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 (1,798 records) with 2024 (2,226) — 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 116,090 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
This dataset covers 116,090 published patent records matching coding-tree-unit, intra-prediction and motion-vector-prediction claims combined with rate-distortion optimization, in-loop filtering, entropy coding, transform-coefficient, quantization-parameter or prediction-mode-signaling terms. The search window runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, so it captures both the settled tool set from earlier codec generations and the newer AI-assisted filter and prediction work now entering examination.
Records are drawn from filings and publications across major offices, with the United States, the European Patent Office and the WIPO PCT route carrying the largest volumes. Because a single filing family can generate several published documents, the family-level assignee ranking below is the fairer read on who actually controls claim space, while the raw record count is what drives the technology-composition and trend charts.
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Two views of the same 116,090 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Annual filings climbed to a peak of 2,951 in 2020, then continued at a high plateau; the 2021-to-2024 span shows a +24% rise from 1,798 to 2,226 records. Years after 2024 are shown for completeness but understate true activity, since publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
H04N (pictorial communication / video-TV) dominates at 17.0% of all records, an order of magnitude ahead of every other subclass. G06T, H03M, G06K, G06N, H04B, G06F and G06V each sit at 0.4% or below, meaning the vast majority of technical detail is filed as core video-communication art rather than being classified into adjacent computing or AI subclasses — a signal that most drafting still frames these tools as codec claims first.
Shares are the percentage of the 116,090 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 video coding standard tools and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThis Samsung filing (US20260095600A1, published 2026-04-02) describes an AI-based in-loop filter (AILF) that extracts features from each frame's channels, selects a pre-processor from a bank of multi-pre-processors based on those features, and encodes the image information accordingly. It sits squarely in the in-loop filtering claim family this dataset tracks, but frames the filter selection as a learned, feature-conditioned step rather than a fixed rule.Abstract trimmed for length; full claims should be reviewed before relying on this summary.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20180098063A1 | Motion vector prediction for affine motion models in video coding | 725 |
| 2 | US7003035B2 | Video coding methods and apparatuses | 621 |
| 3 | US20180359483A1 | Motion vector prediction | 581 |
| 4 | US20050123207A1 | Video frame or picture encoding and decoding | 570 |
| 5 | US20170332099A1 | Merge candidates for motion vector prediction for video coding | 537 |
| 6 | US20170094313A1 | Non-separable secondary transform for video coding | 492 |
| 7 | US20160100189A1 | Intra bc and inter unification | 487 |
| 8 | US20090002379A1 | Video decoding implementations for a graphics processing unit | 467 |
| 9 | US20170094314A1 | Non-separable secondary transform for video coding with reorganizing | 443 |
| 10 | US20140105276A1 | Picture coding device, picture coding method, picture coding program, picture decoding device, picture decodi… | 420 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate references; treat them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not of current technical importance.
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 →Three patterns worth acting on before drafting or licensing in this space.
Five assignees combined hold 48,257 of the 116,090 records in scope. New entrants filing on core motion-vector-prediction or in-loop-filter mechanics are filing into dense, well-defended prior art rather than open ground.
Filings rose from 1,798 in 2021 to 2,226 in 2024. That is genuine growth, not an artefact of publication lag, since 2024 is the most recent year the trend can treat as complete.
The strongest co-assignee pair in this dataset shares 1,733 filings, far ahead of the next pairs at 227 and 119. That kind of joint-filing volume usually reflects a parent-subsidiary drafting arrangement rather than an arm's-length collaboration.
H04N alone covers 17.0% of all 116,090 records, while every other subclass sits at 0.4% or below. Drafting that leans on AI-model or image-recognition subclasses (G06N, G06V) is still comparatively rare in this corpus.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to video coding standard tools, with the prior art for and against each one.
The ranked leaders combine large legacy portfolios with newer high-volume filers; recent-year figures should be read alongside the publication-lag caveat above.
The top-ranked assignee's 16,204 records is roughly three times the fifth-place total of 5,331, underlining that scale at the very top is uneven even within the leading group.
Tenth place sits at 2,765 records, roughly half of fifth place's 5,331 — the concentration curve is steep even inside the top ten, not just between the top ten and the long tail.
Every one of the most active recent filers shows a steep year-on-year decline in the latest year. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, this reads as an artefact of the data cut-off rather than a genuine pullback in R&D activity.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| ByteDance Inc. | 44 | -85% |
| Douyin Vision Co., Ltd. | 34 | -87% |
| LG Electronics Inc. | 17 | -88% |
| Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd. | 16 | -83% |
| Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. | 13 | -86% |
| Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI) | 11 | -74% |
| Beijing Dajia Internet Information Technology Co., Ltd. | 8 | -64% |
| Qualcomm Incorporated | 5 | -91% |
The landscape points to a few concrete next steps depending on what you are trying to decide.
Given that 41.6% of all records sit with five assignees, any new filing on core motion-vector-prediction or in-loop-filter claims should be checked against their specific claim scope before drafting.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaAI-conditioned filter selection and learned quantization-parameter adaptation show thinner filing density than the core toolset, which is where a first claim has more room to stand on its own.
Run a white-space search in EurekaBecause publication lags filing by around 18 months, the most informative near-term signal will be how many of the thin 2025-2026 records convert to full publications over the next reporting cycle.
Set up monitoring in EurekaThe assignee ranking in this dataset covers 100 companies across 116,090 published records, with the leading assignee holding 16,204 records — roughly three times the fifth-place total of 5,331. The five leading assignees combined account for 41.6% of all records in scope, so the field is concentrated at the top even though the full ranked list runs to 100 companies. Anyone assessing competitive position should look at family-level counts rather than raw document counts, since a single filing can generate multiple published documents.
Filings grew from 1,798 records in 2021 to 2,226 in 2024, a +24% increase, and 2024 is the most recent year the trend can treat as complete. Later years in the dataset show lower counts, but that reflects the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication rather than a real slowdown. The honest read is that activity was still rising through the last complete year, with 2020 as the peak year so far at 2,951 filings.
H04N, the pictorial communication and video/TV subclass, dominates at 17.0% of all 116,090 records — far ahead of every other subclass. G06T, H03M, G06K, G06N, H04B, G06F and G06V each account for 0.4% of records or less. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100%, and any class-level share should always be read against the full record total, not against another class's count.
US20260095600A1 is a Samsung filing published 2026-04-02 that claims an AI-based in-loop filter selecting a pre-processor from multiple candidates based on features extracted per frame and channel. It matters because it frames filter selection as a learned, feature-conditioned step rather than a fixed rule, which narrows the room for a near-identical adaptive-selection claim. Anyone drafting in-loop filter claims that involve any form of feature-based pre-processor selection should review its specific claim language before finalising scope.
The IPC composition shows core video-communication art (H04N) is heavily claimed while adjacent AI-model and image-recognition subclasses (G06N, G06V) sit at 0.1% of records each, suggesting thinner coverage where codec tools intersect with learned models. Sub-areas such as AI-conditioned in-loop filter selection, learned quantization-parameter adaptation, and entropy coding tuned for AI-generated residuals show comparatively low filing density relative to the core toolset. These are not guaranteed clear, but they are the branches where a first claim has more room to stand without colliding with dense prior art from the leading assignees.
Go past this page: query the whole video coding standard tools 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.