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 →Filing growth compares 2021 (66 records) with 2024 (38) — 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 435 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Surgical robot simulation and modeling sits at the intersection of two claim traditions: the surgical robotics itself (A61B) and the training and demonstration apparatus built to rehearse on it (G09B). This dataset pulls 435 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine both — systems that simulate tissue interaction, force feedback or virtual procedures alongside an actual or intended robotic surgical platform.
Filing offices skew heavily toward the United States, with the EPO and WIPO PCT route both active, and secondary volume from India, Germany and Australia — consistent with a field where clinical device makers file first at home and extend selectively.
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Two views of the same 435 families: how filing volume moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim weight.
Annual filings rose from 18 in 2017 to a peak of 77 in 2022, then eased off — the 2026 figure of 4 is a partial year and will revise upward, but the plateau around the 2022 midpoint points to a maturing rather than expanding filing pace.
A61B (diagnosis & surgery) leads at 266 records, with G09B (educational & demonstration aids) at 147 and G16H (healthcare informatics) at 106 close behind — evidence that simulation and training claims are filed nearly as often as the underlying surgical mechanism itself. G06T (image processing) and G06N (AI models) sit further back, marking newer, thinner claim layers.
Shares are the percentage of the 435 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about surgical robot simulation and modeling and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA surgical simulation device includes a support structure and animal tissue carried in a tray. A simulated human skeleton is carried by the support structure above the animal tissue and includes simulated human skin. A camera images the animal tissue and an image processor receives images of markers positioned on the ribs and animal tissue and forms a three-dimensional wireframe image. An operating table is adjacent a local robotic surgery station as part of a robotic surgery station and includes at least one patient support configured to support the patient during robotic surgery. At least one patient force/torque sensor is coupled to the at least one patient support.Filed by Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc. — combines a physical tissue-and-skeleton rig with optical tracking and force sensing tied directly to a robotic surgery station, rather than a pure software simulator.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7155316B2 | Microsurgical robot system | 2,209 |
| 2 | US8108072B2 | Methods and systems for robotic instrument tool tracking with adaptive fusion of kinematics information and i… | 1,742 |
| 3 | US20160314716A1 | Telerobotic surgery system for remote surgeon training using remote surgery station and party conferencing an… | 1,030 |
| 4 | US20160314717A1 | Telerobotic surgery system for remote surgeon training using robotic surgery station coupled to remote surgeo… | 807 |
| 5 | US20070018958A1 | Force reflective robotic control system and minimally invasive surgical device | 745 |
| 6 | US10813710B2 | Telerobotic surgery system using minimally invasive surgical tool with variable force scaling and feedback an… | 555 |
| 7 | US20180250086A1 | Telerobotic surgery system using minimally invasive surgical tool with variable force scaling and feedback an… | 522 |
| 8 | US20090088634A1 | Tool tracking systems and methods for image guided surgery | 519 |
| 9 | US20040111183A1 | Microsurgical robot system | 365 |
| 10 | US8457930B2 | Personalized fit and functional designed medical prostheses and surgical instruments and methods for making | 342 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply by being searchable longer; treat rank here as historical influence, not current commercial weight.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
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 →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 →Four read-throughs from the filing trend, IPC spread and citation data.
Filings climbed from 18 in 2017 to a peak of 77 in 2022 and have not exceeded that since. Even allowing for the 18-month publication lag understating 2025-2026, the shape is a plateau rather than a growth curve.
G09B (educational and demonstration aids) accounts for 147 of 435 records against A61B's 266. That ratio signals simulation and training rigs are a genuine second claim front, not an afterthought bolted onto surgical device filings.
The most-cited record, US7155316B2, describes a microsurgical robot system and predates most of the corpus. Recent filings build on that base rather than displacing it in citation terms.
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across 435 families, and the strongest links involve a university partnering with named individual inventors rather than another company — a field still filing mostly solo.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to surgical robot simulation and modeling, with the prior art for and against each one.
