Power and Force Limiting Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- Filing has cooled, not collapsed. annual filings fell from 1,000 in 2021 to 647 in 2024, a 35% drop over three years, after peaking at 1,058 in 2019.
- No single filer dominates. the leader holds 41,685 records but the top 5 combined account for only 6.7% of all 1,553,057 records in scope, and the top 10 just 10.3%.
- Momentum is thinning even among leaders. several of the largest historical filers show year-on-year filing drops of 88% to 100% in the latest tracked year.
Filing growth compares 2021 (1,000 records) with 2024 (647) — 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 1,553,057 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks patent activity around power and force limiting collaborative operation — the control, protection and impedance schemes that let machines share physical space and physical contact with people or other equipment without exceeding safe force or power thresholds. The search spans transient response, quasi-static contact, payload-aware speed envelopes, compliant covering and force distribution claims filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026. Coverage runs to 1,553,057 records, filtered on title, abstract and claim-description language rather than a single classification code, which is why the technology composition below is spread thin across several IPC subclasses rather than concentrated in one.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years in any trend understate real filing activity — 2024 is the last year that can be read as complete, and everything after it is still filling in.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 1,553,057-record set: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how the subject matter splits across IPC subclasses.
A cooling curve, not a cliff
Filings ran from 797 in 2017 to a peak of 1,058 in 2019, then eased to 647 by 2024 — a 35% decline over the 2021-2024 span. The 2025 and 2026 figures (57 for the partial latest year) are undercounts caused by publication lag, not evidence of a stalled field.
Spread across power, compute and RF classes
No single IPC subclass dominates: H02J (power supply and grid systems) leads at 0.2% of all records, closely followed by G06F, H04W and H04L, each also near 0.1-0.2%. Because records carry multiple classes, these shares overlap rather than sum to a whole, which reflects how tightly power-limiting claims are entangled with digital control and wireless-communication subject matter.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,553,057 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Power and Force Limiting Collaborative Operation with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about power and force limiting collaborative operation and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in the field
US12307378B1 — Labeling transient voltage stability samples in a power grid via semi-supervised learning
The filing describes a method for labeling transient voltage stability samples in a power grid using semi-supervised learning: it builds a voltage time-series trajectory for each load bus under a set of transient operating scenarios, preliminarily labels the stability status of each scenario into a class-label dataset, then splits the resulting sample set into labeled and unlabeled subsets before propagating labels across them.Filed by Hunan University, published 2025-05-20 — illustrates how grid-side transient stability classification is being claimed as a data-labeling method rather than a hardware or control-loop invention.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20160249910A1 | Surgical charging system that charges and/or conditions one or more batteries | 2,416 |
| 2 | US10182816B2 | Charging system that enables emergency resolutions for charging a battery | 2,183 |
| 3 | US9733663B2 | Power management through segmented circuit and variable voltage protection | 1,843 |
| 4 | US20080315829A1 | Power Supply Systems for Electrical Devices | 1,545 |
| 5 | US20040143297A1 | Advanced automatic external defibrillator powered by alternative and optionally multiple electrical power sou… | 1,509 |
| 6 | US20150280424A1 | Power management through segmented circuit and variable voltage protection | 1,405 |
| 7 | US6458142B1 | Force limiting mechanism for an ultrasonic surgical instrument | 1,380 |
| 8 | US6104162A | Method and apparatus for multi-power source for power tools | 1,356 |
| 9 | US5540681A | Method and system for radiofrequency ablation of tissue | 1,281 |
| 10 | US20120235636A1 | Systems and methods for providing positioning freedom, and support of different voltages, protocols, and powe… | 1,197 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus skew toward older filings, which have had more time to accumulate citations — read them as a signal of influence on later filers, not as a ranking of current technical importance.
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 filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once the raw counts are read against each other.
The field is fragmented at the top
The leading assignee holds 41,685 records, yet the five largest filers together account for only 6.7% of all records in scope, and the ten largest for 10.3%. That leaves the overwhelming majority of filing activity distributed across a long tail of smaller entrants rather than locked up by a handful of incumbents.
Growth has slowed since 2019's peak
Annual filings peaked at 1,058 in 2019 and eased to 647 by 2024, a 35% decline across a three-year window of complete data. Several of the historically largest filers show year-on-year drops of 88% to 100% in the latest tracked year, suggesting the pullback is broad rather than isolated to one company.
