Technology landscape · Machine learning, German applicants · 2014–2024

German machine-learning patent families grew 6.7-fold from 2014 to 2021, and 6,361 more sit outside the core codes.

9,479 families in the core IPC groups for machine learning and pattern recognition. Half carry a neural-network code. Robert Bosch holds 22.9% of all families.

Data
EPO PATSTAT Global, Spring 2026 (patstat_2026a)
Unit
DOCDB family
Scope
German applicants · IPC G06N and G06F18/00 with predecessors, 115 symbols
Queries
Query 0a to 10, all published
Families per earliest filing year · rows from front to back: G06N3, G06N20, G06F18, G06N5, G06N10, G06N7 · non-exclusive · 2024 provisional · G06F18 dips in 2022 at the IPC changeQuery 3
  1. 6.7×

    Families per year grew from 211 (2014) to 1,417 (2021).

    Growth
  2. 49.6%

    of the 9,479 families carry a neural-network code (G06N3).

    Sub-areas
  3. 22.9%

    of the families belong to Robert Bosch (2,166), more than the next two applicants together.

    Leaders
  4. 50.0%

    of the 2021–2024 families have a DPMA member, level with the US at 50.2%.

    Offices
  5. 6,361

    further families use machine learning inside another field and carry no core code.

    Hidden

01 · Growth

Filings grew for seven years in a row, then levelled off after 2021

2014–2016

211, 221 and 287 families. Counting only the codes of today's IPC edition gives 78 for 2014; the gap is the predecessor symbols, so it reflects reclassification history.

2017–2019

The steepest single-year increases: +68.6% in 2017 and +66.5% in 2018.

2021

The peak at 1,417 families, 6.7 times the 2014 level. Measured 2014 to 2023, the compound annual growth rate is 22.9%.

2022–2024

1,155 families in 2022 and 1,347 in 2023; the two code-set readings converge. 2024 (979) is still being published, and no growth claim rests on it.

Patent families by earliest filing year, two code-set readings

Data table: filing activity 2014–2024
Families by earliest filing year (* provisional)
YearFamilies (completed code set)Year on yearFamilies (current-edition codes only)
2014211—78
2015221+4.7%97
2016287+29.9%142
2017484+68.6%321
2018806+66.5%599
20191,266+57.1%1,059
20201,306+3.2%1,129
20211,417+8.5%1,333
20221,155−18.5%1,146
20231,347+16.6%1,348
2024*979−27.3%*979
Total9,479—8,231

Query 2 · 29.9 GB passEach family counted once, in its earliest in-scope filing year; the years sum to 9,479

02 · Sub-areas

Half the families carry a neural-network code

4,699 of 9,479 families (49.6%) carry G06N3, the group for computing arrangements based on biological models that holds neural networks and deep learning. General machine learning (G06N20) reaches 3,127 families (33.0%) and pattern recognition (G06F18) 2,466 (26.0%). Quantum computing (G06N10) and probabilistic or fuzzy models (G06N7) are level at 493 each, on opposite trajectories.

Patent families per machine-learning sub-area

Data table: machine-learning sub-areas
Machine-learning sub-areas (IPC main groups)
Sub-areaFamiliesShare of 9,479
Neural networks & deep learning (G06N3)4,69949.6%
Machine learning, general (G06N20)3,12733.0%
Pattern recognition (G06F18)2,46626.0%
Knowledge-based models (G06N5)1,09611.6%
Quantum computing (G06N10)4935.2%
Probabilistic & fuzzy models (G06N7)4935.2%
Other computational models (G06N1, G06N99)1461.5%
Sum of sub-areas12,520132.1%

Query 3 · 21.7 GB passNon-exclusive: the seven values sum to 12,520

A family can carry codes from several sub-areas, so shares are read against the family total and not against each other; no pie chart is used. Two predecessor symbols are folded into their successors: G06F15/18 counts towards G06N20 and G06K9/62 towards G06F18.

03 · Evolution

Quantum computing peaked last, with 152 families in 2023

Neural networks

G06N3 goes from 19 families in 2014 to 747 in 2021 and then holds a plateau near 700. General machine learning follows one step lower, 16 to 509, then near 450.

