Atomic Clock Interrogation Patents: Leaders & White Space 2026
A data-backed look at atomic clock interrogation patents: who leads filings, how the technology splits across laser, oscillator and timing classes, and where claim space is still open.
Filing growth = 2021 (19 records) → 2024 (22); 2024 is the last year we treat as complete. Top-5 share = the 5 largest assignees ÷ all 515 records in scope (CR5), not the ranked leaders only.
What atomic clock interrogation patenting actually covers
Atomic clock interrogation is the set of methods and hardware used to probe an atomic or ionic reference — via laser spectroscopy, Ramsey pulses, or coherent population trapping — and lock a local oscillator to that reference’s clock transition. The 515 records in this dataset span filings from 2015 through the 2026 cut-off, capturing both the classic microwave atomic clock lineage and the more recent wave of optical-clock and chip-scale vapor-cell work. Because interrogation sits at the interface of laser physics, RF control electronics and precision timing, most records carry claims that touch more than one classification family at once.
The picture that emerges is one of a technology with a small set of entities holding a disproportionate share of filings, sitting on top of a wide base of single- or few-filing entrants. Reading the classification split alongside the assignee concentration tells a filer where the crowded ground is — largely in oscillator control and laser-source hardware — and where a differentiated claim might still land cleanly.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 515-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those records classify across the IPC subclasses that matter most to atomic clock interrogation.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Annual filings rose from 25 in 2017 to a peak of 40 in 2023, with a documented 16% increase between 2021 (19 records) and 2024 (22 records) — the last year in this window that can be treated as complete before publication lag thins out the count. Readings for 2025 and 2026 should be read as partial, not as a slowdown.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in. Growth rates on this page therefore end at 2024; running them to the last bar would understate the field.
IPC subclass distribution
Time-interval measuring (G04F, 48.5% of records) and laser & stimulated-emission hardware (H01S, 32.6%) anchor the field, with automatic frequency and phase control (H03L, 29.1%) close behind — together describing the core interrogation-and-lock loop. Oscillation generation, material analysis, optical modulation and optical elements each cover a smaller share, marking narrower or newer branches of the same technology.
Shares are the percentage of the 515 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Quantum Sensing & Metrology: Atomic Clock Interrogation Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about quantum sensing & metrology: atomic clock interrogation patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a representative filing
Optical Atomic Clock (US20170176949A1)
The filing describes an optical atomic clock that locks a source laser to a whispering-gallery-mode optical resonator, generates hyperparametric sidebands through multi-wave mixing, and separately locks a reference laser to an atomic reference via a second resonator — chaining the two resonators together so the source laser output is ultimately referenced to the clock transition without directly matching its wavelength.Filed by OEWAVES, INC., published 2017-06-22.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5394490A | Semiconductor device having an optical waveguide interposed in the space between electrode members | 274 |
| 2 | US20050007118A1 | Micromachined alkali-atom vapor cells and method of fabrication | 163 |
| 3 | US6785303B1 | Generation of stabilized, ultra-short light pulses and the use thereof for synthesizing optical frequencies | 153 |
| 4 | US6477285B1 | Integrated circuits with optical signal propagation | 152 |
| 5 | US6265945B1 | Atomic frequency standard based upon coherent population trapping | 147 |
| 6 | US5721514A | Digital frequency generation in atomic frequency standards using digital phase shifting | 145 |
| 7 | US5714910A | Methods and apparatus for digital frequency generation in atomic frequency standards | 130 |
| 8 | US5192921A | Miniaturized atomic frequency standard | 122 |
| 9 | US20130003766A1 | Compact optical atomic clocks and applications based on parametric nonlinear optical mixing in whispering gal… | 115 |
| 10 | US20070247241A1 | Batch-fabricated, RF-interrogated, end transition, chip-scale atomic clock | 115 |
Citation counts favour older filings inside any searched corpus and should be read as a signal of influence on later work, not as a marker 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 says before you file
Four figures from this dataset that change how a filing or freedom-to-operate decision should be framed.
