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 →Filing growth compares 2021 (10 records) with 2024 (7) — 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 1,118 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Metallic glass, also filed under amorphous alloy or bulk metallic glass, is claimed here through composition design and glass-forming ability rather than through a single end-use. The corpus spans 1,118 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026, drawn from a search string that ties alloy composition terms to glass-forming-ability and amorphous-composition language, which keeps the set anchored to material composition claims rather than downstream device claims.
Publication in this dataset lags actual filing by roughly eighteen months, so the 2025 and 2026 figures in the trend chart are undercounts, not a genuine drop-off in research. The receiving-office split, weighted toward the United States, EPO and WIPO PCT filings, points to a field that has historically been prosecuted for broad multi-jurisdiction coverage rather than filed defensively in a single home market.
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Two views of the same 1,118 families: how filing activity has moved year over year, and where those families sit across the IPC classification system.
Annual filings hit 62 in 2017, the high point of the tracked period, then declined toward a midpoint of 8 by 2022. That trajectory reads as an early land-grab on composition space followed by a pull-back, rather than a market still being built out. Because publication lags filing by around eighteen months, the final one or two years of the chart will revise upward as more records post, but the multi-year decline predates that lag effect.
C22C (Alloys) accounts for 732 of the 1,118 records, more than five times the next largest class, B22D metal casting at 201. Powder metallurgy (B22F, 123) and coating/surface deposition (C23C, 116) form a second tier tied to processing routes rather than composition per se. H01M battery applications (50) and G11B data-storage applications (49) are comparatively undercalimed, which is notable given how often metallic glass is discussed as a candidate material for both.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,118 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about metallic glass alloy composition and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA method for in-gas micro/nanoimprinting of bulk metallic glass includes steps of preparing a die, heating the bulk metallic glass and in-gas micro/nanoimprinting of the bulk metallic glass. In the step of preparing a die, the die has a micro/nano structure having multiple depressions and a flow channel connected to the depressions. In the step of heating the bulk metallic glass, the bulk metallic glass is heated to a temperature between a glass transition temperature and a crystallization temperature of the bulk metallic glass. In the step of in-gas micro/nanoimprinting, the bulk metallic glass is forced into the die in presence of gas to imprint a complementing micro/nano structure.Filed by CHU, JINN P., published 2008-05-01. Process claim on a forming method rather than an alloy composition, which narrows its blocking effect on composition-only filings.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5288344A | Berylllium bearing amorphous metallic alloys formed by low cooling rates | 760 |
| 2 | US5735975A | Quinary metallic glass alloys | 575 |
| 3 | US5368659A | Method of forming berryllium bearing metallic glass | 540 |
| 4 | US20100084052A1 | Compositions of corrosion-resistant Fe-based amorphous metals suitable for producing thermal spray coatings | 209 |
| 5 | US20200257933A1 | Machine Learning to Accelerate Alloy Design | 186 |
| 6 | US20050084407A1 | Titanium group powder metallurgy | 183 |
| 7 | US4923770A | Amorphous metal alloy compositions for reversible hydrogen storage and electrodes made therefrom | 160 |
| 8 | US4859413A | Compositionally graded amorphous metal alloys and process for the synthesis of same | 141 |
| 9 | US4537624A | Amorphous metal alloy powders and synthesis of same by solid state decomposition reactions | 123 |
| 10 | US6010580A | Composite penetrator | 115 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus skew toward older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations; treat this as a measure of influence on the field's vocabulary, not of present-day importance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
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 →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 →Three patterns stand out once the raw counts are read against each other: where prior art is thickest, where filing has cooled, and where the classification data suggests claim space is still open.
The three most-cited records in this corpus are all beryllium-bearing or quinary amorphous alloy patents from the mid-1990s, led by US5288344A at 760 citations. Their persistence at the top of the citation table after three decades means new composition claims in this family are almost always assessed against them first.
Annual filings fell from a peak of 62 in 2017 to a midpoint of 8 in 2022, with no sign of recovery in the years since. That pattern is consistent with a technology where the obvious composition territory was staked out quickly, leaving later entrants to compete over narrower variations.
C22C alone accounts for roughly two-thirds of the corpus, more than five times B22D casting in second place. Application-specific classes tied to batteries and data storage sit under 50 records each, a gap that is wide enough to be structural rather than incidental.
