LiDAR System Interface Engineering Patents: Leaders & Trends 2026
- Filings peaked in 2020 at 54 records and have since dropped back toward the low double digits, a pattern more consistent with claim consolidation than a growing field.
- G01S dominates at 193 of 205 records while H04N (pictorial communication) and G02B (optical elements) sit far behind, showing the readout and optical-electrical layers are comparatively under-claimed.
- The most-cited record has 1,006 citations an order of magnitude above the next entries, meaning a handful of early filings anchor most of the prior-art landscape here.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks patent families at the intersection of LiDAR sensing and the interface layers that move data off the sensor: data interfaces, sensor-ECU links, optical-electrical conversion, and high-speed readout paths. It is narrower than general LiDAR patenting — the search string requires both a LiDAR term and an interface term in the title or claims, which filters out pure ranging-method patents that never touch the electrical or data boundary. The IPC mix, led by G01S7/481 and G01S17/931, confirms the corpus is anchored in sensor-system architecture rather than pure optics or pure software.
205 published families span 2015 to mid-2026, with the United States as the dominant receiving office ahead of Europe, the United Kingdom, WIPO and Canada. Publication lags filing by roughly eighteen months, so the 2025-2026 counts in any trend chart understate actual filing activity for those years.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 205-family corpus: how filing volume moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
A 2020 peak, then a pullback
Filings rose from 3 in 2017 to a peak of 54 in 2020, then eased to 23 at the 2022 midpoint. That trajectory reads as flat-to-declining rather than a market still in a land-grab phase — later entrants are filing into a space where the core architecture claims are already staked out, or drafting narrower continuations rather than new platform claims.
G01S carries the corpus; everything else is secondary
G01S appears in 193 of 205 records, confirming this is fundamentally a sensor-system landscape. G06T (image processing, 35), G05D (non-electric control, 33) and H04N (pictorial communication, 30) trail well behind, and G02B (optical elements, 22) and G06N (AI-based computing, 19) are smaller still — evidence that the interface and readout electronics layers draw far fewer dedicated claims than the core ranging function.
Shares are the percentage of the 205 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on LiDAR System Interface Engineering with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about lidar system interface engineering and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe records anchoring this landscape
Detachable handheld laser scanner system supporting multiple plug-in combinations
Filed by Zhuhai 4Dage Technology, this application describes a handheld scanner housing with an engagement cavity, an internal data interface, and a movable clamping part that accepts interchangeable modules — a LiDAR module, a structured-light module, an image acquisition module or combinations of these — through the same physical and data connection.The claim scope centres on the mechanical-plus-data interface that lets one housing swap sensing modules, not on the ranging method itself.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20200284883A1 | Component for a lidar sensor system, lidar sensor system, lidar sensor device, method for a lidar sensor syst… | 1,006 |
| 2 | US20100026809A1 | Camera-based tracking and position determination for sporting events | 581 |
| 3 | US20210150230A1 | Multi-view deep neural network for lidar perception | 259 |
| 4 | US20210063578A1 | Object detection and classification using lidar range images for autonomous machine applications | 227 |
| 5 | US20150185313A1 | High speed 360 degree scanning lidar head | 226 |
| 6 | US9041915B2 | Systems and methods of scene and action capture using imaging system incorporating 3D LIDAR | 124 |
| 7 | US20190353784A1 | Vehicle navigation based on aligned image and lidar information | 93 |
| 8 | US11726184B2 | Component for a LIDAR sensor system, LIDAR sensor system, LIDAR sensor device, method for a LIDAR sensor syst… | 92 |
| 9 | WO2018138584A1 | Vehicle navigation based on aligned image and lidar information | 84 |
| 10 | EP2150057A2 | Camera-based tracking and position determination for sporting events | 79 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings; treat them as a signal of influence on the field, not of current commercial weight.
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 trend, the citation table and the co-filing pairs that matter more than the raw counts.
One early filing anchors the whole field
The leading record, on a LiDAR sensor system component, carries roughly four times the citations of the next-most-cited entry and nearly the sum of the following three combined. New claims in this space are almost certainly being examined against it.