Quantum computing

1 family in 2014, 44 in 2020, 152 in 2023. Still small at 493 in total.

Probabilistic and fuzzy

G06N7 peaks at 85 families in 2019 and falls to 30 in 2023, consistent with a classical modelling branch being crowded out by learned models.

Read with care

Pattern recognition drops from 302 (2021) to 94 (2022). G06F18 came with the 2023 IPC edition and took over from G06K9/62; the 2022 cohort sits on that boundary. The dip is a classification transition.

Patent families per sub-area and earliest filing year

Data table: sub-areas by year
Sub-areas by earliest filing year (* provisional)
Sub-area20142015201620172018201920202021202220232024*
Neural networks (G06N3)192150171364686723747679723516
Machine learning, general (G06N20)163657135226405460509435479369
Pattern recognition (G06F18)13813016021629945340030294155119
Knowledge-based models (G06N5)3440375711116016315911813087
Quantum computing (G06N10)102172144907815297
Probabilistic & fuzzy (G06N7)2121413865855972403021
Other (G06N1, G06N99)1210174750312130

Query 3 · 21.7 GB passNon-exclusive; 2024 provisional

04 · Neural nets

Learning methods outweigh architecture, 2,443 families to 1,401

Inside G06N3, German filings are more often about how a model is trained, validated or adapted than about the structure of the network. Among named architectures the order is combinations of networks (477), auto-encoder and encoder-decoder networks (168), convolutional networks (167) and recurrent networks (86). Among learning regimes: backpropagation (208), supervised (187), non-supervised (119), reinforcement (103), transfer (80), adversarial (69) and distributed or federated learning (67). 186 families sit in G06N3/063, the hardware realisation of neural networks.

Patent families per G06N3 subgroup, top 15

Data table: G06N3 subgroups
G06N3 subgroups
IPC symbolTitleIntroducedFamilies
G06N3/08Learning methods20002,443
G06N3/04Architecture, e.g. interconnection topology20001,401
G06N3/02Neural networks20001,177
G06N3/045Combinations of networks2023477
G06N3/00Computing arrangements based on biological models2000253
G06N3/084Backpropagation, e.g. using gradient descent2023208
G06N3/09Supervised learning2023187
G06N3/063using electronic means (hardware realisation)2000186
G06N3/0455Auto-encoder networks; Encoder-decoder networks2023168
G06N3/0464Convolutional networks [CNN, ConvNet]2023167
G06N3/0475Generative networks2023127
G06N3/088Non-supervised learning, e.g. competitive learning2023119
G06N3/092Reinforcement learning2023103
G06N3/044Recurrent networks, e.g. Hopfield networks202386
G06N3/047Probabilistic or stochastic networks202386
G06N3/082Learning methods modifying the architecture202380
G06N3/096Transfer learning202380
G06N3/042Knowledge-based neural networks202375
G06N3/094Adversarial learning202369
G06N3/098Distributed learning, e.g. federated learning202367

Query 4 · 21.7 GB passNon-exclusive. Titles and introduction dates from IPC edition 20260101

These subgroups are young. Every symbol below G06N3/045 in the table, the named architectures and learning regimes, came with the 2023 IPC edition. Their counts describe how far offices have re-tagged the branch, not when the techniques were invented, which is also why the parent groups still hold most of the volume. Read this chapter as a relative profile, not as a time series.

05 · Leaders

Robert Bosch holds 22.9% of the landscape

Bosch's 2,166 families are more than the next two applicants together, Siemens AG (900) and SAP (746). Twelve of the twenty-five largest applicants are vehicle manufacturers or automotive suppliers: BMW, Volkswagen, ZF, Daimler, Audi, Porsche, Mercedes-Benz Group, Valeo, Conti Temic and three Continental entities. Outside that block the list holds one research organisation (Fraunhofer, 161), one chemicals company (BASF, 69), one semiconductor company (Infineon, 62) and one telecommunications operator (Deutsche Telekom, 51).

