https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/xr-and-human-interface-patent-landscape-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-08-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Media, Audio & Immersive Interfaces
XR and human interface patents: mapping who holds the claims and where the field is still open
  • 33.8% of the field sits with five companies. 15,973 of 47,253 records in scope belong to the top five assignees, a level of concentration that narrows freedom-to-operate fast for anyone entering pose tracking, codec bitstream or interface-device claims.
  • Filings peaked in 2022 at 2,298, then eased. The 2021-to-2024 span shows a 29% pull-back (1,723 to 1,230), though 2025-26 figures are still filling in under the usual 18-month publication lag.
  • Pictorial communication and general data processing dominate the class mix. H04N and G06F alone touch 15.6% and 13.2% of records respectively, while AI-model computing (G06N) sits at just 1.6% — a gap relative to the rest of the stack.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
47.3K
Published Records
34%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-29%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (1,723 records) with 2024 (1,230) — 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 47,253 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

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

What this landscape covers

This landscape tracks patent activity at the intersection of XR (extended reality) systems and human interface hardware/software — filings that combine media or digital-media XR concepts with codec bitstream handling, frame-rate control, pose tracking, interface devices, audio synthesis or motion tracking. The scope spans 47,253 published records filed or published between 2015 and the August 2026 data cut-off.

The dataset draws on a search string built to catch both the immersive-media side of XR (codec, frame rate, audio synthesis) and the physical interface side (pose tracking, motion tracking, interface devices), so it covers headset and display pipelines as well as the input hardware and sensing layers that sit underneath them.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2017–2026
  1. 1TENCENT AMERICA LLC6,520
  2. 2INTEL CORP4,218
  3. 3CANON KK2,207
  4. 4KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS NV2,207
  5. 5MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC821
  6. 6SK HYNIX INC810
  7. 7QUALCOMM INC810
  8. 8SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD708
  9. 9APPLE INC602
  10. 10DELL PROD LP575
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on XR & Human Interface Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. 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 47,253-record corpus: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.

Filing trend, 2017–2026

Annual filings rose from 706 in 2017 to a peak of 2,298 in 2022, then declined to 1,230 by 2024 — a 29% drop over that three-year window. 2025 and 2026 figures are undercounted because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months; they should not be read as a genuine slowdown yet.

Filing trend, 2017–202606251,2501,8752,500706201720182019202020212,2982022202320242025732026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

IPC subclass concentration

H04N (pictorial communication) and G06F (electric digital data processing) each cover well over a tenth of all records, showing that most claims still sit in media transport and general-purpose processing rather than in specialised sensing or AI layers. G06N (AI-model computing) and G06Q (business/commerce data processing) trail at 1.6% and 2.0% respectively, marking those as comparatively thin claim territory relative to the core media and processing classes.

IPC subclass concentrationH04N · Pictorial communication (video…7,37915.6%G06F · Electric digital data processi…6,25113.2%H04L · Digital information transmissi…2,0194.3%G06T · Image data processing & genera…1,5873.4%A61B · Diagnosis & surgery1,3742.9%H04W · Wireless communication networks9342.0%G06Q · Business, commerce & admin dat…9332.0%G06N · Computing based on AI models7781.6%Other11,96025.3%

Shares are the percentage of the 47,253 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 XR & Human Interface Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on XR & Human Interface Patent Landscape with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about xr & human interface patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Prior Art

Representative and most-cited records

Representative Filing
US20050270275A12005-12-08

Scrolling device of human interface device and human interface device using the same

ATLAB INC.

A scrolling device of human interface device and human interface device using the same is disclosed. The scrolling device of human interface device includes a plurality of touch sensing pads and performs scroll operation by sensing contact of at least one of the plurality of touch sensing pads. Thus, it is possible to prevent a mechanical noise and malfunction caused by mechanical abrasion. Further, it is possible to sense upward and downward scroll movement as well as leftward and rightward scroll movement, thus providing still more various scroll information, so that it is possible to make good use of the scrolling device of human interface device.Filed by ATLAB INC., published 2005-12-08 — an early example of touch-pad-based scroll sensing later absorbed into broader interface-device claim sets.

