Silicon Photonics Simulation Patent Snapshot 2026
Ericsson holds a commanding lead in silicon photonics simulation, with the field concentrated around optical elements and systems. Annual filing volume has plateaued near its 2018 peak, suggesting a maturing but still active niche where optical transmission and MEMS-adjacent branches remain comparatively sparse.
Ericsson dominates a concentrated but narrow field
Ericsson (Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson) is the clear leader, followed by MIT and Huawei Technologies tied at the second position, with Zhejiang Lab and the Industrial Technology Research Institute rounding out the top five.
The top five filers account for 38% of the combined total among the ranked applicants visible in this query, indicating moderate-to-high concentration for a niche simulation topic. A meaningful tier gap separates the leader from the rest: Ericsson’s count is more than double that of any single challenger.
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) | 8 | |
| 2 | Massachusetts Institute of Technology | 3 | |
| 3 | Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. | 3 | |
| 4 | Zhejiang Lab | 2 | |
| 5 | DR INDIRA BAHADDUR | 2 | |
| 6 | Industrial Technology Research Institute | 2 | |
| 7 | International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) | 2 | |
| 8 | DR VENKATESWARA RAO KOLLI | 2 | |
| 9 | DR SREENIVASULU TUPAKULA | 2 | |
| 10 | Baylor University | 2 |
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | BEIJING UNIV OF POSTS & TELECOMM | 2 | |
| 12 | George Washington University | 2 | |
| 13 | ELECTRONICS & TELECOMM RES INST | 2 | |
| 14 | Colorado State University Research Foundation | 1 | |
| 15 | KIMERLING LIONEL C | 1 | |
| 16 | NATIONAL TECHNOLOGY & ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS OF SAN… | 1 | |
| 17 | DR KUMAR P K AN INDIAN NAT DEPT OF COMPUTER SCI EN… | 1 | |
| 18 | SOCKIN MICHAEL D | 1 | |
| 19 | NOKIA SOLUTIONS & NETWORKS OY | 1 | |
| 20 | University of Pavia | 1 |
Ericsson’s position implies an established simulation capability tied to optical network deployment; the presence of MIT and Huawei signals that both academic research and large-scale telecoms R&D are actively investing in this space.
The most recent 18–24 months of filings are subject to publication lag and should be treated as an undercount of actual activity. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
Filing activity has plateaued; optical elements dominate the technology mix
Two lenses—annual filing trend and IPC branch composition—reveal both the pace of invention and the technical priorities of active filers in silicon photonics simulation.
Annual filing trend
Filings peaked in 2018 and have oscillated at lower levels since, consistent with a field that has moved from rapid early growth into a plateau. The apparent decline in 2024–2026 data points reflects publication lag rather than a genuine drop in activity.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
G02B (Optical elements and systems) is the visible branch by a wide margin, reflecting simulation work centred on waveguides, couplers, and splitters. G02F (Optical control and modulation) is the clear second branch, while H04B (Transmission) and the MEMS, laser, and multiplexing classes each represent smaller but distinct clusters.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaHighly cited patent families surfaced by the query
Citation-heavy patent families returned by the query. Use this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents.
Optical coupling devices and silicon photonics chi…
Provided are optical coupling devices and silicon photonics chips having the same. the optical coupling device may include a lower layer having a first region and a second region, a first core layer disposed on the lower layer, the first core layer including first and second waveguides disposed on the first and second regions, respectively, a clad layer… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Optical coupling module | 41 |
| 2 | Hybrid photonic non-blocking wide spectrum WDM on-… | 39 |
| 3 | Optical coupling devices and silicon photonics chi… | 36 |
| 4 | Optical splitter including a trident structure | 28 |
| 5 | Optical coupling module | 20 |
| 6 | Silicon Photonic Device, Optical Polarisation Beam… | 19 |
| 7 | 一种基于硅基超材料的片上集成型光功率分束器 | 18 |
| 8 | Ultrafast ge/si resonator-based modulators for opt… | 18 |
Ranked by total forward citations. Citation counts favour older and broadly cited patent families, and broad or adjacent patents may appear when they match the search scope. Treat this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents. Some patent titles may be shown in their original, non-English language where an accurate translation could not be guaranteed.
