Book a demo

Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays Patents: Leaders & White Space 2026

Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays Patents: Leaders & White Space 2026
https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/silicon-photomultiplier-arrays-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Sensors & Actuators
Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays Patents: Who Leads and Where the Gaps Are
  • 83 of 212 records sit with the top five assignees (39.2%), but 47 more companies still hold ranked positions — this is a concentrated field with a real long tail.
  • Filings peaked in 2017 at 27 and fell to 6 by 2024 (down 68% from 2021's 19) — publication lag means the last two years are still filling in, not necessarily declining.
  • G01T dominates at 39.6% of records, tied to PET/radiation detection, while dynamic-range and recovery-time claims sit thinner across G01J and G06F.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
212
Published Records
39%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-68%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (19 records) with 2024 (6) — 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 212 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What the SiPM array patent record actually shows

Silicon photomultiplier arrays sit at the intersection of semiconductor device physics and detection system engineering, which is why the 212 records in scope span classes as different as G01T (nuclear and X-radiation measurement) and G06F (digital data processing). The search string was built around the operational pain points that actually separate one SiPM design from another — crosstalk between microcells, gain uniformity, dynamic range, temperature coefficient, recovery time and packing density — rather than the device name alone, so the corpus should be read as claims about performance tuning, not just device structure.

Filing rose to a 2017 peak and has since receded, a pattern consistent with an early land-grab around core microcell architecture followed by consolidation into fewer, more defensible filings. Reading the trend past 2024 as a real slowdown would be premature: publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2015–2026
  1. 1KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS NV29
  2. 2MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC17
  3. 3MOTIONAL AD LLC13
  4. 4SENSL TECH12
  5. 5SEMICON COMPONENTS IND LLC12
  6. 6FNV IP BV11
  7. 7SHENZHEN MINDRAY BIO MEDICAL ELECTRONICS CO LTD10
  8. 8NXP BV8
  9. 9NAT RES COUNCIL OF CANADA8
  10. 10UNIV OF NOTRE DAME DU LAC7
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays 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
The Numbers

Filing trend and technology composition

Two views of the same 212-record corpus: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.

Filing trend: a 2017 peak followed by a real contraction

Filings ran from 27 in 2017 down to 2 in the still-partial 2026 count. The clearest complete-year comparison is 2021 (19) to 2024 (6), a 68% drop — a genuine contraction in new filing, not an artefact of lag, since both years are fully published.

Filing trend: a 2017 peak followed by a real contraction081523302720172018201920202021202220232024202522026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

IPC composition: detection applications outweigh raw device claims

G01T (39.6% of records) and G01J (15.6%) point to radiation and light measurement as the dominant application context, ahead of H01L (23.6%), the semiconductor device class itself. G01S (13.7%), G01N (12.7%), A61B (11.3%), G06F (8.5%) and H04N (8.0%) show the device reused across positioning, material analysis, medical and imaging systems — because a record can carry several classes, these shares add to more than 100% of the 212 records.

IPC composition: detection applications outweigh raw device claimsG01T · Nuclear & X-radiation measurem…8439.6%H01L · Semiconductor devices5023.6%G01J · Radiation & light measurement3315.6%G01S · Radar, sonar & positioning2913.7%G01N · Material analysis & testing2712.7%A61B · Diagnosis & surgery2411.3%G06F · Electric digital data processi…188.5%H04N · Pictorial communication (video…178.0%Other5124.1%

Shares are the percentage of the 212 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 Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about silicon photomultiplier arrays and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key Patents

The most-cited records anchor TOF-PET applications

Representative Filing
US9810795B22017-11-07

US9810795B2 — Method and apparatus to minimise the onset and recovery time of a silicon photomultiplier

SENSL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.

Silicon photomultiplier circuitry is provided that comprises at least one silicon photomultiplier pixel, each pixel comprising a plurality of silicon photomultiplier microcells. The silicon photomultiplier circuitry comprises control circuitry adapted to maintain a substantially constant voltage on a connection node between microcells of the pixel. The control circuitry is adapted to minimize the onset and recovery time of an output signal by maintaining a substantially constant voltage on the connection node.Filed by Sensl Technologies; issued 2017-11-07.

US9810795B2 — patent drawing 1US9810795B2 — patent drawing 2
View full filing
Highest-cited records in the corpus
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1WO2006111883A2Digital silicon photomultiplier for TOF-pet148
2US20080203309A1Digital silicon photomultiplier for TOF-PET119
3US20100010343A1Detection of radiation labeled sites using a radiation detection probe or camera incorporating a solid state …98
4US8395127B1Digital silicon photomultiplier for TOF PET97
5US20160266260A1SiPM-BASED RADIATION DETECTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS82
6US20180039053A1Device and method for detecting light72
7US20100316184A1Silicon photomultiplier detector for computed tomography66
8US8068896B2Detection of radiation labeled sites using a radiation detection probe or camera incorporating a solid state …54
9US7723694B2Digital silicon photomultiplier for TOF-PET53
10JP2010536186Aシリコンフォトマルチプライヤ回路に関連する方法及び装置49

Citation counts favour older filings simply by virtue of longer exposure — read them as a signal of influence on downstream work, not as a ranking of current technical importance.

Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays 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
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 →
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 concentration and citation data mean for filing strategy

Three figures worth sitting with before deciding where to file next: how tight the top of the ranking is, how far filing volume has actually receded, and which application context is absorbing most of the claim activity.

Concentration
39.2%
of 212 records held by the top 5 assignees

Leadership is real but not total

The leader holds 29 records with fifth place at 12 and tenth at 7 — a steep drop from first to fifth, then a much flatter tail across 57 ranked companies. New entrants are not blocked outright; they are competing for space below the top tier.

Based on the assignee ranking, 212 records in scope.
Filing momentum
-68%
2021 (19) to 2024 (6), complete years only

A genuine pullback, not a lag artefact

Because both 2021 and 2024 are fully published, this drop reflects real filing behaviour rather than the reporting delay that affects 2025 and 2026. It suggests core microcell architecture claims are maturing and fewer entities see fresh whitespace there.

2017 remains the peak year at 27 filings.
Application pull
39.6%
of records classed under G01T

Radiation detection is the dominant use case

G01T's share, well ahead of G01J at 15.6%, shows that TOF-PET and related radiation-measurement systems have driven a disproportionate share of SiPM array claims, consistent with the most-cited records in the corpus all being PET-related.

Class shares sum to more than 100% because records carry multiple IPC codes.
Filing geography
100
US-office records, the largest single office

Filing is US-anchored with a real European and PCT presence

Europe (EPO) accounts for 34 and WIPO (PCT) filings for 26, with China at 18 and the UK at 8 — a filing footprint that still runs through US and European offices first rather than China-first.

Receiving-office counts across the 212-record corpus.
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 silicon photomultiplier arrays, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays 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

A concentrated top tier over a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants

57 companies appear in the ranked list. The leader sits well ahead of the field at 29 records, but the drop to a flatter tail below tenth place (7 records) means the ranking rewards sustained filing more than any single breakthrough claim.

Leader
29
records

The top assignee holds a clear lead

With 29 records against a fifth-place figure of 12, the leading assignee's position rests on volume built over years rather than a single pivotal filing — consistent with its presence among the most-cited TOF-PET records.

Assignee ranking, 212-record corpus.
Mid tier
12 → 7
fifth to tenth place

The tier below the leader is tightly packed

The gap from fifth (12) to tenth (7) is far narrower than first to fifth, meaning several companies are realistically contesting the same claim space rather than one runner-up chasing the leader.

Positions 5 and 10 in the ranking.
Long tail
57
ranked companies

Most assignees hold only a handful of records

Beyond the top ten (which together hold 59.9% of all 212 records), the remaining 47 ranked companies split the rest thinly — a sign that entry is still possible outside the core detection-application claims.

Full ranked list as returned by the data endpoint.
Collaboration
9
co-assignee pairs

Co-filing is limited and concentrated around one player

Only 9 co-assignee pairs appear in the corpus, and the strongest repeated pairings all involve the same leading assignee working with named inventors or a related corporate entity, rather than cross-company joint ventures.

Co-assignee pair counts across the corpus.
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas worth checking before filing
Branches where the IPC composition and citation pattern suggest thinner claim density relative to the core detection use case.
Microcell crosstalk suppression circuitsDynamic-range extension at high count ratesTemperature-coefficient compensation schemesPacking-density layout for fill-factor gainsRecovery-time control outside PET contexts
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Koninklijke Philips N.V.0
Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC0
Motional AD LLC0
Sensl Technologies, Ltd.0
Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC0
Shenzhen Mindray Bio-Medical Electronics Co., Ltd.0
FNV IP B.V.0
NXP B.V.0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays 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 next

The dataset points to two practical next steps: checking freedom-to-operate against the densest claim clusters, and scanning the thinner branches for a defensible first filing.

Map claim boundaries around the cited TOF-PET filings

The most-cited records concentrate around digital SiPM architecture for time-of-flight PET. Before filing in that space, a clause-by-clause read of those claims against your own circuit topology is the fastest way to find out whether you have room.

Explore the citation network in Eureka

Test a first claim in an under-claimed branch

Dynamic-range extension, temperature-coefficient compensation and non-PET recovery-time control show thinner representation relative to the core detection classes. Drafting a claim there and checking it against prior art directly is a faster test than reading the landscape alone.

Draft and check a claim in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays 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 SiPM array patents

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays 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 Silicon Photomultiplier Arrays in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole silicon photomultiplier arrays corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

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.

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.