University profile · Saxony and Thuringia · 2013–2024
One university holds almost half of the academic patents in Saxony and Thuringia: TU Dresden, with 1,032 of 2,197 families.
17 institutions, universities, universities of applied sciences and one university hospital, filed 2,197 patent families from 4,048 applications. Fraunhofer is co-applicant on 251 of them.
- Data
- EPO PATSTAT Global, Spring 2026 (patstat_2026a)
- Unit
- DOCDB family
- Scope
- Applicant name: 199 variants of 17 institutions
- Queries
- Query 0 to Query 10, all published
TU Dresden 135 families in 2013, 67 in 2018 · every other institution below 35 a year
- 47.0%
of the 2,197 families belong to TU Dresden; seven of the seventeen institutions hold fewer than 30 each.
Institutions - 281 → 163
families a year from 2013 to 2017; since then the series moves between 156 and 185.
Trend - 415
families in measurement, the largest technology field, but no sector dominates.
Technology - 251
families with Fraunhofer as co-applicant, 11.4% of the portfolio. The next partner reaches 22.
Partners - 23.1% → 30.5%
share of families with an EP filing, 2013–2017 against 2018–2022, while the DPMA share fell.
Where
01 · Institutions
TU Dresden holds 1,032 of 2,197 families, more than four times the next filer
TU Dresden also files 47.2% of all applications. The second tier lies close together: TU Bergakademie Freiberg (236), FSU Jena (224) and TU Ilmenau (209). Seven institutions hold fewer than 30 families each over twelve years. Saxony contributes 1,648 families, Thuringia 553.
Patent families per institution, 2013–2024 (Saxony and Thuringia in two colours)
Data table: institutions ranked
| Institution | Type | State | Families | Applications | Name variants | EP filings | DE filings | Families with WO member | Co-filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TU Dresden | University | Saxony | 1,032 | 1,911 | 55 | 285 | 833 | 399 | 407 |
| TU Bergakademie Freiberg | University | Saxony | 236 | 424 | 14 | 40 | 214 | 95 | 46 |
| FSU Jena | University | Thuringia | 224 | 553 | 26 | 92 | 178 | 152 | 143 |
| TU Ilmenau | University | Thuringia | 209 | 343 | 17 | 58 | 162 | 68 | 81 |
| TU Chemnitz | University | Saxony | 147 | 212 | 11 | 29 | 131 | 32 | 37 |
| Universität Leipzig | University | Saxony | 95 | 220 | 12 | 36 | 44 | 62 | 41 |
| HS Mittweida | UAS | Saxony | 71 | 77 | 5 | 2 | 69 | 4 | 10 |
| Universitätsklinikum Jena | Hospital | Thuringia | 64 | 165 | 19 | 42 | 23 | 48 | 34 |
| HTW Dresden | UAS | Saxony | 52 | 78 | 7 | 12 | 51 | 14 | 11 |
| EAH Jena | UAS | Thuringia | 31 | 46 | 8 | 10 | 27 | 6 | 14 |
| Bauhaus-Universität Weimar | University | Thuringia | 26 | 37 | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 |
| WH Zwickau | UAS | Saxony | 20 | 26 | 4 | 8 | 14 | 1 | 9 |
| HTWK Leipzig | UAS | Saxony | 12 | 12 | 6 | 1 | 11 | 1 | 6 |
| HS Nordhausen | UAS | Thuringia | 7 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 4 |
| HS Zittau/Görlitz | UAS | Saxony | 5 | 7 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 2 |
| HS Schmalkalden | UAS | Thuringia | 4 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| FH Erfurt | UAS | Thuringia | 3 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 |
| Saxony (distinct) | Saxony | 1,648 | 2,926 | 118 | 408 | 1,352 | 602 | 547 | |
| Thuringia (distinct) | Thuringia | 553 | 1,127 | 81 | 199 | 413 | 275 | 271 | |
| All institutions (distinct) | both | 2,197 | 4,048 | 199 | 605 | 1,763 | 876 | 814 |
Query 4All DOCDB families, any filing authority, with the institution as applicant
Filing routes differ sharply by institution. FSU Jena reaches abroad most consistently: 152 of its 224 families (67.9%) contain a WO member and 92 (41.1%) have an EP filing. HS Mittweida sits at the other end, with 69 of its 71 families filed in Germany and 4 with a WO member. Universitätsklinikum Jena is the only institution whose EP filings (42) outnumber its German ones (23).
