Resistivity and Induction Logging Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- One filer dominates the ranking. the leading assignee holds 175 records against a fifth-place figure of 48 and a tenth-place figure of 15 — a steep drop-off rather than a gradual one.
- Filing has pulled back sharply. filings fell from 11 in 2021 to 3 in 2024, a -73% swing over that three-year span, even before accounting for publication lag.
- Claims cluster in two IPC subclasses. G01V (87.6% of the 492 records) and E21B (38.2%) dominate, leaving digital-processing and AI-adjacent classes each under 6% of the same record base.
Filing growth compares 2021 (11 records) with 2024 (3) — 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.
What this field covers
Resistivity and induction logging patents cover the tools and inversion methods used to infer formation properties — invasion profiles, anisotropy, mud filtrate resistivity, shoulder-bed effects — from electromagnetic measurements taken in a wellbore. The search scope combines array induction, laterolog and triaxial induction hardware claims with the correction and inversion techniques (skin effect correction, resistivity inversion) that turn raw signal into a usable formation model. This is a mature oilfield-services discipline: the most-cited records in scope date back to the 1990s, and current filings mostly refine rather than reinvent the underlying physics.
The 492 records in scope span 2015 through mid-2026, with receiving-office activity concentrated in the United States, the PCT system, Canada and the United Kingdom. The data favours incumbents with existing tool platforms: a new inversion algorithm has to be paired with hardware claims or licensed access to compete for wellbore time.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 492-record set: filings by year, and the IPC subclasses those filings carry. Because a single record can carry more than one IPC subclass, the composition shares add up to more than 100%.
Filings peaked in 2017 and have since pulled back
2017 recorded 18 filings, the high point of the window. By 2024 — the most recent year that publication lag allows to be read as complete — annual filings had fallen to 3, down from 11 in 2021, a -73% move over that span. Years after 2024 are still filling in and should not be read as a continued decline.
G01V and E21B carry almost all the claim volume
G01V (geophysics and gravity surveying) appears on 87.6% of the 492 records and E21B (earth and rock drilling) on 38.2%, confirming this is fundamentally a downhole-measurement field. Digital-processing classes — G06F, G01N, G06G, H04W, G06N, G16Z — each sit at 5.3% or below, meaning software and AI-adjacent framing is present but still a minority claim strategy layered on top of the physical measurement.
Shares are the percentage of the 492 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Resistivity and Induction Logging with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about resistivity and induction logging and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited prior art
US9176252B2 — Estimating petrophysical parameters and invasion profile using joint induction and pressure data inversion approach
Methods and related systems are described relating to an inversion approach for interpreting geophysical electromagnetic data. The inversion can be constrained by using a multiphase fluid flow simulator, incorporating pressure data if available, which simulates the fluid flow process and calculates the spatial distribution of water saturation and salt concentration, transformed into formation conductivity using a resistivity-saturation formula. The inverted invasion profile is consistent with fluid flow physics and accounts for gravity segregation effects.Filed by Schlumberger Technology Corporation, 2015-11-03.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5867806A | System and method for performing inversion on LWD resistivity logs with enhanced resolution | 143 |
| 2 | US6023168A | Apparatus and method for measuring the resistivity of underground formations | 118 |
| 3 | US6061634A | Method and apparatus for characterizing earth formation properties through joint pressure-resistivity inversi… | 89 |
| 4 | US5663499A | Method for estimating permeability from multi-array induction logs | 88 |
| 5 | US20100126717A1 | Instrumented formation tester for injecting and monitoring of fluids | 85 |
| 6 | US6509738B1 | Electromagnetic induction well logging instrument having azimuthally sensitive response | 74 |
| 7 | US7046010B2 | Multi-mode microresistivity tool in boreholes drilled with conductive mud | 73 |
| 8 | US20100185393A1 | Estimating petrophysical parameters and invasion profile using joint induction and pressure data inversion ap… | 68 |
| 9 | US20030222651A1 | System and method for evaluation of thinly laminated earth formations | 66 |
| 10 | US20100082255A1 | Method for borehole correction, formation dip and azimuth determination and resistivity determination using m… | 62 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and skew toward older filings; treat them as a signal of foundational importance, not current filing activity.
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 numbers mean for a filing decision
Three patterns stand out once the ranking, the trend and the IPC composition are read together.
The gap between first and fifth is steep
The leading assignee's 175 records dwarf the fifth-place figure of 48 and the tenth-place figure of 15. That is a single dominant filer sitting above a long tail of 69 ranked companies, not a evenly split field — new entrants are filing into a space where one player has already staked most of the core inversion and hardware claims.
Filing pace has cooled across the leaders
Filings dropped from 11 in 2021 to 3 in 2024 industry-wide, and the largest named assignees each show 0 filings in the latest tracked year. That pattern is consistent with a technology where the core measurement physics is settled and remaining claims are increasingly incremental refinements rather than new platforms.