Patent families of the fifteen largest German applicants

Data table: twenty-five largest applicants
Twenty-five largest German applicants
#ApplicantTypeFamiliesShare
1Robert Bosch GmbHCompany2,16622.9%
2Siemens AGCompany9009.5%
3SAP SECompany7467.9%
4Siemens Healthcare GmbHCompany4104.3%
5Bayerische Motoren Werke AGCompany3583.8%
6Volkswagen AGCompany3333.5%
7IBM Deutschland GmbHCompany2172.3%
8ZF Friedrichshafen AGCompany2042.2%
9NEC Europe LtdCompany1791.9%
10Daimler AGCompany1681.8%
11Siemens Healthineers AGCompany1661.8%
12Fraunhofer-GesellschaftResearch1611.7%
13Audi AGCompany1461.5%
14Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AGCompany1291.4%
15Mercedes-Benz Group AGCompany1181.2%
16Continental Automotive Technologies GmbHCompany1021.1%
17Valeo Schalter und Sensoren GmbHCompany951.0%
18Continental Automotive GmbHCompany750.8%
19Siemens Mobility GmbHCompany710.7%
20BASF SECompany690.7%
21Continental Autonomous Mobility Germany GmbHCompany650.7%
22Rohde & Schwarz GmbH & Co. KGCompany640.7%
23Infineon Technologies AGCompany620.7%
24Conti Temic microelectronic GmbHCompany600.6%
25Deutsche Telekom AGCompany510.5%

Query 5 · 24.3 GB passGrouped by harmonised applicant name; share of the 9,479 families

Nine of the twelve largest portfolios are led by neural networks. SAP files more in general machine learning (413) and knowledge-based models (232) than in neural networks (230). IBM Deutschland puts 149 of its 217 families into quantum computing, 30.2% of the entire German quantum sub-area. Daimler concentrates on pattern recognition (134 of 168 families).

Where each of the twelve largest portfolios sits, families per sub-area

ApplicantG06N3 Neural netsG06N20 ML generalG06F18 Pattern rec.G06N5 KnowledgeG06N7 ProbabilisticG06N10 QuantumOther
Robert Bosch1,367772528217140208
Siemens AG504302136227801515
SAP23041312723257347
Siemens Healthcare2381621182326422
BMW143106129242400
Volkswagen163991272010120
IBM Deutschland512401761493
ZF Friedrichshafen13445583351
NEC Europe1047419581308
Daimler31121341200
Siemens Healthineers103613911521
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft90303892200

Query 5 · 24.3 GB passRows do not sum to the portfolio: a family can sit in several sub-areas

Corporate groups are not consolidated. The harmonised name merges spelling variants but not corporate structures: Siemens appears as four entries and Continental as three, and Daimler AG and Mercedes-Benz Group AG are the same group under its former and current name. Entries overlap where two of them co-file (52 families carry both Siemens Healthcare and Siemens Healthineers), so rows cannot be added. Sector labels come from psn_sector; across the landscape 7,907 families have an applicant recorded as a company, 283 a public research organisation, 251 a university, 261 an individual, and 1,258 an applicant with no sector recorded. These counts are non-exclusive.

06 · Domains

Road vehicles are the largest field of application

900 families carry B60W (conjoint control of vehicle sub-units), and five further vehicle-related subclasses follow in the top sixteen: traffic control (G08G, 468), vehicle fittings (B60R, 379), radar and radio navigation (G01S, 362), navigation (G01C, 290) and vehicle registering (G07C, 205). Healthcare is the second cluster, split between diagnosis and surgery (A61B, 427) and healthcare informatics (G16H, 423). Industrial automation (G05B 661, G05D 228), enterprise software (G06Q, 569), communications and measurement follow.