Why the column does not add up. The seventeen institution rows sum to 2,238 families against a distinct total of 2,197. The 41 families in between are filed jointly by two or more institutions in scope and count once per institution. Likewise 1,648 + 553 = 2,201, four more than 2,197, because four families carry applicants from both states.
02 · Trend
Filings fell from 281 families in 2013 to 163 in 2017 and have stayed in a narrow band since
2013–2017
From 281 families to 163, a drop of 42.0% over four years. The five years average 223.4 families.
2018–2023
Between 156 and 185 families a year. The last five complete years, 2019–2023, average 168.8.
By state
Thuringia fell from 78 families in 2013 to 31 in 2019 and has stayed between 31 and 45 since. Saxony fell from 203 to 109 by 2017 and recovered to 122–145 in 2019–2023.
2024, incomplete
80 families. Publication follows filing by about 18 months, so 2024, and to a lesser degree 2023, are below their eventual level and not comparable with earlier years.
Patent families per first filing year, Saxony and Thuringia
Data table: families per first filing year
| Year | Total families | Saxony | Thuringia | Co-filed families | Co-filing share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | 281 | 203 | 78 | 123 | 43.8% |
| 2014 | 234 | 175 | 59 | 82 | 35.0% |
| 2015 | 217 | 162 | 57 | 72 | 33.2% |
| 2016 | 222 | 157 | 65 | 96 | 43.2% |
| 2017 | 163 | 109 | 54 | 60 | 36.8% |
| 2018 | 156 | 111 | 45 | 75 | 48.1% |
| 2019 | 167 | 137 | 31 | 46 | 27.5% |
| 2020 | 185 | 145 | 40 | 70 | 37.8% |
| 2021 | 160 | 129 | 31 | 59 | 36.9% |
| 2022 | 171 | 134 | 37 | 57 | 33.3% |
| 2023 | 161 | 122 | 40 | 51 | 31.7% |
| 2024* | 80 | 64 | 16 | 23 | 28.8% |
| Total | 2,197 | 1,648 | 553 | 814 | 37.0% |
Query 5Each family counts once, in its earliest in-scope filing year · state series sum four above the total
TU Dresden shows the Saxon pattern: 135 families in 2013, a low of 67 in 2018, then 72–91 a year. One possible explanation is a change in filing practice rather than in research output; the data in this report does not distinguish the two.
Annual patent families of the six largest filers
Data table: annual families for the six largest filers
| Institution | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024* | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TU Dresden | 135 | 120 | 98 | 96 | 69 | 67 | 91 | 75 | 76 | 91 | 72 | 42 | 1,032 |
| TU Bergakademie Freiberg | 27 | 20 | 19 | 29 | 18 | 13 | 17 | 28 | 23 | 18 | 17 | 7 | 236 |
| FSU Jena | 31 | 25 | 24 | 26 | 21 | 20 | 12 | 18 | 12 | 13 | 17 | 5 | 224 |
| TU Ilmenau | 34 | 22 | 19 | 23 | 22 | 20 | 14 | 16 | 11 | 12 | 9 | 7 | 209 |
| TU Chemnitz | 16 | 17 | 17 | 16 | 7 | 11 | 11 | 8 | 16 | 8 | 14 | 6 | 147 |
| Universität Leipzig | 14 | 13 | 12 | 4 | 6 | 14 | 3 | 10 | 6 | 4 | 9 | 0 | 95 |
Query 5Per-institution years use that institution's own earliest filing year · 2024 incomplete
03 · Technology
Measurement is the largest field with 415 families, and no sector dominates
415 families are 18.9% of the portfolio and 58% more than the next field, other special machines (262). Materials and metallurgy (241) and electrical machinery (221) follow.