US20050270275A1 — patent drawing 1US20050270275A1 — patent drawing 2
View full record
Most-cited records in this landscape
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US6850252B1Intelligent electronic appliance system and method4,058
2US6611537B1Synchronous network for digital media streams2,481
3US6400996B1Adaptive pattern recognition based control system and method2,342
4US5223844AVehicle tracking and security system2,163
5US6640145B2Media recording device with packet data interface1,591
6US5875108AErgonomic man-machine interface incorporating adaptive pattern recognition based control system1,588
7US20070053513A1Intelligent electronic appliance system and method1,452
8US6037927AMethod and apparatus for providing force feedback to the user of an interactive computer simulation1,415
9US7742036B2System and method for controlling haptic devices having multiple operational modes1,289
10US6697048B2Computer interface apparatus including linkage having flex1,276

Citation counts favour older filings in any searched corpus — read them as a marker of influence on later filings, not as a signal of current commercial relevance.

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 XR & Human Interface Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. 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 →
Signal Check

What the numbers say about the field

Three cuts of the same data — concentration, momentum and claim density — that matter for deciding where to file and where to watch.

Concentration
33.8%
of 47,253 records held by top 5 assignees

The top of the field is crowded

Five assignees hold 15,973 of the 47,253 records in scope, and the top ten combined reach 41.2% (19,478 records). That is a narrow band of companies controlling a large share of the claim space, which raises the freedom-to-operate bar for new entrants filing on core pose-tracking or codec claims.

Based on the 100-company ranked assignee set
Momentum
-29%
filings 2021 → 2024 (1,723 → 1,230)

Volume has eased off its 2022 peak

Filings rose steadily from 706 in 2017 to a peak of 2,298 in 2022, then pulled back to 1,230 by 2024. That is the last year the data can be read as complete; 2025-26 numbers will keep rising as publications catch up.

18-month publication lag applies to the two most recent years
Claim density
15.6%
of records classed under H04N

Media transport claims dominate the stack

H04N (pictorial communication) and G06F (digital data processing) together account for the bulk of classed records, while G06N (AI-model computing) sits at only 1.6%. That gap suggests AI-driven interface logic is still comparatively underclaimed next to core media transport.

Class shares sum to more than 100% because records carry multiple IPC codes
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 xr & human interface patent landscape, 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 XR & Human Interface Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Competitive Set

Who is filing, and where the room to move sits

The ranked leaders span device makers, chipmakers and platform software companies. Momentum data shows most top filers pulling back year over year, even as the field stays concentrated.

Scale leader
6,520
records from the top-ranked assignee

One filer sits well above the rest

The leading assignee's record count is more than double the fifth-place figure of 821, and nearly nine times the tenth-place figure of 575 — a steep drop-off rather than a gradual taper.

Ranked across 100 assignees
Recent momentum
-91% to -100%
YoY change among tracked leaders' latest-year filings

Even leaders are filing less this year

Every tracked leading assignee shows a steep year-over-year drop in latest-year filings, several down to single digits or zero. Read this alongside the publication lag: it reflects incomplete recent data as much as any real pullback.

Latest tracked year is partial
Collaboration
10
co-assignee pairs identified

Joint filing is rare and concentrated

Only ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest pair filed jointly far more often than the others tracked. Co-filing is not how most of this field moves — most assignees file solo.

Strongest pair well ahead of the rest of the list
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas worth a closer look
These sit adjacent to the dense classes above but carry noticeably thinner filing density.
AI-driven pose inference modelsadaptive frame-rate codecs for XR streaminghaptic feedback synthesis for wearablescross-device motion-tracking calibrationbusiness-model claims on immersive commerce
Rank all filers by momentum →
Filing momentum by leading assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Tencent America LLC28-91%
Canon Inc.2-95%
Xerox International LLC2-95%
Intel Corp1-75%
SK Hynix Inc0-100%
Dell Products LP0-100%
Robert Bosch GmbH0-100%
Immersion Corporation0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on XR & Human Interface Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Next Steps

Where to take this analysis

This landscape flags where claim density sits and where it thins out. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision means going deeper on specific branches.

Check freedom-to-operate on a specific claim

Concentration at the top of this field means a new pose-tracking or codec filing is likely to sit close to existing claims from one of the leading assignees. Run the specific claim language against the dense classes before drafting.

Explore this landscape in Eureka

Track the under-claimed branches over time

AI-driven interface logic and adaptive codec claims sit well below the density of core media-transport classes today. Watching how fast that gap fills is more useful than a single snapshot.

Set up monitoring in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on XR & Human Interface Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions about this landscape

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on XR & Human Interface Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Research XR & Human Interface Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole xr & human interface patent landscape 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.