Massive MIMO Design Optimization Patent Landscape 2026
- 12 families total, a small, concentrated set rather than a crowded field — filing peaked at 4 in 2020 and has not repeated that level since.
- One co-filing pair, Mitsubishi Electric Corporation with its European R&D arm, is the only recurring collaboration structure the data shows.
- AI-assisted design is a minority thread, with G06N appearing in only 3 of 12 records against 12 for H04B, so most claims are still classical array and precoding math.
Filing growth compares 2021 (3 records) with 2024 (0) — 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 landscape tracks patent families at the intersection of massive MIMO and large-scale antenna systems where the claims specifically address antenna array optimization, beamforming design or precoding optimization, filtered to IPC classes covering beam-steering antenna arrays and array signal processing. It is a narrow cut of a much larger MIMO literature — 12 families total — built to isolate the design-optimization layer rather than baseband processing or general MIMO transceiver claims.
Filing filtered this tightly will always look thin next to broad MIMO searches; the value is in seeing which assignees bothered to claim the optimization step itself, not just the antenna hardware or the modulation scheme around it.
Filing trend and technology mix
Twelve families span a decade of activity with no sustained upward trend. Reading the chart alongside the IPC mix shows a field where the antenna-array and beamforming core is well established and AI-assisted design is still an add-on rather than the norm.
A single peak, then a pullback
Filings were at zero in 2017, rose to a peak of 4 in 2020, then dropped back to zero by the 2022 midpoint and have stayed flat since. That is not a technology in decline so much as a niche that had one active window; the 2025-2026 count will rise as publication catches up, since publication lags filing by roughly 18 months.
H04B dominates, G06N is the minority signal
Every one of the 12 records sits in H04B (transmission, general), confirming this is fundamentally a signal-processing and array-design corpus. Only 3 records also touch G06N (AI-based computing), meaning most of the field still treats optimization as closed-form or algorithmic rather than learned.
Shares are the percentage of the 12 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Massive MIMO Design Optimization with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about massive mimo design optimization and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe records that anchor this space
Method, base station, system and computer program for massive MIMO communication
The invention relates to a method of massive MIMO communication, comprising: forming a transmission beam set (Φ) by a base station (BS) with privileged channel directions; designing an additional beam set (Θ) for optimizing the transmission beam set, so as to detect channel direction change outside the privileged channel directions.US20220247463A1, filed by Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, published 2022-08-04.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2019195426A1 | Analog channel estimation techniques for beamformer design in massive MIMO systems | 16 |
| 2 | EP3751753A1 | Method and system of massive MIMO communciation | 3 |
| 3 | US20250047363A1 | Heuristic radio resource management for massive MIMO in satellite broadband communication networks | 2 |
| 4 | WO2020250556A1 | Method, base station, system and computer program for massive MIMO communication | 2 |
Citation counts here reflect influence inside this narrow, IPC-filtered corpus, not overall industry adoption — and they favour older filings by construction.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (4 of 4 rows); 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
The dataset is small enough that every record matters individually, which is unusual for a landscape report and worth treating as a feature: it lets a reader trace exactly which assignee owns which optimization mechanic.
One filing carries most of the citation weight
WO2019195426A1, on analog channel estimation for beamformer design, is cited far more than any other record in the set. That gap signals it is the reference point examiners and applicants keep returning to for analog beamformer estimation claims, not that the underlying idea is still novel.
PCT filing dominates the entry route
Four of the twelve families entered via WIPO's PCT route before national phase, ahead of direct US and EPO filing. That pattern fits applicants who were still deciding on jurisdictions when they filed, consistent with a field that has not settled on one commercial anchor market.
AI-assisted optimization is still additive
Only a quarter of the corpus pairs classical transmission claims with AI-model computing classes. That leaves learned beamforming and precoding approaches comparatively open relative to the deterministic array-optimization claims that dominate H04B.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to massive mimo design optimization, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Mitsubishi Electric Corporation | Mitsubishi Electric R&D Centre Europe B.V. | 3 |
The one recurring pair in the data is Mitsubishi Electric Corporation filing alongside its own European R&D subsidiary, Mitsubishi Electric R&D Centre Europe B.V., three times — an internal group structure rather than a cross-company alliance. No other co-assignee pair repeats.