Applied IPC subclasses co-occurring with the core machine-learning codes

Data table: co-occurring IPC subclasses
IPC subclasses co-occurring with the core codes
SubclassTitleFamilies
G06FElectric digital data processing2,287
G06KGraphical data reading; presentation of data; record carriers2,117
G06VImage or video recognition or understanding1,272
G06TImage data processing or generation, in general1,141
B60WConjoint control of vehicle sub-units of different type900
G05BControl or regulating systems in general661
G06QICT for administrative, commercial, financial purposes569
G08GTraffic control systems468
A61BDiagnosis; Surgery; Identification427
G16HHealthcare informatics423
B60RVehicles, vehicle fittings or vehicle parts379
G01SRadio direction-finding; radio navigation; radar362
H04LTransmission of digital information350
G01CMeasuring distances, levels or bearings; navigation290
G01RMeasuring electric variables; measuring magnetic variables242
G01NInvestigating or analysing materials235
H04WWireless communication networks232
G05DSystems for controlling or regulating non-electric variables228
G07CTime or attendance registers; registering vehicles205
G01MTesting static or dynamic balance of machines or structures194

Query 6 · 21.7 GB passFirst colour: vehicle-related subclasses. Non-exclusive

G06F (2,287), G06K (2,117), G06V (1,272) and G06T (1,141) are computing and image-processing neighbours of the core codes and do not describe a field of use; G06K carries the historic pattern-recognition groups that preceded G06F18. They are in the table and left out of the chart. One family usually carries several subclasses, so the figures cannot be added and do not partition the 9,479 families.

07 · Offices

The US is the most-used office, and the DPMA has drawn level in recent filings

5,463 of 9,479 families (57.6%) have a US member, ahead of the DPMA (4,757, 50.2%), the EPO (3,934, 41.5%), the PCT route (3,579, 37.8%) and China (3,535, 37.3%).

Families with a member at each office

Data table: filing offices
Filing offices, all periods
OfficeFamilies with a memberShare of 9,479
US — United States5,46357.6%
DE — Germany (DPMA)4,75750.2%
EP — European Patent Office3,93441.5%
WO — PCT route3,57937.8%
CN — China3,53537.3%
JP — Japan1,02510.8%
KR — Korea6056.4%
CA — Canada1751.8%
AU — Australia1731.8%
ES — Spain1351.4%
GB — United Kingdom1251.3%
BR — Brazil1061.1%

Query 7 · 21.7 GB passCounted across all members of an in-scope family; PCT rate 3,579 / 9,479 = 37.8%

In 2014–2017 filings the US was used by 63.3% of families against 55.3% for the DPMA. In 2018–2020 the gap widened to almost 18 points (66.4% against 48.6%). In 2021–2024 the two are level at 50.2% and 50.0%. China rose from 29.3% to 41.9% and settled at 36.1%; Japan's share rose from 9.5% to 12.0%.

Share of families in each filing period with a member at the office (%)

Data table: geographic shift by filing period
Office use by filing period, families and share of the period
Office2014–2017 (1,203 families)2018–2020 (3,378 families)2021–2024 (4,898 families)
US762 — 63.3%2,242 — 66.4%2,459 — 50.2%
DE665 — 55.3%1,643 — 48.6%2,449 — 50.0%
EP518 — 43.1%1,507 — 44.6%1,909 — 39.0%
WO453 — 37.7%1,196 — 35.4%1,930 — 39.4%
CN352 — 29.3%1,414 — 41.9%1,769 — 36.1%
JP114 — 9.5%324 — 9.6%587 — 12.0%
KR72 — 6.0%197 — 5.8%336 — 6.9%

Query 7 · 21.7 GB passFamilies per period: 1,203, 3,378 and 4,898

Offices are non-exclusive: a family filed in Germany, at the EPO and in the US counts at all three, so the figures sum well above 9,479. The 2021–2024 period contains 2024 filings still being published, and national-phase entries from PCT applications filed in 2022–2024 are in many cases not yet due. Shares for the US, CN, JP and KR in that period are lower bounds.

08 · Partners

Most foreign co-applicants are arms of groups already on the German side

IBM Corp (221 families), Siemens, NEC and the Bosch and IBM subsidiaries in India and China are foreign arms of groups on the German side of the same filings. The external partners are mostly research institutions, plus F. Hoffmann-La Roche (15), Toyota Motor Europe (8) and Intel (6). The three universities partner with industry: Tsinghua and Carnegie Mellon appear alongside Robert Bosch on every joint family, and 20 of Nanyang's 28 are shared with Continental Automotive Technologies.