What the structure means for R&D investment decisions
The combination of moderate concentration, a plateau lifecycle, and sparse adjacent branches points to specific strategic openings and risks for teams evaluating entry or expansion.
Field has plateaued near its 2018 peak
The lifecycle evidence indicates annual filings have plateaued near their 2018 peak, classifying this as a maturing niche. The 14% recent-window growth figure reflects multi-year accumulation rather than a fresh surge. Teams entering now face an established body of prior art, making differentiation on simulation methodology or specific device architecture more important than broad coverage.
Lifecycle: MaturityOne clear leader, several mid-tier challengers
Ericsson’s filing count is more than double that of MIT, Huawei, or any other challenger. The mid-tier is spread across telecoms firms, universities, and national labs, none of which has consolidated a second-place position. This fragmented challenger tier suggests the space below Ericsson is still contestable for a focused entrant with a differentiated simulation approach.
HHI: Moderate-HighNo co-applicant activity detected in scope
The evidence contains no recorded co-applicant filings in this corpus, meaning all active filers appear to be pursuing independent IP strategies. The absence of consortia or joint filings may reflect the niche size, or it may indicate an opportunity to anchor a collaborative simulation platform before larger alliances form. This finding should be revisited as the corpus grows.
Collaboration: None detectedUS-centric filings; Europe and China are secondary
The United States is the visible filing jurisdiction, followed by Europe (EPO), China, and WIPO (PCT). India also appears as a filing destination, consistent with the individual-inventor entries visible in the applicant ranking. Teams prioritising protection outside the US should note that European and Chinese coverage is thin relative to the technology’s commercial relevance in those markets.
Lead office: USGo beyond the landscape: Eureka’s TRIZ Solution agent breaks down an R&D problem and returns patented concept solutions, each with a technical approach and cited patent & literature evidence.
Co-filing pairs, ranked by the number of jointly-filed patent families.
Assignee snapshot from the current evidence set
The applicants below are visible in this query result. Because the evidence set is relatively small, read this section as a directional snapshot rather than a full competitive ranking.
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson
Ericsson’s portfolio is concentrated in G02B (Optical elements and systems), H04B (Transmission), and H05K (Printed circuits and assemblies), reflecting simulation work integrated into network hardware design. With 8 patent records, the company holds more than double the count of any single challenger. Applicant momentum data is not available in this corpus.
patent records: 8Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MIT’s focus is tilted toward G02F (Optical control and modulation), with a secondary position in G02B, pointing to simulation of active photonic components such as modulators rather than passive routing elements. At 3 patent records, MIT ties with Huawei Technologies for the second-ranked position. Applicant momentum data is not available in this corpus.
patent records: 3Frequently asked questions
The corpus in scope contains 25 patent families. This is a niche and technically specific topic, and the corpus size reflects that specialisation rather than any gap in search coverage.
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson is the leading filer, holding 8 patent records—more than double the count of any single challenger. MIT and Huawei Technologies are tied for second with 3 patent records each.
G02B (Optical elements and systems) is the visible branch by a substantial margin, reflecting simulation work centred on waveguides, couplers, and splitters. G02F (Optical control and modulation) is the second most active branch.
The United States is the primary filing jurisdiction, followed by Europe (EPO), China, and WIPO (PCT). India also appears as a destination, consistent with several individual-inventor entries in the applicant ranking.
The lifecycle evidence classifies the field as mature, with annual filings having plateaued near their 2018 peak. The 14% recent-window growth figure reflects multi-year accumulation. The most recent 18–24 months of data are subject to publication lag and may undercount current activity.
No co-applicant filings are recorded in the current corpus. All active filers appear to be pursuing independent IP strategies. This absence may be an artefact of the small corpus size and should be revisited as more filings publish.
Map your own silicon photonics simulation Snapshot
Join 18,000+ innovators using PatSnap Eureka to map any technology landscape: search 2B+ patents and papers, surface key assignees, and generate a report like this in minutes.
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.