Claims sit overwhelmingly in geophysics, not software
G01V accounts for 87.6% of the 492 records and E21B for 38.2%, while every digital-processing class sits at 5.3% or under. An applicant leading with an AI or data-processing angle is filing into comparatively open claim territory relative to the crowded core measurement classes.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to resistivity and induction logging, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | Schlumberger Limited | 37 |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | Schlumberger Holdings Limited | 31 |
| Schlumberger Holdings Limited | Schlumberger Limited | 31 |
| Schlumberger Canada Limited | Schlumberger Limited | 26 |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | Schlumberger Canada Limited | 25 |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | Prad Research and Development Limited | 22 |
| Schlumberger Holdings Limited | Prad Research and Development Limited | 22 |
| Schlumberger Limited | Prad Research and Development Limited | 22 |
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the data, and the three strongest all link entities within the same corporate group — a pattern typical of multinational oilfield-services structures filing the same invention across regional subsidiaries rather than genuine cross-company collaboration.
Who holds the claim space, and where it thins out
The ranking (69 companies) is dominated by a small number of oilfield-services majors and their regional filing entities; below the top handful, filing counts drop off quickly into single-digit contributors.
A single dominant filer
The top-ranked assignee holds 175 records in this dataset, far ahead of the fifth-place figure of 48. Much of that volume is likely split across related corporate entities of the same group rather than one legal filer, which the co-assignee data supports.
A fast-thinning mid-tier
Between fifth place (48 records) and tenth place (15 records), filing counts fall by roughly two-thirds. This is where competitive-intelligence teams should watch most closely: these firms are active but have not yet built the density to block a well-drafted new claim.
The largest filers have gone quiet in the latest tracked year
Every one of the largest named assignees shows 0 filings in the latest tracked year. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this likely reflects incomplete data for 2025-2026 rather than an actual halt, but it does mean recent activity from these firms is currently invisible in the record.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | 0 | — |
| Schlumberger Technology Corporation | 0 | — |
| Schlumberger Holdings Limited | 0 | — |
| Schlumberger Canada Limited | 0 | — |
| Schlumberger Limited | 0 | — |
| Baker Hughes Holdings LLC | 0 | — |
| REEVES WIRELINE TECH LTD | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a mature core and a thinner periphery. Two directions make sense depending on whether the goal is defensive clearance or offensive filing.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the dominant filer
With one assignee holding 175 of the ranked records, any new hardware or inversion claim in the core G01V/E21B space should be checked against that portfolio specifically before drafting.
Explore prior art in Patsnap Eureka →Draft claims toward the under-claimed branches
AI-driven inversion, wireless telemetry integration and real-time correction algorithms all sit at low single-digit IPC shares of the 492 records — that is where a first-filer position is still realistically available.
Map white space in Patsnap Eureka →Common questions about resistivity and induction logging patents
One assignee leads the ranked field with 175 records, well ahead of the fifth-place company at 48 and tenth place at 15. This dataset's ranking covers 69 companies in total, and the drop from the leader to the rest of the field is steep rather than gradual. Several of the largest names in the ranking are related corporate entities of the same oilfield-services group, filed under slightly different legal names across jurisdictions, so the effective concentration at the top is likely even higher than the raw ranking suggests.
Filings fell from 11 in 2021 to 3 in 2024, a -73% change over that span, after peaking at 18 in 2017. That said, publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the years closest to the present are always undercounted and should not be read as proof of an ongoing decline. The safest read is that the technology's core measurement physics is well established, and filers are refining rather than staking new ground.
US9176252B2, assigned to Schlumberger Technology Corporation and filed in 2015, covers a method for estimating petrophysical parameters and invasion profiles by jointly inverting induction (electromagnetic) and pressure data, using a multiphase fluid flow simulator to constrain the inversion. It ties the inverted invasion profile to fluid flow physics and gravity segregation effects rather than treating resistivity inversion as a standalone electromagnetic problem. Anyone building a joint induction-pressure inversion workflow for invasion-profile estimation needs to check their approach against this claim scope specifically.
G01V (geophysics and gravity surveying) appears on 87.6% of the 492 records in scope, and E21B (earth and rock drilling for wells) on 38.2%, confirming that this is primarily a downhole hardware and measurement-physics field. Digital-processing and AI-adjacent classes such as G06F, G01N, G06G, H04W, G06N and G16Z each sit at 5.3% or below, so software and AI framing is present but still a secondary claim strategy layered onto the physical measurement. A record can carry multiple IPC classes, so these shares add up to more than 100% and should not be read as mutually exclusive categories.
The thinnest claim density sits in the digital-processing and AI-adjacent classes — G06N, H04W, G16Z — each under 6% of the 492 records, compared with the 87.6% share held by core geophysics claims. Practically, that means approaches combining triaxial or array induction data with machine-learning-based inversion, real-time shoulder-bed correction, or wireless telemetry integration are less crowded than the core hardware and inversion-algorithm space. Any new filing there should still be checked against the dominant assignee's existing portfolio, since large incumbents sometimes hold broad umbrella claims that reach into adjacent digital methods.
Research Resistivity and Induction Logging in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole resistivity and induction logging 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.