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, but the strongest, Poole and Prest, share 91 families, with Poole-Scott and Prest-Scott each near 70. That concentration marks a single tightly-linked filing group rather than a broadly collaborative field.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to metallic glass alloy composition, with the prior art for and against each one.
Recent-year momentum across the named assignees in this corpus reads as flat: every one of the tracked organisations and individual inventors shows zero filings in the latest tracked year, reinforcing the broader decline visible in the filing trend.
Poole, Prest and Scott appear together across the strongest co-assignee pairs in the dataset, with the top pair sharing 91 families. This points to a single well-organised filing programme rather than a broad base of independent inventors.
Named institutional assignees in the momentum data, including a university research programme and a large consumer technology company, show zero filings in the most recent year tracked. Given the publication lag, this likely understates true recent activity, but it is consistent with the multi-year filing decline.
The United States receives more than double the next largest office, EPO at 143, with WIPO PCT close behind at 124. That skew suggests the commercially important filings in this field have consistently sought US protection first.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Crucible Intellectual Property, LLC | 0 | — |
| California Institute of Technology | 0 | — |
| POOLE JOSEPH C | 0 | — |
| PREST CHRISTOPHER D | 0 | — |
| Apple Inc. | 0 | — |
| Glassimetal Technology, Inc. | 0 | — |
| SCOTT MATTHEW S | 0 | — |
| STRATTON DERMOT J | 0 | — |
The dataset points to two useful next steps: a closer read of the composition claims themselves, and a check of whether the under-claimed branches identified here are genuinely open or simply filed under different search terms.
Run the specific alloy composition ranges from the most-cited patents through a claim chart against any new formulation before filing, since the citation data shows later filers are consistently measured against the same 1990s beryllium-bearing patents.
Explore claims in EurekaThe thin battery and data-storage counts here may partly reflect this search string's composition-focused terms rather than a true absence of filings; a targeted search on device-specific vocabulary would confirm whether the gap is real.
Run a targeted search in EurekaFiling activity in this dataset ran at 62 records in 2017, its peak year, then fell toward a midpoint of 8 by 2022 with no clear recovery since. That pattern typically shows up when the most accessible composition space has already been claimed and later entrants face crowded prior art, particularly the beryllium-bearing and quinary alloy patents that still dominate the citation rankings. It is worth noting that publication lags actual filing by around eighteen months, so the final year or two of any trend chart will always look artificially low and should not be read as a sudden stop.
The most-cited records in this corpus are beryllium-bearing amorphous alloy patents from the mid-1990s, led by one patent describing beryllium-bearing amorphous metallic alloys formed by low cooling rates at 760 citations, alongside a quinary metallic glass alloy patent and a related beryllium-bearing forming-method patent. Their citation counts, in the hundreds, mean most subsequent composition filings in this space have had to distinguish themselves from this specific group. A newer entrant, a machine-learning-based alloy design patent, also appears among the most-cited, signalling that computational composition search is becoming a recognised prior-art category in its own right.
The recent-year momentum data in this corpus shows every tracked assignee, including institutional and corporate names as well as individual inventors, at zero filings in the latest tracked year, reflecting the broader multi-year decline in filing activity. Historically, the strongest filing relationships are between a small cluster of individual co-inventors, with the top pair sharing 91 families and two other pairings each near 70. That concentration suggests activity in this field has been driven by a tightly linked filing programme rather than a wide field of independent competitors.
The IPC distribution shows C22C alloy claims accounting for 732 of the 1,118 records in this corpus, more than five times the next largest class, while application-specific classes tied to batteries and data storage sit at 50 and 49 records respectively. Given how often metallic glass is proposed as a candidate material for battery electrodes and magnetic components, that gap looks structural rather than incidental. Corrosion-resistant iron-based coatings for thermal spray applications and machine-learning-guided composition search also show comparatively thin claim density relative to their technical relevance.
The United States receives 548 of the filings tracked in this corpus, more than double the next largest office, the European Patent Office at 143, with WIPO PCT applications close behind at 124. Japan, China and Germany each receive a smaller share. This distribution suggests that commercially significant metallic glass composition filings have historically prioritised US protection first, with PCT filings used to preserve broader international options before committing to national phase entry.
Go past this page: query the whole metallic glass alloy composition 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.