Patent families in the fifteen largest WIPO technology fields (a family can sit in several)
Data table: top 15 WIPO fields
| WIPO field | WIPO sector | Families | Share of 2,197 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Measurement | Instruments | 415 | 18.9% |
| Other special machines | Mechanical engineering | 262 | 11.9% |
| Materials, metallurgy | Chemistry | 241 | 11.0% |
| Electrical machinery, apparatus, energy | Electrical engineering | 221 | 10.1% |
| Medical technology | Instruments | 175 | 8.0% |
| Machine tools | Mechanical engineering | 174 | 7.9% |
| Biotechnology | Chemistry | 170 | 7.7% |
| Optics | Instruments | 166 | 7.6% |
| Semiconductors | Electrical engineering | 139 | 6.3% |
| Computer technology | Electrical engineering | 130 | 5.9% |
| Chemical engineering | Chemistry | 129 | 5.9% |
| Pharmaceuticals | Chemistry | 119 | 5.4% |
| Surface technology, coating | Chemistry | 105 | 4.8% |
| Analysis of biological materials | Instruments | 102 | 4.6% |
| Transport | Mechanical engineering | 97 | 4.4% |
Query 6WIPO 35 fields from the IPC codes of the institutions' applications
At sector level chemistry (808), mechanical engineering (770) and instruments (742) lie within 9% of each other; only electrical engineering (578) and other fields (139) fall clearly behind. The aggregate has no single technological centre. The specialisation appears only per institution.
Patent families in the five WIPO sectors
Data table: WIPO sectors
| WIPO sector | Families | Share of 2,197 |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 808 | 36.8% |
| Mechanical engineering | 770 | 35.0% |
| Instruments | 742 | 33.8% |
| Electrical engineering | 578 | 26.3% |
| Other fields | 139 | 6.3% |
| Sum of sectors | 3,037 | 138.2% |
Query 6Sector values are not parts of a whole
Sector and field totals are non-exclusive. A family carries several IPC symbols and so several fields and sectors. The five sector values sum to 3,037 against 2,197 distinct families, an average of 1.38 sector memberships per family.
04 · Specialisation
Single institutions are far more focused than the region: materials take 48.7% of Freiberg's families
Biotechnology accounts for 38.9% of Universität Leipzig's families, optics for 36.2% of FSU Jena's and measurement for 34.9% of TU Ilmenau's. TU Dresden is the exception: its largest field, measurement, reaches only 17.7% of its own portfolio. Measurement recurs most: it is in the top three of five of the nine institutions shown and the largest field for two of them.
The three largest WIPO fields of each institution with at least 50 families
| Institution | Families | Largest field | Second | Third |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TU Dresden | 1,032 | Measurement · 183 (17.7%) | Other special machines · 136 (13.2%) | Electrical machinery · 121 (11.7%) |
| TU Bergakademie Freiberg | 236 | Materials, metallurgy · 115 (48.7%) | Chemical engineering · 34 (14.4%) | Other special machines · 27 (11.4%) |
| FSU Jena | 224 | Optics · 81 (36.2%) | Measurement · 59 (26.3%) | Electrical machinery · 29 (12.9%) |
| TU Ilmenau | 209 | Measurement · 73 (34.9%) | Electrical machinery · 23 (11.0%) | Computer technology · 21 (10.0%) |
| TU Chemnitz | 147 | Machine tools · 39 (26.5%) | Other special machines · 24 (16.3%) | Mechanical elements · 18 (12.2%) |
| Universität Leipzig | 95 | Biotechnology · 37 (38.9%) | Pharmaceuticals · 24 (25.3%) | Measurement · 20 (21.1%) |
| HS Mittweida | 71 | Machine tools · 22 (31.0%) | Other special machines · 15 (21.1%) | Materials, metallurgy · 14 (19.7%) |
| Universitätsklinikum Jena | 64 | Medical technology · 19 (29.7%) | Biotechnology · 17 (26.6%) | Pharmaceuticals · 17 (26.6%) |
| HTW Dresden | 52 | Other special machines · 20 (38.5%) | Transport · 14 (26.9%) | Measurement · 13 (25.0%) |
Query 6Shares of the institution's own family count; a family can carry several fields, so a row can exceed 100%
05 · Partners
Fraunhofer co-files 251 families, and the next partner reaches 22
771 of 2,197 families (35.1%) carry at least one external co-applicant. Fraunhofer alone accounts for 251 of them: 32.6% of all externally co-filed families and 11.4% of the entire portfolio. Co-applicants are read from the same applications the institutions filed, and partners run through the same name rules as the scope, so no institution appears as its own partner.