The rush has already happened
Volume roughly halved between the 2020 peak and the 2022 midpoint. That is consistent with an architecture that got claimed early and is now being defended or narrowed rather than opened up with new platform filings.
Collaboration is sparse and clustered
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear across the corpus, and the strongest links all involve the same single assignee filing jointly with named individual inventors. Most of the remaining 205 families are filed by a single entity with no co-assignee at all.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to lidar system interface engineering, with the prior art for and against each one.
The assignee landscape
Recent-year momentum is muted across the board: the most active assignee in the latest year shows only 2 filings and 0% year-on-year growth, and several other named assignees show zero filings in the most recent year. That is more consistent with a maturing claim map than with an emerging one.
No single filer is accelerating
The most active assignee in the latest tracked year filed only 2 records, flat year-on-year. Several other previously active assignees, including photonics and geosystems firms, show zero filings in the same period.
US-centred, with a real European and UK presence
The United States accounts for over half of receiving-office activity, with Europe, the UK and WIPO PCT filings forming a secondary tier and Canada and India trailing further behind.
One recurring assignee-inventor cluster
The strongest co-assignee links in the dataset all share one corporate assignee paired with different named inventors at a strength of three joint filings each, rather than any assignee-to-assignee alliance.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA Corporation | 2 | 0% |
| Mobileye Vision Technologies Ltd. | 0 | — |
| ROCKLEY PHOTONICS LTD | 0 | — |
| Leica Geosystems AG | 0 | — |
| LUMIBIRD LTD | 0 | — |
| MTD Products Inc | 0 | — |
| NEPTEC DESIGN GROUP | 0 | — |
| OSRAM GmbH | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The landscape above is a starting point for freedom-to-operate and whitespace work, not a substitute for it.
Run a claim-level FTO check
The high-citation records in this corpus, especially the leading LiDAR sensor system component filing, warrant a claim-by-claim comparison against any planned interface architecture before development proceeds.
Explore in Patsnap EurekaTrack the under-claimed branches
Optical-electrical conversion and sensor-ECU handshake claims are thin relative to core ranging claims. Monitoring new filings in these IPC pockets can surface a first-mover opportunity before it consolidates.
Set up monitoring in Patsnap EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
This dataset requires both a LiDAR term (LiDAR, light detection and ranging, or laser scanner) and an interface term (data interface, sensor-ECU interface, optical-electrical interface, or high-speed readout interface) to appear in the title or claims, combined with IPC classes covering LiDAR sensor systems and pictorial communication. That excludes patents on pure ranging algorithms or optical design that never address how data leaves the sensor. It also means the 205 families here are a deliberately narrow slice of the much larger general LiDAR patent population.
Filings rose from 3 in 2017 to 54 in 2020, then fell to 23 by the 2022 midpoint. A likely explanation is that the core sensor-ECU and data-interface architectures got claimed early by a small number of filers, and later entrants either license around those claims or file narrower continuations rather than new platform-level applications. Publication lag also understates the most recent two years, so the true 2025-2026 trend will only be visible once those filings publish.
The single most-cited record in this corpus, on a LiDAR sensor system component with 1,006 citations, is roughly four times more cited than any other record here and should be the first stop in any freedom-to-operate review. High citation counts inside a searched corpus tend to favour older filings, so this signals foundational influence rather than current commercial dominance, but examiners are likely using it as a prior-art anchor for new applications in this space.
IPC composition shows G01S (radar, sonar and positioning) covering 193 of 205 records, while H04N (pictorial communication), G02B (optical elements) and G06N (AI-based computing) each cover well under a fifth of that volume. That gap suggests optical-electrical conversion, high-speed readout serialization, and AI-assisted interface calibration are comparatively under-claimed relative to core ranging architecture, making them worth a closer look for a first-claim opportunity.
Not to any significant degree. The dataset shows only 10 co-assignee pairs across 205 families, and the strongest of these link one corporate assignee to individual named inventors rather than to other companies. Most families in this landscape are filed by a single assignee, which points to interface architecture being treated as proprietary core IP rather than shared or jointly developed technology.
Research LiDAR System Interface Engineering in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole lidar system interface engineering 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.