Five entities hold a third of the field
The top five assignees combined account for 172 of the 515 records in scope. One leader alone holds 64 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 20 — a gap that suggests a genuine incumbent rather than a crowded tie at the top.
Filing volume climbed through the last complete window
Annual filings rose from 19 in 2021 to 22 in 2024, and the field peaked at 40 records in 2023. Treat 2025 and 2026 counts as undercounted rather than declining, since publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
Timing hardware dominates the classification spread
Time-interval measuring and laser & stimulated-emission classes cover the largest shares of the dataset, with automatic frequency control close behind. Optical modulation, material analysis and electric/magnetic measurement classes sit at single-digit-to-low-teens shares, marking narrower technical branches.
US and EPO routes carry most of the volume
United States filings lead at 229 records, with the EPO route at 99 and the WIPO/PCT route at 38. Germany, Austria and Israel each register in the mid-to-high twenties, pointing to a filing footprint concentrated in a handful of jurisdictions rather than spread evenly worldwide.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to quantum sensing & metrology: atomic clock interrogation patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific questions worth running further before committing a filing strategy or a freedom-to-operate review.
Map the incumbent's claim boundaries
With one assignee holding 64 of 515 records, understanding exactly what that portfolio claims — and where its independent claims stop — is the first step before filing into oscillator control or laser-lock subject matter.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaProbe the under-claimed classification branches
Optical elements, electric/magnetic measurement and material analysis each cover single-digit shares of the dataset. Confirming whether that reflects real technical difficulty or simply less filing interest can surface open claim space.
Run a white-space search in EurekaCommon questions on atomic clock interrogation patents
The dataset's assignee ranking, covering 515 records, shows one entity holding 64 records — well ahead of the fifth-ranked holder at 20 and the tenth-ranked holder at 10. The top five assignees combined account for 172 records, or 33.4% of all 515 records in scope, and the top ten reach 46.2%. That leaves a long tail of entities with only a handful of filings each, so the field is concentrated at the top without being a monopoly.
Filings rose from 25 in 2017 to a peak of 40 in 2023, and the 2021-to-2024 window — the most recent period that can be read as complete — shows 16% growth, from 19 to 22 records a year. Counts for 2025 and 2026 look lower only because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, so those years are still filling in rather than showing a genuine drop. Anyone tracking this space should expect the recent-year figures to rise as more filings publish.
Time-interval measuring (IPC class G04F) appears in 48.5% of the 515 records, making it the single largest classification, followed by laser and stimulated-emission hardware (H01S) at 32.6% and automatic frequency or phase control (H03L) at 29.1%. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should be read as overlapping coverage rather than a strict breakdown. Smaller classes — material analysis, optical modulation, electric and magnetic measurement, and optical elements — each cover under 8% of records and mark narrower or emerging sub-branches.
The United States is the largest receiving office with 229 records, followed by the European Patent Office at 99 and the WIPO/PCT route at 38. Austria, Israel and Germany each register in the mid-to-high twenties. This spread indicates that most applicants prioritise US protection first, then extend selectively into Europe and a small number of additional jurisdictions rather than filing broadly worldwide.
This filing, assigned to OEWAVES, INC. and published in 2017, claims an optical atomic clock architecture that locks a source laser to a whispering-gallery-mode resonator and generates optical sidebands through multi-wave mixing, while a separate reference laser locks to an atomic reference via a second resonator chained to the first. The result is an RF output referenced to the atomic clock transition without the source laser itself operating at that transition's wavelength. Anyone designing a dual-resonator or sideband-generation approach to optical clock stabilisation should review its specific claim language before assuming a design-around is clean.
Research Quantum Sensing & Metrology: Atomic Clock Interrogation Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole quantum sensing & metrology: atomic clock interrogation patent landscape 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.