External co-applicants by joint patent families
Data table: external co-applicants
| Partner (harmonised name) | Country | Joint families |
|---|---|---|
| Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung | DE | 251 |
| Siemens AG | DE | 22 |
| Leibniz-Institut für Photonische Technologien (IPHT), Jena | DE | 22 |
| Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf e.V. | DE | 21 |
| Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften e.V. | DE | 11 |
| thyssenkrupp Steel Europe AG | DE | 9 |
| Leibniz-Institut für Polymerforschung Dresden e.V. | DE | 9 |
| Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft (second spelling variant) | 9 | |
| Leichtbau-Zentrum Sachsen GmbH | DE | 9 |
| INSERM, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale | FR | 8 |
| GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH | DE | 8 |
| CNRS | FR | 7 |
| Leibniz-Institut für Photonische Technologien (second spelling variant) | DE | 7 |
| Audi AG | DE | 6 |
| Leibniz-Institut für Festkörper- und Werkstoffforschung Dresden | DE | 6 |
| JenaBatteries GmbH | DE | 6 |
| SurFunction GmbH | DE | 6 |
| 2MH Glas GmbH | DE | 6 |
Query 7Chart: the fourteen largest partner records · table: all eighteen with six or more
Partner names are harmonised by PATSTAT, not by this report. han_name splits Fraunhofer across a second variant with 9 further families and the Jena photonics institute across a second variant with 7. The variants may share families, so their counts cannot simply be added. The true Fraunhofer and Leibniz IPHT figures lie at or above the values shown, by up to the size of the second variant.
The institutions collaborate outward far more than with each other. Only 39 families (1.8% of the portfolio) join two or more of the seventeen, against 771 with an external partner. The densest internal link, FSU Jena with Universitätsklinikum Jena (10 families), is consistent with one academic site under two legal entities.
Joint families between the regional institutions
| Institution A | Institution B | Joint families |
|---|---|---|
| FSU Jena | Universitätsklinikum Jena | 10 |
| TU Dresden | Universität Leipzig | 7 |
| HTW Dresden | TU Dresden | 5 |
| TU Bergakademie Freiberg | TU Dresden | 4 |
| EAH Jena | TU Ilmenau | 2 |
| Universität Leipzig | Universitätsklinikum Jena | 2 |
| TU Ilmenau | Universitätsklinikum Jena | 2 |
| Eleven further pairs | 1 each |
Data table: sector of the external co-applicants
| Partner sector (PATSTAT psn_sector) | Families with such a partner |
|---|---|
| Government / non-profit research | 371 |
| Company | 282 |
| Unknown | 149 |
| University (outside the region) | 80 |
| Individual | 31 |
| Company and government / non-profit | 5 |
| Unclassified (blank) | 5 |
| Government / non-profit and hospital | 1 |
| Hospital | 1 |
| Families with at least one external partner | 771 |
Query 7Pair counts sum to 43 for 39 families · sector rows sum to 925 for 771 families
06 · Research institutes
Fraunhofer is the largest non-university research applicant in both states
481 EP families with a Saxon inventor and 273 with a Thuringian one, roughly 4.6 times the Leibniz figure in Saxony. Fraunhofer is also the dominant co-applicant of the universities (251 joint families), so the same organisation sits at both ends of the regional research relationship. Helmholtz is a Saxon phenomenon in this data, 77 families against 10, consistent with the Dresden-Rossendorf site; DLR is the only one of the five with more Thuringian than Saxon families (9 against 6). Leibniz is the most evenly spread (104 / 59).
EP families with a regional inventor, by research organisation and state
Data table: research organisations
| Organisation | Saxony (DED) | Thuringia (DEG) | Share of the state's EP output |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft | 481 | 273 | 6.7% / 6.5% |
| Leibniz-Gemeinschaft | 104 | 59 | 1.5% / 1.4% |
| Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft | 77 | 10 | 1.1% / 0.2% |
| Max-Planck-Gesellschaft | 62 | 17 | 0.9% / 0.4% |
| DLR | 6 | 9 | 0.1% / 0.2% |
| All EP families with a regional inventor | 7,171 | 4,226 | 100% / 100% |
Query 10EP applications 2013–2024 with an inventor in NUTS DED or DEG and the organisation as applicant
A different measurement basis. The university figures elsewhere are name-based and cover every filing office. This chapter is inventor-location-based and EP-only, because regional geocoding in PATSTAT exists on EP person records and not on German national ones. The two cannot be compared or added: a Fraunhofer institute in Dresden is counted here through its inventors' residence, a university through its own name.
07 · Where
Four in five families take the German route, and the EP share rose from 23.1% to 30.5%
1,763 of 2,197 families have a DPMA filing, the classic German university priority-filing pattern. 755 families carry a PCT application filed by an institution itself and 605 reach the EPO. Counting all members of a family, not only those the institutions filed, 876 families (39.9%) contain a WO member.