The fifteen most frequent non-German co-applicants

Data table: non-German co-applicants
Non-German co-applicants on in-scope families
Co-applicantCountryJoint families
IBM CorpUS221
Huawei Technologies Co. LtdCN154
Siemens CorpUS64
Tsinghua UniversityCN53
Siemens Ltd ChinaCN51
NEC CorpJP49
Nanyang Technological UniversitySG28
Bosch Global Software Technologies Private LtdIN26
IBM China Investment Co. LtdCN25
Carnegie Mellon UniversityUS24
Robert Bosch Engineering & Business Solutions Private LtdIN20
F. Hoffmann-La Roche AGCH15
Huawei Cloud Computing Technologies Co. LtdCN10
Continental Automotive FranceFR10
Dentsply Sirona IncUS8
Toyota Motor EuropeBE8
Intel CorpUS6
Toyota Jidosha KKJP6
Roche Molecular Systems IncUS6
Siemens Energy IncUS5
FEV TürkiyeTR5
Yujin Robot Co. LtdKR4
Technische UniversiteitNL4
The General Hospital CorpUS4
Kyndryl IncUS4

Query 8 · 24.3 GB passGrey: foreign arm of a group on the German side. Non-exclusive

Huawei Technologies is the second-largest name at 154 families, with a different profile: no single Huawei-plus-German pair reaches ten families, the largest being nine. Its German-linked filings are shared with many individually named applicants resident in Germany, not with one German corporate entity. A family enters the table when at least one applicant is resident in Germany and at least one further applicant elsewhere.

09 · Pairs

1,546 families have more than one applicant, and the largest pairs are within one group

16.3% of the families carry more than one applicant. The largest pairs are internal, led by IBM Corp with IBM Deutschland (217). The largest industry–academia pairs all involve Robert Bosch: Tsinghua University (53), Carnegie Mellon (24) and the University of Freiburg (20). Outside Bosch: Continental with Nanyang (20), Eleqtron with the University of Siegen (12), Forschungszentrum Jülich with RWTH Aachen (9). Cross-brand automotive pairs are small, Audi with Volkswagen at most (18).

The fifteen most frequent applicant pairs

Data table: applicant pairs
Applicant pairs on jointly filed families
Applicant pairCountriesJoint families
IBM Corp + IBM DeutschlandUS / DE217
Siemens AG + Siemens CorpDE / US62
Robert Bosch + Tsinghua UniversityDE / CN53
Siemens Healthcare + Siemens HealthineersDE / DE52
Siemens AG + Siemens Ltd ChinaDE / CN51
NEC Corp + NEC EuropeJP / DE49
Bosch Global Software Technologies + Robert BoschIN / DE26
IBM China Investment + IBM DeutschlandCN / DE25
IBM China Investment + IBM CorpCN / US25
Carnegie Mellon University + Robert BoschUS / DE24
Robert Bosch Engineering & Business Solutions + Robert BoschIN / DE20
Continental Automotive Technologies + Nanyang Technological UniversityDE / SG20
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg + Robert BoschDE / DE20
Audi + VolkswagenDE / DE18
F. Hoffmann-La Roche + Roche DiagnosticsCH / DE12
Eleqtron + Universität Siegen— / DE12
Porsche + VolkswagenDE / DE12
Audi + PorscheDE / DE12
Cariad + Robert BoschDE / DE11
Continental Automotive France + Continental AutomotiveFR / DE9
Siemens AG + Siemens MobilityDE / DE9
Continental Automotive Technologies + Continental Autonomous MobilityDE / DE9
Huawei Technologies + an individual applicant resident in GermanyCN / DE9
Forschungszentrum Jülich + RWTH AachenDE / DE9

Query 8 · 24.3 GB passFirst colour: industry–academia pairs; grey: pairs within one group or brand family

Pairs come from harmonised names, so a partner recorded under two variants appears in two rows. Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg is present under a short and a public-law-body variant, and a further pair with 17 families sits under the second one; the ranking is a lower bound for such partners. A pair is counted once per family, and a family with three applicants yields three pairs, so pair counts cannot be added to the 1,546 multi-applicant families.

