Quantitative Phase Imaging Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- One filer sits well clear of the field. The leader holds 87 records against a fifth-place count of 43 and a tenth-place count of 22, a steep drop-off rather than a gradual taper.
- Filing has cooled hard from its peak. Activity peaked at 123 records in 2021 and fell to 49 by 2024, a 60% decline over that three-year span.
- Holography and material analysis dominate the claim space. G01N and G03H classes cover 42.2% and 32.8% of the 895 records in scope respectively, leaving narrower classes like C12M and G03F comparatively open.
Filing growth compares 2021 (123 records) with 2024 (49) — 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 895 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What quantitative phase and label-free imaging patents actually cover
Quantitative phase imaging and related label-free microscopy techniques recover optical path-length or refractive-index information from a sample without stains or fluorescent tags, using interferometric or holographic capture followed by numerical reconstruction. The patent activity in this space spans three layers: the optical hardware that captures interference or diffraction patterns, the reconstruction algorithms that turn raw intensity data into phase or refractive-index maps, and the application layer — cell biology, dry mass measurement, lithography metrology — where the imaging output gets used. Search terms in this dataset combine core techniques like holographic microscopy with functional claims around refractive index mapping, reconstruction algorithms and imaging throughput, which is why records cluster so heavily in material analysis and holography IPC classes rather than in a single narrow art.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years in any trend understate real activity; the 2024 figures are the last that can be read as complete.
Filing trend and technology composition
The dataset covers 895 published records dated 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off, ranked across 100 assignees by patent family.
A sharp rise, then a sharp pull-back
Filings rose from 50 in 2017 to a peak of 123 in 2021, then fell to 49 by 2024 — a 60% decline over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in given publication lag and should not be read as a continuation of decline.
Where the claims sit
G01N (material analysis & testing) touches 42.2% of records and G03H (holography) 32.8%, confirming that most filings anchor either the measurement claim or the holographic capture method. G02B (optical elements) at 27.7% and G06T (image data processing) at 13.0% show the hardware/software split within that core; smaller classes like C12M (bioreactors, 5.5%) and G03F (photolithography, 5.4%) mark where the application layer is thinner. Records can carry several IPC classes, so these shares sum to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 895 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Quantitative Phase and Label-Free Imaging with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about quantitative phase and label-free imaging and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this field
Multiple-wavelength quantitative phase imaging (QPI)
The present disclosure is directed to systems and methods for performing multiwavelength quantitative phase imaging (QPI). The QPI systems and methods are well suited for imaging biological cells. For example, the QPI system can have a relatively simple configuration and can be employed with microscopes for analyzing biological cells without having to modify the hardware (e.g., the auxiliary image pathway) of the microscope. In addition, the QPI systems and methods can be used for other applications, such as lens testing and atmospheric correction of images captured by cell phone cameras, for example.Filed by Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona, published 2023-03-09.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20190333199A1 | Systems and methods for deep learning microscopy | 254 |
| 2 | US20120218379A1 | Incoherent lensfree cell holography and microscopy on a chip | 252 |
| 3 | US6262818B1 | Method for simultaneous amplitude and quantitative phase contrast imaging by numerical reconstruction of digi… | 222 |
| 4 | US20140118529A1 | Fourier Ptychographic Imaging Systems, Devices, and Methods | 166 |
| 5 | US20150160450A1 | Embedded pupil function recovery for fourier ptychographic imaging devices | 162 |
| 6 | US20120248292A1 | Lens-free wide-field super-resolution imaging device | 129 |
| 7 | US20140133702A1 | Methods for Rapid Distinction between Debris and Growing Cells | 112 |
| 8 | WO2000020929A1 | Method and apparatus for simultaneous amplitude and quantitative phase contrast imaging by numerical reconstr… | 105 |
| 9 | US20120223217A1 | E-petri dishes, devices, and systems | 100 |
| 10 | US20150054979A1 | Variable-illumination fourier ptychographic imaging devices, systems, and methods | 96 |
Citation counts are drawn from within this searched corpus and favour older, earlier-filed documents — treat them as a signal of influence on later filers, not of current commercial relevance.
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 decisions
Three patterns stand out once the ranking, the trend and the IPC mix are read together.
The top of the field is narrow
The top 5 assignees combined account for 331 records, 37.0% of all 895 in scope, and the top 10 add up to 51.2%. The gap from leader (87) to fifth place (43) is steep, meaning a handful of players set the terms in the core claim areas while the rest of the ranked 100 hold much smaller, often single-digit positions.