Subject matter spans power, compute and RF
No IPC subclass captures more than a fraction of a percent of the record set on its own; H02J, G06F, H04W and H04L all sit close together near the top. That spread signals that force- and power-limiting claims are typically bundled with digital control or communication subject matter rather than filed as standalone mechanical or electrical safety inventions.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to power and force limiting collaborative operation, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and who has pulled back
The assignee ranking spans consumer electronics, telecom infrastructure and industrial equipment names, but recent-year momentum tells a different story from historical volume.
Largest cumulative filer sits well ahead of fifth place
The top-ranked assignee's record count is roughly three times fifth place (13,502), but that gap says more about years of accumulated filing than about current activity — several long-standing leaders show sharp year-on-year declines in the latest tracked year.
Even the biggest names are filing far less
Several of the assignees with the largest historical footprints show year-on-year filing drops between 88% and 100% in the most recent tracked year. That pattern, combined with the broader -35% three-year decline, points to a field where prior claim positions are being held rather than actively expanded.
Co-assignment is limited and concentrated
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest pairings tied to a small number of large organisations. That scarcity suggests most filings in this space come from single-assignee R&D rather than joint ventures or cross-licensed development programmes.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| LG Electronics | 2 | -71% |
| Qualcomm Inc. | 1 | -96% |
| CAUSAM ENERGY INC | 1 | -88% |
| General Electric Co. | 0 | -100% |
| Intel Corp. | 0 | -100% |
| Texas Instruments Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| International Business Machines Corp. (IBM) | 0 | -100% |
| Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a fragmented field with a cooling filing curve — the open questions are about where specific claim space remains unoccupied.
Map the compliant-covering and speed-envelope branches
The composition data shows filing spread thinly across power, compute and RF classes, with no subclass concentrated enough to signal a settled claim structure in mechanical safety covering or payload-aware speed control.
Explore white space in EurekaTrack the leaders showing momentum reversal
Several of the largest historical filers have pulled back sharply in the latest tracked year; watching whether that continues into 2025-2026 filings once publication lag clears will show whether the pullback is strategic or temporary.
Set up assignee monitoring in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
The dataset in scope contains 1,553,057 published records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026, drawn from a search across title, abstract and claim-description language rather than a single classification code. That figure covers all records matching the search terms, not a narrower count restricted to granted patents or a single jurisdiction. Because the search is language-based, it captures adjacent subject matter in power management, transient stability and impedance control alongside core collaborative-robotics force limiting claims.
The assignee ranking covers 100 companies, with the leader holding 41,685 records and fifth place at 13,502. Despite that gap, the top 5 assignees combined account for only 6.7% of all 1,553,057 records in scope, and the top 10 for 10.3%, which means the field is far from dominated by a small group of incumbents. Most of the filing volume sits in a long tail of smaller entrants rather than concentrated leadership.
Filing peaked at 1,058 records in 2019 and declined to 647 by 2024, a 35% drop across that three-year span of complete data. Figures for 2025 and 2026 look much lower still, but that reflects publication lag — patent applications typically publish around 18 months after filing, so recent years are always undercounted at the time of analysis. Several of the historically largest filers also show year-on-year declines of 88% to 100% in the latest tracked year, reinforcing that the slowdown is broad rather than tied to one company pulling back.
US12307378B1, filed by Hunan University and published 2025-05-20, claims a method for labeling transient voltage stability samples in a power grid using semi-supervised learning. It builds a voltage time-series trajectory per load bus across a set of transient operating scenarios, applies preliminary stability labels into a class-label dataset, then splits the resulting sample set into labeled and unlabeled subsets for further label propagation. It is a data-classification method rather than a hardware or real-time control-loop invention, which narrows what it can block for someone building an actual force- or power-limiting control system.
The technology composition shows filing spread thinly across power supply, digital processing, wireless communication and power conversion classes, with no subclass exceeding roughly 0.2% of all records. Branches tied to compliant covering materials, payload-aware speed envelopes and quasi-static contact force distribution show comparatively little concentrated claim activity relative to the field's overall volume. That thinness suggests room for narrowly drafted claims in those specific mechanisms, though a full freedom-to-operate search against the most-cited records is still necessary before filing.
Research Power and Force Limiting Collaborative Operation in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole power and force limiting collaborative operation 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.