Patent families by filing office, 2013–2024
Data table: filing offices
| Office | Families | Share of 2,197 |
|---|---|---|
| DE · Germany (DPMA) | 1,763 | 80.2% |
| WO · PCT (filed by an institution) | 755 | 34.4% |
| EP · European Patent Office | 605 | 27.5% |
| US · United States | 353 | 16.1% |
| CN · China | 100 | 4.6% |
| CA · Canada | 65 | 3.0% |
| KR · South Korea | 56 | 2.5% |
| ES · Spain | 40 | 1.8% |
| AU · Australia | 25 | 1.1% |
| PL · Poland | 22 | 1.0% |
| TW · Taiwan | 21 | 1.0% |
| BR · Brazil | 15 | 0.7% |
Query 8A family counts at an office if an institution filed there
Between the two complete windows the DPMA share fell 5.5 percentage points while EP gained 7.4, WO 4.8, the US 3.5 and China 3.1. China doubled in absolute terms, from 34 to 55 families, while the window total fell from 1,117 to 906. No office in the table moved the other way.
Share of families at each office, 2013–2017 against 2018–2022 (%)
Data table: office shares by window
| Office | 2013–2017 families | Share | 2018–2022 families | Share | Change in share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DE | 896 | 80.2% | 677 | 74.7% | −5.5 pp |
| WO | 326 | 29.2% | 308 | 34.0% | +4.8 pp |
| EP | 258 | 23.1% | 276 | 30.5% | +7.4 pp |
| US | 173 | 15.5% | 172 | 19.0% | +3.5 pp |
| CN | 34 | 3.0% | 55 | 6.1% | +3.1 pp |
| CA | 28 | 2.5% | 35 | 3.9% | +1.4 pp |
| KR | 23 | 2.1% | 24 | 2.6% | +0.5 pp |
| Families in the window | 1,117 | 100% | 906 | 100% |
Query 82023 and 2024 excluded: publication lag · a family with filings in both windows counts in both
08 · Grants
The EPO granted 59.6% of the 2013–2020 applications, the DPMA 47.1%
The United States is higher still at 67.5%. One consistent reading is selection: a family reaches the EPO or the USPTO only after the applicant has decided it is worth the extra cost, while the German filing is often the first and cheapest step. The data shows the difference; it cannot establish the cause.
Granted share of applications filed 2013–2020, by office (%)
Data table: grant rate by office
| Office | Applications 2013–2020 | Granted | Grant rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| ES · Spain | 39 | 38 | 97.4% |
| KR · South Korea | 41 | 30 | 73.2% |
| US · United States | 277 | 187 | 67.5% |
| EP · European Patent Office | 448 | 267 | 59.6% |
| DE · Germany (DPMA) | 1,356 | 638 | 47.1% |
| CN · China | 68 | 31 | 45.6% |
| CA · Canada | 44 | 16 | 36.4% |
| WO · PCT phase | 510 | 27 | not applicable |
Query 8Application level · WO shown for completeness, excluded from every rate
Two reasons a grant rate can mislead. PCT applications never grant: a WO application is an international phase, so its 510 applications are excluded from every rate here, including the institution table. Pendency: applications filed after 2020 are excluded, and even inside 2013–2020 the later years are partly pending, so every rate is a lower bound.
Restricted to DE and EP, the two routes all seventeen institutions use, 905 of 1,804 applications were granted, 50.2%. Across the twelve institutions with a reportable cohort the rate ranges from 29.3% to 76.5%. The two life-science-heavy portfolios sit at the bottom, Universität Leipzig (29.3%) and Universitätsklinikum Jena (38.0%); TU Bergakademie Freiberg (57.8%), HTW Dresden (59.1%) and EAH Jena (57.7%) sit at the top. WH Zwickau's 76.5% rests on 17 applications and is an indication only.