Growth peaked in 2021 and has not returned
Filing volume climbed from 50 records in 2017 to a peak of 123 in 2021, then dropped to 49 by 2024, a 60% fall. That is a real pull-back in complete-year data, not an artifact of publication lag, though 2025-2026 figures will still revise upward as later publications land.
Measurement and holography crowd the center; application classes stay thin
G01N and G03H together touch the large majority of records, showing that most claims are still fought over the core measurement and holographic-reconstruction methods. Application-adjacent classes like C12M (bioreactors) and G03F (photolithography) sit at 5.5% and 5.4%, suggesting less-crowded ground for claims tied to specific downstream uses.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to quantitative phase and label-free imaging, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and who has slowed
Recent-year momentum diverges sharply from historical leadership: several of the largest historical filers show no activity in the latest year, while one mid-table player is still adding.
A single filer well ahead of the pack
The leading assignee holds 87 records against a fifth-place count of 43, a gap wide enough that no single competitor is close to matching its position across the full ranking period.
One smaller filer is still active while historical leaders go quiet
Thrive Bioscience shows 2 records in the latest year for +100% year-on-year growth, while several historically larger filers, including California Institute of Technology and the University of California, show 0 in the latest year for -100% YoY — a reminder that recent-year counts are thin and still subject to publication lag.
Collaboration is concentrated around one lithography player
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest of them center on ASML working jointly with university and research-foundation partners, pointing to a specific lithography-metrology collaboration cluster rather than broad cross-industry co-filing.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| THRIVE BIOSCIENCE INC | 2 | +100% |
| ASML Netherlands B.V. | 1 | -75% |
| California Institute of Technology | 0 | -100% |
| The Regents of the University of California | 0 | -100% |
| Ovizio Imaging Systems NV/SA | 0 | — |
| Interuniversity Microelectronics Centre (IMEC) | 0 | — |
| ASTRIN BIOSCIENCES INC | 0 | — |
| Ramot at Tel Aviv University Ltd. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The figures above answer where filing has concentrated and where it has thinned out. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision needs a closer read of the actual claim boundaries.
Map the claim boundaries around the leader's 87 records
A concentration this steep at the top usually means dense, overlapping claim scope in the core reconstruction and capture methods. Before filing nearby, check what those 87 records actually cover.
Explore the claim map in EurekaCheck the under-claimed classes before committing R&D
C12M and G03F sit well below the core classes in record share. That could mean genuine white space, or it could mean the application layer is not yet defined by IPC in the way the core technique is.
Run a white space search in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
The dataset ranks 100 assignees by patent family, and one filer leads clearly with 87 records, well ahead of the fifth-place assignee at 43. The top 5 assignees combined hold 331 records, 37.0% of the 895 records in scope, and the top 10 combined hold 51.2%. That is a steep drop-off rather than a gradual taper, meaning a small number of organizations set the terms in the core claim areas while most of the ranked 100 hold much smaller positions.
Filing rose from 50 records in 2017 to a peak of 123 in 2021, then fell to 49 by 2024, a 60% decline over that three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year that can be read as a complete count; 2025 and 2026 figures will still revise upward as publications catch up, since publication typically lags filing by around 18 months. Read the recent downturn as real but not necessarily final until later-year data settles.
G01N (material analysis and testing) covers 42.2% of the 895 records in scope, and G03H (holography) covers 32.8%, making these the two dominant classes. G02B (optical elements and systems) and G06T (image data processing) follow at 27.7% and 13.0% respectively. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should not be summed into one total.
US20230073901A1, filed by Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona and published 2023-03-09, covers systems and methods for multiple-wavelength quantitative phase imaging designed to work with existing microscope hardware without modifying the auxiliary image pathway. Its scope centers on a specific multi-wavelength QPI configuration rather than phase imaging broadly, so it constrains designs that follow that particular optical path and wavelength-switching approach more than it blocks the field generally. Anyone building a QPI system should check its claim language against their own optical configuration rather than assume general exclusion.
The thinner IPC classes in this dataset — C12M (bioreactors and enzyme apparatus) at 5.5% of records and G03F (photolithography and photomechanics) at 5.4% — sit well below the dominant G01N and G03H classes, suggesting the application layer around bioreactor integration and lithography metrology is less crowded than the core measurement and holography methods. That does not guarantee open claim space, since low record counts can also reflect a smaller addressable niche, but it is a reasonable starting point for a freedom-to-operate check before committing to a specific application claim.
Research Quantitative Phase and Label-Free Imaging in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole quantitative phase and label-free imaging 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.