaltene onset pressure in reservoir fluid using downhole fluid analysis data, processed through a statistical model trained on historical data and laboratory measurements. It represents the pattern seen elsewhere in the dataset: a statistical inference layer built on top of established downhole fluid analysis hardware rather than a new sampling mechanism itself.
Research Formation Testing and Fluid Analysis in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole formation testing and fluid analysis 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.