Grant rate by institution, DE and EP applications filed 2013–2020
| Institution | DE + EP applications 2013–2020 | Granted | Grant rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| TU Dresden | 838 | 440 | 52.5% |
| FSU Jena | 216 | 80 | 37.0% |
| TU Bergakademie Freiberg | 185 | 107 | 57.8% |
| TU Ilmenau | 182 | 90 | 49.5% |
| TU Chemnitz | 111 | 57 | 51.4% |
| Universität Leipzig | 82 | 24 | 29.3% |
| HS Mittweida | 51 | 27 | 52.9% |
| Universitätsklinikum Jena | 50 | 19 | 38.0% |
| HTW Dresden | 44 | 26 | 59.1% |
| EAH Jena | 26 | 15 | 57.7% |
| Bauhaus-Universität Weimar | 20 | 9 | 45.0% |
| WH Zwickau | 17 | 13 | 76.5% |
| Five institutions with fewer than 10 applications | 24 | 16 | not reported |
| All institutions | 1,804 | 905 | 50.2% |
Query 8No rate below 10 applications (HTWK Leipzig, HS Nordhausen, HS Zittau/Görlitz, HS Schmalkalden, FH Erfurt) · joint applications count for each institution
09 · Inventors
Eight of the twelve most prolific inventors work at TU Dresden
That matches TU Dresden's share of the portfolio. What differs is weight. Chokri Cherif's 49 families are 4.7% of TU Dresden's 1,032, while Christos Aneziris's 28 are 11.9% of TU Bergakademie Freiberg's 236 and Jens Limpert's 23 are 10.3% of FSU Jena's 224. In the smaller portfolios one research group carries a visible share of everything the institution files.
Inventors named on 20 or more families (colour: TU Dresden, TU Bergakademie Freiberg, FSU Jena)
Data table: inventors on 20 or more families
| Inventor | Institution | Families | Share of that institution's portfolio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cherif, Chokri | TU Dresden | 49 | 4.7% |
| Leo, Karl | TU Dresden | 39 | 3.8% |
| Hufenbach, Werner | TU Dresden | 32 | 3.1% |
| Kleemann, Hans | TU Dresden | 29 | 2.8% |
| Aneziris, Christos | TU Bergakademie Freiberg | 28 | 11.9% |
| Hesse, Ullrich | TU Dresden | 27 | 2.6% |
| Kaskel, Stefan | TU Dresden | 26 | 2.5% |
| Limpert, Jens | FSU Jena | 23 | 10.3% |
| Plettemeier, Dirk | TU Dresden | 21 | 2.0% |
| Kroke, Edwin | TU Bergakademie Freiberg | 21 | 8.9% |
| Curbach, Manfred | TU Dresden | 21 | 2.0% |
| Schubert, Ulrich Sigmar | FSU Jena | 20 | 8.9% |
Query 9Names upper-cased before counting
PATSTAT does not resolve inventor identity. Upper-casing removes the most common differences; for one inventor above it merged three records. It cannot resolve initials against full names or separate two people who share a name, so the report gives no total number of inventors per institution.
10 · Citations
1,228 of 2,197 families have been cited at least once, and 969 never
The cited families received 9,225 citations together. The distribution is steeply skewed: the 101 families with 20 or more citations are 4.6% of the portfolio. An average of 7.5 citations per cited family describes almost none of the individual families.
Patent families by forward citations received
Data table: citation distribution
| Forward citations received | Families | Share of 2,197 |
|---|---|---|
| 0 citations | 969 | 44.1% |
| 1–4 | 755 | 34.4% |
| 5–19 | 372 | 16.9% |
| 20–49 | 74 | 3.4% |
| 50 or more | 27 | 1.2% |
| At least one citation | 1,228 | 55.9% |
Query 9All family members, all citing offices
Citation intensity does not follow portfolio size. Universität Leipzig has 95 families but averages 14.8 citations per cited family, nearly twice TU Dresden's 7.6 across 1,032. FSU Jena has the highest cited share among the large filers (64.7%) and an above-average 8.6. HS Mittweida's 71 families produced 45 citations in total: a portfolio filed almost entirely at the DPMA, where fewer citing documents exist.
