Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/network-slicing-quality-control-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Telecom & WirelessNetwork Slicing Quality Control Patents: Filing Trends and Who Leads
- Filing growth has flattened, not accelerated. The peak year so far is 2024 at 109 filings, but the 2022 midpoint of 85 shows the curve leveling rather than climbing — a maturing claim space, not an emerging one.
- One assignee is still pushing while others have gone quiet. Huawei filed 7 in the latest year (+17% YoY) while Ericsson and Microsoft Technology Licensing both dropped to zero (-100% YoY), leaving a visible gap in recent momentum among the historically active filers.
- H04W and H04L dominate; AI-driven slicing is a minor share. 324 records sit in H04W and 238 in H04L, but only 21 touch G06N — AI-based slice management is claimed far less than the wireless and transmission mechanics it's meant to optimise.
456
Published Records
72%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+142%
3-Yr Growth (lag-adjusted)
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this dataset covers
Network slicing quality control sits at the intersection of SLA assurance, slice performance monitoring and QoS assurance claims layered onto 5G network slicing and RAN slicing architectures. The corpus spans 456 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026, drawn from filings at the USPTO, WIPO, EPO, India, Germany and Austria. Most records classify under H04W (wireless communication networks) and H04L (digital information transmission), with a smaller but non-trivial presence in G06F data processing and G06N AI-based methods.
Filing activity began in earnest around 2017 and rose through 2024, the peak year recorded so far. Because publication typically lags filing by around eighteen months, the 2025-2026 figures in any trend chart understate real filing volume for those years. The receiving-office spread — led by the United States, WIPO and the EPO — points to a field where applicants are pursuing broad multi-jurisdiction coverage rather than concentrating in a single market.
Filing trend and IPC composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Network Slicing Quality Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The Data
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 456-family corpus: how filings have moved year over year, and where they cluster across the IPC classification system.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 3 in 2017 to a peak of 109 in 2024. The 2022 midpoint of 85 sitting well below the 2024 peak, followed by a partial 2026 count of 10, suggests the growth curve has flattened rather than continued to accelerate — consistent with a technology area where core claim positions are largely staked out.
IPC subclass distribution
H04W (324 records) and H04L (238) together account for the great majority of filings, confirming that quality control here is claimed primarily as a wireless-network and transmission-layer problem. G06F (47) and G06N (21) show a smaller but real push toward data-processing and AI-based approaches to slice management, while H04B, H04J, H04M and G06K each carry single-digit-to-low-double-digit counts, marking narrower supporting niches rather than independent battlegrounds.
Shares are the percentage of the 456 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Network Slicing Quality Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Network Slicing Quality Control with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about network slicing quality control and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
The most-cited prior art in this space
Representative Filing
Leveraging 5G network slicing capability to increase network security
AT&T INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY I, L.P.
Filed by AT&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. and published 2022-05-26, this record defines security-based network slices distinct from conventional service slices. Subscriber traffic is assigned to a security slice based on device characteristics or observed behaviour, and traffic can be reassigned when behaviour meets a defined criterion such as malfeasance or misuse.US20220166799A1 frames slicing as a security-control mechanism rather than purely a performance-QoS one — a distinct claim angle from the SLA-monitoring records that dominate the rest of the corpus.
Highest-cited records in the corpus
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20200259896A1 | Industrial Automation with 5G and Beyond | 742 |
| 2 | WO2023091664A1 | Radio access network intelligent application manager | 237 |
| 3 | US20200044943A1 | Methods and functions of network performance monitoring and service assurance | 184 |
| 4 | US20240259879A1 | Radio access network intelligent application manager | 118 |
| 5 | US20220124560A1 | Resilient radio resource provisioning for network slicing | 114 |
| 6 | US20170078157A1 | Method and apparatus for data analytics management | 69 |
| 7 | US20200154292A1 | Method and system of performance assurance with conflict management in provisioning a network slice service | 67 |
| 8 | US20240305533A1 | Radio resource planning and slice-aware scheduling for intelligent radio access network slicing | 66 |
| 9 | US20220039016A1 | NR-u LBT mac procedures | 57 |
| 10 | US20200059407A1 | Communication method, network device, and system | 36 |
Citation counts are drawn from a searched corpus and skew toward older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations; treat them as a signal of influence on subsequent filings, not as a ranking of current commercial importance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Network Slicing Quality Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the numbers say about the field
Three patterns emerge from filing volume, citation weight and the IPC spread that matter for anyone deciding where to file or partner next.
Filing Momentum
109 in 2024
peak filing year
Growth has plateaued after 2024
The climb from 3 filings in 2017 to 85 by 2022 and 109 by 2024 looks steep in absolute terms, but the flattening between the 2022 midpoint and the 2024 peak signals that the core architectural claims in SLA assurance and slice monitoring are largely staked out. New entrants now face a denser prior-art floor than filers did five years ago.
Based on 456 published families, 2017-2026
Citation Weight
742 citations
top-cited record
Early industrial-automation filings anchor the field
US20200259896A1 on industrial automation with 5G and beyond carries by far the heaviest citation count in the set, followed by two records sharing the title 'Radio access network intelligent application manager'. Heavy citation on older filings is typical of a searched corpus and reflects accumulated influence, not that these are still the most commercially active claims.