10 · Grants

Japan grants 82.0% of its 2014–2020 families, the DPMA 23.9%

In the 2014–2020 cohort (4,581 families) examination is largely complete. The US grants 73.8% and the EPO 50.6%. One possible explanation for the German figure is that a DE filing often serves as a priority anchor for a later EP or PCT filing, so examination is never requested; the data cannot distinguish that from refusal or withdrawal. 4,757 families have a DE member and 3,934 an EP member, so the two routes run in parallel.

Granted families as a share of families at each office, 2014–2020 cohort (%)

Data table: grant rates by office
Grant rates by office, 2014–2020 cohort
OfficeFamilies at officeGrantedGrant rate
JP — Japan43835982.0%
US — United States3,0042,21873.8%
AU — Australia784861.5%
KR — Korea26916159.9%
CN — China1,7661,00456.9%
EP — European Patent Office2,0251,02550.6%
CA — Canada1052927.6%
DE — Germany (DPMA)2,30855223.9%
ES — Spain110110100.0%

Query 7 · 21.7 GB passSpain in the table only: all 110 ES families are recorded as granted, which reflects national procedure. PCT excluded

Rates for filings from 2021 onwards are not shown: examination pendency would make them artificially low. Grant procedures differ between offices (deferred examination, utility-model conversion, national validation), so read each office against itself over time, not against the others.

11 · Citations

Siemens Healthcare draws 23.4 citations per family, five times Robert Bosch

Siemens Healthcare's 410 families draw twice the next value; Robert Bosch's 2,166 families attract 4.7 each. The two medical-imaging entities, Siemens Healthcare and Siemens Healthineers, account for 11,446 of the citations counted. Among larger portfolios SAP reaches 10.5 over 746 families and Siemens AG 6.8 over 900. The automotive suppliers ZF (2.8) and Valeo (3.9) and the manufacturers Daimler (3.0) and BMW (4.2) sit below the software and medical portfolios.

Forward citations per family, applicants with at least 60 families

Data table: citation impact
Citation impact by applicant
ApplicantFamiliesCitations receivedPer family
Siemens Healthcare4109,58923.4
NEC Europe1792,05811.5
Siemens Healthineers1661,85711.2
SAP7467,79710.5
Infineon Technologies6263010.2
BASF696669.7
Conti Temic microelectronic605068.4
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft1611,3478.4
Audi1461,2148.3
Siemens AG9006,1206.8
Volkswagen3332,1516.5
IBM Deutschland2171,3236.1
Continental Automotive753845.1
Siemens Mobility713545.0
Robert Bosch2,16610,2274.7
BMW3581,5084.2
Valeo Schalter und Sensoren953713.9
Daimler1684973.0
ZF Friedrichshafen2045752.8
Rohde & Schwarz641712.7

Query 9 · 32.6 GBFamily counts match the Leaders chapter exactly

Citations accumulate with age. A family filed in 2015 has had nine more years to be cited than one filed in 2024, and this chapter does not normalise for that, so portfolios weighted towards early filings score higher by construction. The measure counts distinct citing publications of any family member across all offices and does not separate examiner from applicant citations.

12 · Hidden

6,361 more families use machine learning without a core code

213 CPC symbols outside G06N and G06F18 tag machine learning inside another field, such as engine control (F02D41/1405), speech recognition (G10L15/16) or radar signal processing (G01S7/417). They find 6,361 German families with no core code, 67% on top of the core search and 40.1% of the combined 15,867. The hidden share was 36.0% in 2014 and 46.4% in 2023, lowest at 30.9% in 2019. 2,916 core families (30.8%) also carry a domain tag, which makes the Domains chapter possible.