Average forward citations per cited family, by institution
Data table: citations by institution
| Institution | Families | Cited at least once | Cited share | Total citations | Per cited family |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TU Dresden | 1,032 | 594 | 57.6% | 4,539 | 7.6 |
| FSU Jena | 224 | 145 | 64.7% | 1,244 | 8.6 |
| TU Ilmenau | 209 | 131 | 62.7% | 1,002 | 7.6 |
| TU Bergakademie Freiberg | 236 | 124 | 52.5% | 557 | 4.5 |
| TU Chemnitz | 147 | 66 | 44.9% | 583 | 8.8 |
| Universität Leipzig | 95 | 52 | 54.7% | 767 | 14.8 |
| Universitätsklinikum Jena | 64 | 37 | 57.8% | 341 | 9.2 |
| HTW Dresden | 52 | 30 | 57.7% | 236 | 7.9 |
| HS Mittweida | 71 | 21 | 29.6% | 45 | 2.1 |
| EAH Jena | 31 | 15 | 48.4% | 38 | 2.5 |
| WH Zwickau | 20 | 15 | 75.0% | 48 | 3.2 |
| Bauhaus-Universität Weimar | 26 | 10 | 38.5% | 19 | 1.9 |
| HTWK Leipzig | 12 | 5 | 41.7% | 18 | 3.6 |
| All institutions (distinct) | 2,197 | 1,228 | 55.9% | 9,225 | 7.5 |
Query 9Four institutions with fewer than five cited families omitted · rows sum to 1,250 cited families, 1,228 distinct · older families have had longer to be cited
11 · Regions
Dresden accounts for 43.0% of Saxony's EP families, Jena for 31.9% of Thuringia's
3,086 of 7,171 and 1,346 of 4,226 EP families with a local inventor, 2013–2024. Both cities are the seats of the largest filers in this report. Beyond the four large cities the distribution is flat: eight further districts lie between 374 and 614 families, with no second cluster.
NUTS 3 districts by EP families with a local inventor (Saxony and Thuringia in two colours)
Data table: top 12 districts
| NUTS 3 | District | State | EP families |
|---|---|---|---|
| DED21 | Dresden, Kreisfreie Stadt | Saxony | 3,086 |
| DEG03 | Jena, Kreisfreie Stadt | Thuringia | 1,346 |
| DED51 | Leipzig, Kreisfreie Stadt | Saxony | 991 |
| DED41 | Chemnitz, Kreisfreie Stadt | Saxony | 688 |
| DED43 | Mittelsachsen | Saxony | 614 |
| DED2E | Meißen | Saxony | 608 |
| DED2F | Sächsische Schweiz-Osterzgebirge | Saxony | 557 |
| DEG01 | Erfurt, Kreisfreie Stadt | Thuringia | 488 |
| DED42 | Erzgebirgskreis | Saxony | 472 |
| DED2C | Bautzen | Saxony | 460 |
| DED45 | Zwickau | Saxony | 454 |
| DED52 | Leipzig, Landkreis | Saxony | 374 |
| DED | Saxony, all districts | Saxony | 7,171 |
| DEG | Thuringia, all districts | Thuringia | 4,226 |
| DED + DEG | Both states, distinct | both | 11,142 |
Query 10EP applications filed 2013–2024 with at least one inventor in the district
Academic applicants are a small share of regional EP output. Universities appear on 6.9% of Saxony's and 5.2% of Thuringia's EP families, government or non-profit research institutes on a further 9.4% and 8.5%. Companies carry roughly seven in ten in both states, so the academic contribution reads as a research input into a company-dominated regional portfolio.
Applicant sector on EP families with a regional inventor
Data table: applicant sector
| Applicant sector | Saxony | Share of 7,171 | Thuringia | Share of 4,226 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Company | 4,867 | 67.9% | 3,033 | 71.8% |
| Unknown | 1,315 | 18.3% | 714 | 16.9% |
| Government / non-profit research | 677 | 9.4% | 358 | 8.5% |
| University | 496 | 6.9% | 219 | 5.2% |
| Individual | 245 | 3.4% | 156 | 3.7% |
| Mixed and other sectors | 15 | 0.2% | 2 | 0.0% |
Query 10PATSTAT psn_sector; Unknown is a PATSTAT value · a family can appear in several rows
What this basis can and cannot see. District-level NUTS codes exist on EP person records, not on German national ones, so this chapter counts EP filings only and any organisation that never files at the EPO is invisible. That is the opposite bias to the rest of the report, where four in five university families run through the DPMA. The 11,142 regional EP families and the 2,197 university families are two different measurements and must not be compared directly.
12 · How we counted
How the numbers were counted
- Scope by applicant nameA regional pass over person records with a NUTS code in DED or DEG (62 name pairs) fixed the institution list; a national pass over names with a higher-education term and a university town found most variants. An explicit rule set on the upper-cased, umlaut-folded person_name maps 199 variants to the seventeen institutions, from 55 for TU Dresden to 2 each for HS Nordhausen and HS Schmalkalden. It applies unchanged in every query and on both sides of the co-applicant analysis.