Citation counts within this corpus only
Technology Split
21 in G06N
AI-classified records
AI-driven slice management is a minority claim
Against 324 H04W and 238 H04L records, only 21 fall under G06N for AI-based computing methods. Quality control in network slicing is still overwhelmingly claimed as a networking and transmission problem, leaving AI-driven prediction and automated remediation of slice SLAs comparatively open ground.
IPC subclass counts across 456 records
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to network slicing quality control, with the prior art for and against each one.
Co-filing is rare
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Rakuten Mobile, Inc. | RAKUTEN MOBILE USA LLC | 5 |
| Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. | MARQUEZAN CLARISSA | 3 |
| Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. | POE WINT YI | 1 |
| Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson | XU WENLIANG | 1 |
| Nokia Technologies Oy | Nokia Shanghai Bell Co., Ltd. | 1 |
| Nokia Technologies Oy | Nokia Solutions and Networks Oy | 1 |
Only 6 co-assignee pairs appear in the entire corpus, and the strongest — Rakuten Mobile and Rakuten Mobile USA — reflects an internal corporate relationship rather than cross-company collaboration. Most filers in this space are prosecuting independently.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Network Slicing Quality Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who is filing, and who has stopped
Recent-year momentum diverges sharply from historical filing volume. A handful of assignees are still active; several long-standing filers have gone to zero.
Still Filing
+17% YoY
Huawei, latest year
Huawei is the one clear active filer
Huawei recorded 7 filings in the latest year with positive year-over-year growth, making it the only assignee in the tracked momentum set showing continued upward filing activity. Its co-assignee pairings with named individual inventors also suggest active internal prosecution rather than a stalled programme.
Latest-year filing count and YoY change
Gone Quiet
-100% YoY
Ericsson & Microsoft
Two historically active filers dropped to zero
Ericsson and Microsoft Technology Licensing both show zero filings in the latest year, a full reversal from prior activity. Samsung Electronics still logged 1 filing in the latest year, and Rakuten Mobile and Verizon Patent and Licensing also show zero, though their historical co-filing and portfolio size still matter for freedom-to-operate review.
Momentum figures for the latest tracked year
Filing Pattern
6 pairs
co-assignee relationships
Prosecution is mostly solo
With only 6 co-assignee pairs across 456 families, cross-company joint filing is the exception. The strongest pairing links a corporate parent to its own subsidiary rather than two independent competitors, which means competitive mapping here is better done assignee-by-assignee than by collaboration cluster.
Co-assignee pairs across the full corpus
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. | 7 | +17% |
| Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | 1 | — |
| Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson | 0 | -100% |
| Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC | 0 | -100% |
| Rakuten Mobile, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Verizon Patent and Licensing Inc. | 0 | — |
| Intel Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| Nokia Technologies Oy | 0 | -100% |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Network Slicing Quality Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this analysis
The filing and citation data point to a field with a settled core and a thinner AI-driven edge. Two directions follow from that.
Map the AI-slicing white space in detail
With only 21 G06N-classified records against 324 in H04W, a targeted search on AI-based slice prediction and automated remediation claims would clarify how much genuine white space remains before committing R&D there.
Explore in Patsnap EurekaTrack the assignees still filing
Huawei's continued positive momentum against several competitors dropping to zero filings is worth monitoring quarter by quarter rather than assuming the whole field has cooled uniformly.
Set up monitoring in Patsnap EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Network Slicing Quality Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about this landscape
This dataset contains 456 published patent families filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that match claims around SLA assurance, slice performance monitoring and QoS assurance combined with network slicing or RAN slicing terms. That figure counts families, which is the fairer unit because it neutralises duplicate continuation filings and multi-jurisdiction copies of the same invention. Because publication lags filing by roughly eighteen months, the true count for 2025 and 2026 is understated and will rise as more applications publish.
Huawei stands out as the most recently active filer, with 7 filings in the latest tracked year and positive year-over-year growth, while several other historically significant filers including Ericsson, Microsoft Technology Licensing, Rakuten Mobile and Verizon Patent and Licensing show zero filings in that same year. Samsung Electronics logged a single filing in the latest year. This mix suggests the field's competitive centre of gravity is narrowing even as the overall filing base remains broad across dozens of assignees.
Growth has flattened rather than accelerated. Filings rose from 3 in 2017 to a midpoint of 85 in 2022 and a peak of 109 in 2024, but the gap between the 2022 and 2024 figures is modest relative to the earlier climb, and several long-standing filers have dropped to zero filings in the latest year. That pattern is more consistent with a maturing claim space than an emerging one, though partial-year 2025-2026 data should be read with the publication lag in mind.
The corpus concentrates heavily in H04W (wireless communication networks, 324 records) and H04L (digital information transmission, 238 records), reflecting that quality control is mostly claimed as a networking and transmission-layer mechanism. Smaller clusters appear in G06F (data processing, 47), G06N (AI-based computing methods, 21) and single-digit-to-low-double-digit counts in H04B, H04J, H04M and G06K. The relatively thin G06N presence indicates AI-driven slice management is a minority claim strategy so far.
The clearest under-claimed branches sit where AI-based prediction methods intersect with slice SLA monitoring, security-triggered slice reassignment, and multiplex-layer or data-recognition classifications that carry only single-digit record counts. These areas sit adjacent to the dense H04W/H04L core rather than replacing it, which means a first claim there would need to specify the AI or cross-layer mechanism precisely enough to distinguish it from the broad monitoring and assurance claims already on file.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Network Slicing Quality Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Network Slicing Quality Control in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole network slicing quality control 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.