Recent-year momentum across the tracked assignees is uniformly weak — most show zero filings in the latest year, and the strongest historical filer is down sharply year over year.
The assignee with the deepest filing history in this dataset shows a -100% year-on-year change in the latest tracked year, alongside several other named assignees at zero filings — a sign the field's early leaders have largely stopped adding to their positions.
Among tracked assignees, only one shows any filing at all in the most recent year, and even that is flat at 0% YoY. This is consistent with the broader plateau in the filing trend rather than a sign of new entrants displacing incumbents.
The strongest co-assignee pair in the dataset links a university to a named individual inventor across 4 shared families, with a second pair at 3 — small numbers that suggest most simulation IP is being built and held inside single organisations rather than through joint ventures.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Cilag International AG | 1 | 0% |
| KINDHEART | 0 | — |
| Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Sony Group Corporation | 0 | — |
| Covidien LP | 0 | — |
| Johns Hopkins University | 0 | -100% |
| IX INNOVATION LLC | 0 | — |
| Surgical Theater, Inc. | 0 | — |
Three directions to pressure-test before committing engineering or filing budget to this space.
The representative filing ties a physical tissue rig to optical tracking and force sensing on an actual robotic station — check how tightly that combination is claimed before designing a similar bench setup.
Explore claim scope in EurekaWith every tracked assignee at or near zero in the latest year, the next real signal will be whichever organisation breaks that pattern first — worth setting an alert rather than assuming the plateau holds.
Track assignee activity in EurekaHaptic feedback loops, AI-driven skill scoring and cross-platform data portability all sit well below the A61B/G09B filing density — cheaper ground to stake a first claim on than the crowded core.
Run a white-space search in EurekaThe dataset tracks assignees including Intuitive Surgical, Johns Hopkins University, Sony Group and Covidien LP among others, but recent-year momentum for all of them is at or near zero filings. Historical citation leadership sits with an early microsurgical robot system patent from the mid-2000s, US7155316B2, which still carries the highest citation count in the corpus. That gap between historical filing depth and current activity suggests the leaders established their positions years ago and have since slowed. Anyone assessing freedom-to-operate should weight older granted patents from these assignees more heavily than recent filings.
Filings rose from 18 in 2017 to a peak of 77 in 2022, and have not returned to that level since. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent years in any such trend are always undercounted, so the true 2025-2026 picture will revise upward somewhat. Even with that adjustment, the shape looks like a plateau rather than continued growth. Treat this as a maturing filing landscape, not a shrinking one, until a later data pull confirms the direction.
The bulk of records sit in A61B (diagnosis and surgery, 266 of 435) and G09B (educational and demonstration aids, 147), with G16H (healthcare informatics, 106) and G06F (digital data processing, 76) also carrying meaningful volume. G06T (image processing) and G06N (AI models) are present but thinner, at 58 and 31 respectively. That spread shows claims split fairly evenly between the physical surgical robot, the training/simulation apparatus, and the software layer that connects them.
That filing, from Intuitive Surgical Operations, claims a specific combination: a physical tissue-and-skeleton rig, optical tracking of markers to build a 3D wireframe, and force/torque sensing tied to an actual robotic surgery station's patient support. A simulator that uses only software-based tissue modeling without a physical rig, or one not coupled to a live robotic station, sits outside that specific combination. Designers should check whether their system reproduces all three elements together — the rig, the optical tracking, and the station-coupled force sensing — since removing any one of them is a plausible design-around path worth verifying with counsel.
IPC composition shows AI-driven procedural elements (G06N, 31 records) and image processing (G06T, 58 records) are thin relative to the A61B and G09B core. Sub-areas such as haptic tissue-deformation feedback loops, AI-based skill scoring, and cross-platform data portability between simulators and live robots show low filing density in this corpus. Co-assignee activity is also sparse — only 10 pairs across 435 families — meaning collaborative claim territory between companies and universities is largely open. These are reasonable areas to file a first claim before density builds up, as it has in the core surgical-device space.
Go past this page: query the whole surgical robot simulation and modeling 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.