- One family, one yearHeadline counts are DOCDB families; pseudo-families (docdb_family_id 0) are excluded. Each family sits in the earliest filing year among the institutions' own applications, so the twelve years sum to 2,197.
- PCT rate over all family members876 families (39.9%) have any member with appln_auth WO. The narrower 755 families with a WO application filed by an institution itself are reported separately.
- Grants on applications, 2013–2020 onlyGrant is an application-level event, so grant rates count applications from a cohort that has had at least five years in examination.
Checks and limits
- han_name only as a cross-checkThe harmonised name of TU Ilmenau is also carried by Technische Hochschule Ingolstadt (25 families across two spellings) and Technische Hochschule Köln (4). Universitätsklinikum Jena records sit under FSU Jena names: three harmonised names for two legal entities. The reverse check found two gaps, "Technische Universität" (3 families, harmonised to TU Dresden) and "FRIEDRICH-SCHILLER-UNIVERSITAET" (3 families, FSU Jena), closed by a narrow han_name fallback verified to carry no out-of-region records.
- Affiliated institutes excludedBodies "an der" a university are legally independent: Materialforschungs- und -prüfanstalt an der Bauhaus-Universität Weimar (13 families across two records), Forschungs- und Transferzentrum Leipzig e.V. an der HTWK (largest record 4 families), the Forschungs- und Transferzentrum an der WH Zwickau, the Sächsisches Institut für Angewandte Biotechnologie and IPM an der HS Zittau/Görlitz.
- HospitalsKlinikum Chemnitz gGmbH and Städtisches Klinikum Dresden-Friedrichstadt have no university status; Carl Gustav Carus Management GmbH (3 families) is a service company. All excluded. Universitätsklinikum Jena, a separate legal entity, is its own row. The Dresden medical faculty files under the TU Dresden name and is counted there.
- Individuals excluded, universities of applied sciences includedRecords of the form "Surname, Firstname" are inventors filing in their own name. HS Mittweida, HTW Dresden, HTWK Leipzig, WH Zwickau, HS Zittau/Görlitz, EAH Jena, HS Nordhausen, HS Schmalkalden and FH Erfurt are state universities of applied sciences and part of the portfolio.
- Utility models included3,986 patent applications (2,146 families) and 62 utility models (62 families): 1.5% of applications, 2.8% of families. The families sum to 2,208, not 2,197, because 11 families hold both. TU Chemnitz (19) and HS Mittweida (19) account for 61% of the utility models. No designs occur.
- Applicant, not inventorResearch at these institutions filed by a company or a research institute alone is not counted.
- Name-based scopeA filing under a spelling no rule matches is invisible. The rules were checked against PATSTAT's harmonisation in both directions, but no name-based method can be proven complete.
- Recent years incomplete2024 (80 families) and to a lesser degree 2023 are below their eventual level. No trend statement rests on them, and the two office windows end in 2022.
- Grant rates are lower boundsEven the 2013–2020 cohort holds pending applications. PCT applications are excluded from all rates.
- Regional chapters use a different basisResearch institutes and regions rest on EP applications with geocoded inventors and cannot be added to or compared with the name-based university figures.
- Partner names PATSTAT-harmonisedFraunhofer and Leibniz IPHT are split across two spellings each; their true joint-family counts are at or above the values shown.
- Inventor identity not resolvedNames are only upper-cased, so no count of distinct inventors is reported.
- Multi-assignmentThe five sectors sum to 3,037 and the institution rows to 2,238 against 2,197 families; each table states its gap.
- ClassificationThe set is fixed by applicant name, so subtree expansion, predecessor union and deprecated-symbol retention do not apply. WIPO fields come from tls230_appln_techn_field; no is_active filter was applied.
- EditionComputed on 15 August 2026 against EPO PATSTAT Global, Spring 2026 (patstat-mtc.patstat_2026a), IPC 20260101 and CPC 202608. Figures from another edition are not directly comparable.
The frozen scope definition that Queries 5 to 9 repeat verbatim
Query 4queries.sql · Query 0 to Query 10
Release protocol
- Agentsearch + draftBuilt the name rules and queried PATSTAT read-only. Every number comes from SQL.
- Checks13 rulesEvery claim must trace back to a query; chart and table must agree.
- Reviewsubject expertChecks scope, counts and wording before publication.
- Approvalsecond personA second person not involved in the report approves publication.
Next step
Which region or group of institutions 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.