Assignee landscape and where the gaps sit
With only 12 families, no single assignee has built a defensive wall. The ranking is short and every entrant sits close to the others, which is itself the signal: this is a field still open to a well-targeted first claim rather than one already fenced off by an incumbent's portfolio.
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (Mitsubishi Electric)
The most visible filer in this set, both directly and through its European R&D centre, with claims centred on transmission beam-set design for base stations. Momentum has gone quiet in the most recent year, though that may simply reflect publication lag rather than a stopped program.
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Ericsson)
Present in the ranking but without a repeated co-filing pattern, suggesting single-inventor-team filings rather than a sustained program specific to this narrow optimization slice.
European Space Agency (ESA) (European Space Agency)
An unusual entrant for a terrestrial-sounding technology, pointing to satellite-broadband massive MIMO as a real if minor branch of this field, consistent with the satellite-context citation seen elsewhere in the corpus.
University of Southern California
A single academic entrant in an otherwise corporate field, typically a marker of foundational algorithmic work rather than product-ready claims.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Mitsubishi Electric Corporation | 0 | — |
| Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson | 0 | — |
| European Space Agency (ESA) | 0 | — |
| Mitsubishi Electric R&D Centre Europe B.V. | 0 | — |
| University of Southern California | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
A 12-family landscape is small enough to read end to end, but decisions about freedom-to-operate or first-claim drafting need the underlying claim language, not just the trend lines.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top-cited filings
WO2019195426A1 and US20220247463A1 carry the most citation weight in this corpus; any new beamforming or beam-set design claim should be checked against their specific claim scope before drafting.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaWatch the AI-assisted precoding branch
With only 3 of 12 records touching G06N, a claim that pairs a genuinely novel learned optimization step with array hardware has comparatively little prior art to clear right now.
Track this sub-area in EurekaQuestions practitioners ask about this space
This IPC-filtered landscape identifies 12 patent families covering antenna array optimization, beamforming design and precoding optimization claims within massive MIMO and large-scale antenna systems. That is a narrow slice of the broader massive MIMO literature, deliberately filtered to isolate the optimization layer rather than general transceiver or modulation claims. Because it is such a small set, individual filings carry more weight in freedom-to-operate analysis than they would in a larger field.
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (Mitsubishi Electric) is the most visible filer in this dataset, filing both directly and jointly with its European R&D centre, which is the only repeated co-assignee pair in the corpus. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Ericsson), European Space Agency (ESA) (the European Space Agency) and University of Southern California also appear, but none has built a multi-filing program within this specific optimization-focused filter. The field is small enough that no single assignee holds a dominant defensive position.
Only 3 of the 12 records in this corpus classify under G06N, the AI-model computing class, meaning most existing claims use classical algorithmic or closed-form optimization rather than learned models. That leaves genuine room for claims that pair a novel training or inference step with array hardware, provided they clear the analog channel-estimation prior art already established by filings like WO2019195426A1. Patentability always depends on the specific claim language, but the class-level data shows this branch is not yet heavily claimed.
US20220247463A1, assigned to Mitsubishi Electric, claims a base station method that forms a transmission beam set with privileged channel directions and designs an additional beam set specifically to detect channel changes outside those privileged directions. It blocks implementations that use this two-tier privileged-plus-detection beam set structure for tracking channel direction change. It does not block beamforming designs that use a single beam set or that optimize channel tracking through a different mechanism, such as continuous channel estimation without a discrete secondary beam set.
The trend data shows filings rising to a peak of 4 in 2020 before falling back toward zero by 2022 and staying flat through the most recent years. This likely reflects a concentrated filing window by a small number of assignees rather than a broader industry pullback, given how few total families exist. It is also worth remembering that publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so recent-year counts, including the current year, will understate actual filing activity until later records publish.
Research Massive MIMO Design Optimization in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole massive mimo design optimization 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.