Families with a core code and families found only through domain tags, by earliest filing year

Data table: core vs. hidden families
Core vs. domain-tagged-only families by year (* provisional)
YearCore ML classificationDomain tag onlyCombinedHidden share
201421712233936.0%
201522414637039.5%
201629722552243.1%
201750428178535.8%
20188494231,27233.3%
20191,2845741,85830.9%
20201,3636812,04433.3%
20211,3419192,26040.7%
20221,1451,0152,16047.0%
20231,3381,1582,49646.4%
2024*9448171,76146.4%
Total9,5066,36115,86740.1%

Query 1 · 29.9 GB passLayer 2: CPC title breadcrumb and definition texts, core groups excluded

Layer 2 is a CPC-only construct. CPC is assigned mainly by the EPO, the USPTO and KIPO, so families that never reach those offices are under-represented and 6,361 is a lower bound. The core column totals 9,506 here, not 9,479: 27 families have their earliest Layer-2 filing inside 2014–2024 and their earliest core filing outside it. Every other chapter uses 9,479.

13 · How we counted

How the numbers were counted

  • One family, one countA DOCDB family counts once, in the earliest filing year among its in-scope applications. The years sum to 9,479 families across 13,376 applications.
  • German applicantsAt least one applicant with person_ctry_code = 'DE'. This measures ownership: a German subsidiary of a foreign group is in scope, a foreign holding filing for a German team is not.
  • Completed code setIPC G06N and G06F18/00, subtree expanded by a recursive walk (112 symbols), plus the predecessors G06K9/62, G06F15/18 and G06N1/00: 115 symbols. Withdrawn symbols are kept.
  • IPC as primary scheme, measuredA CPC-primary scope would miss 1,488 families (15.7%) that carry the codes only in IPC; IPC is kept because its reclassification chain makes the time series readable.
Checks and limits
  • Two readingsCurrent-edition codes only give 8,231 families; with predecessors 9,479. The union buys recall at some cost in precision. The true figure lies between the two; this report uses the upper one.
  • G06K9/00 excludedThe residual group feeds 188 successor symbols, only 24% of them in scope. A 24-family title sample of the 1,689 families it would add was off-topic in 18 cases. Predecessors were not themselves subtree-expanded, because the subgroups of G06K9/62 went to G06V.
  • CPC-only families1,824 families carry the equivalent CPC codes but no IPC Layer 1 code and are outside the scope.
  • Title-only familiesA title-keyword search finds 606 families (6.4% of the scope) that the classification does not reach. They are recorded as a gap, because absorbing them would cost more precision than it buys recall.
  • Layer 2 lower bound213 CPC symbols found through the title breadcrumb and definitions, singular and plural searched separately. Offices that do not assign CPC are under-represented.
  • Groups not consolidatedSiemens, Continental, Bosch and Daimler/Mercedes-Benz appear under several overlapping entries that cannot be added.
  • 2024 incompleteAbout 18 months from filing to full publication. No growth claim rests on 2024.
  • Grants and reclassificationGrant rates cover the 2014–2020 cohort only. The G06N3 subgroups and the G06F18 series are affected by ongoing reclassification and are not time series of invention.
  • Precision24 random families read by title; two were not identifiable as machine learning, roughly 8%. No external series measures the same thing, so no external benchmark is quoted.
  • ExclusionsUtility models and designs are excluded (appln_kind <> 'D'), as are pseudo-families and families whose earliest in-scope filing falls outside 2014–2024. Breakdowns other than the annual series and the layer split are non-exclusive.
  • EditionsComputed on 15 August 2026 against IPC edition 20260101 and CPC edition 202608.

Code-set readings, layer coverage and the annual series

Query 1 · 29.9 GB passqueries.sql · Queries 0a to 0e build the code sets · Query 10 holds the precision samples and the negative test (28.3 GB)

Release protocol

  1. Agentsearch + draftBuilt the code sets and queried PATSTAT read-only. Every number comes from SQL.
  2. Checks13 rulesEvery claim must trace back to a query; chart and table must agree.
  3. Reviewsubject expertChecks scope, counts and wording before publication.
  4. Approvalsecond personA second person not involved in the report approves publication.

Next step

Which technology or region should we count for you?

A report like this one starts at 1,500 € plus VAT. Or learn to build it yourself on the EPO's Technology Intelligence Platform.

Book a scoping call · Training for PATLIB centres