https://eureka.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/chemometric-variable-selection-algorithm-for-process-analytical-technology-spectral-data-p-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-10-26 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Patent Landscape Snapshot

Chemometric Variable Selection Algorithm Patents for Process Analytical Technology Spectral Data

A 6-family dataset on chemometric variable selection for spectral data, with filers, filing years and IPC spread for early FTO scans.

25
Published Records
6
Simple Patent Families
48%
In Force at Cut-off
US
Leading Jurisdiction

25 published records collapse into 6 simple (DOCDB) families; the difference is the same invention filed in more than one country. In force = 12 of 25 records still granted and maintained at the data cut-off; the rest are pending, withdrawn, refused or lapsed.

  • 6 simple patent families and 25 published records match the search string across the available filing history.
  • G01N material analysis & testing appears on 5 of the 6 families, the highest share of any subclass in scope.
  • 12 of 25 records were granted and still in force at retrieval, with the remainder pending, withdrawn, refused or lapsed and not broken out further.
Check your own idea
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this dataset covers

This page reads the results of a single search string looking for chemometric variable selection or wavelength selection applied to spectral or spectroscopic data, across every filing date the search string matched, with no date limit applied. The 25 published records resolve to 6 simple patent families, meaning most of the inventive content here was filed into more than one jurisdiction or publication stage rather than being 25 separate inventions. A receiving-office breakdown shows where applications were filed, not where any filer is based.

With only 6 families in scope, this is a small pool. Treat the page as a starting point for a closer search rather than a map of the field, and verify any individual record before relying on it.

Records vs. families in scope
  1. OIL CROPS RES INST CHINESE ACAD OF AGRI SCI2
  2. TAKEDA PHARMA CO LTD1
  3. THE ROYAL VETERINARY & AGRI UNIV1
  4. MERCK PATENT GMBH1
  5. OTTAWA HOSPITAL RES INST1
  6. NOERGAARD LARS1

Ordered by volume only, not by importance or claim strength. Counted in simple (DOCDB) patent families, so one invention filed in several countries counts once. Names come from Patsnap's standardised assignee field as recorded on each document; subsidiaries and group companies are not merged. The icon before each name is read from the name itself (words such as University, Institute or Ltd); the data carries no organisation-type field, so treat it as a reading aid rather than a classification. Filings held by named individuals rather than organisations are removed where they can be identified (3 here); that identification is not exhaustive, so an individually held filing can still appear below. Either way those filings stay inside the totals above. This table shows the top 6 of the 6 filers returned for this search; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 6 is not the complete set of filers. A single family can name more than one filer, so these counts overlap and do not add up to the total.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from one Patsnap search for Chemometric Variable Selection Algorithm for Process Analytical Technology Spectral Data Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Numbers

Filing activity and technology split

Two views of the same 6-family, 25-record dataset: when records were first filed, and which IPC subclasses they carry.

Filing trend by earliest filing year

Published records by earliest filing year, from 2007 (3 records) to a peak of 10 records in 2014, down to 1 in 2026. Years from 2022 onward are still filling in as later publications arrive, so the most recent years understate eventual totals; this series counts documents, not de-duplicated inventions.

Filing trend by earliest filing year035810320072009201120131020152017201920212023202512022 onwards are shaded as still filling in: a filing is only visible once it publishes, up to 30 months after filing.

Counted in published records by earliest filing year, not de-duplicated into families. A filing is counted in the year it was filed, but it only becomes visible after it publishes: roughly 18 months for most routes, and up to 30 months where a PCT application enters national phase. 2022 onwards are therefore still filling in and are shaded; no growth figure on this page uses them. Because this series counts documents rather than inventions, a rise can mean more inventions or the same inventions filed in more countries; this dataset cannot separate the two. This chart covers 2007-2026 (24 records); the 25 total quoted above includes earlier filings outside the window.

IPC subclass composition

Shares are calculated against all 6 simple patent families, and a family can carry more than one subclass, so the figures add up to more than 100%. G01N (material analysis & testing) appears on 5 of the 6 families (83.3%); A01H, C12N, G16B and G16C each appear on 1 family (16.7% apiece).

IPC subclass compositionG01N · Material analysis & testing583.3%A01H · New plants / plant breeding116.7%C12N · Microorganisms & genetic engin…116.7%G16B · Bioinformatics116.7%G16C · Computational chemistry116.7%

Shares are the percentage of the 6 patent families in scope. One patent family can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from one Patsnap search for Chemometric Variable Selection Algorithm for Process Analytical Technology Spectral Data Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Chemometric Variable Selection Algorithm for Process Analytical Technology Spectral Data Patent Landscape with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about chemometric variable selection algorithm for process analytical technology spectral data patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Record in Focus

One record from the result set

As Returned by the Search
US20120008130A92012-01-12

US20120008130A9, Correlation technique for analysis of clinical condition

OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE

The abstract describes a correlation technique that measures spectral properties or changes in bodily fluid and/or tissue using at least two optical techniques, then correlates those measured properties to a clinical condition or a change in it. The method is framed around tracking disease progression or treatment response over time using the measured spectral changes as indicators.This is simply the first record the search returns under the database default order, not the most cited, newest or broadest filing in the set.

US20120008130A9, patent drawing 1US20120008130A9, patent drawing 2
View full record

Selected as the first record the search returns under the database default order, then shown in full. It is not ranked by citations, claim breadth or commercial importance, and it is not a judgement about which filing in this space matters most.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. The first record the search returned, shown in full. Derived from one Patsnap search for Chemometric Variable Selection Algorithm for Process Analytical Technology Spectral Data Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move 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 →
Reading the Data

What the figures show

Three figures worth sitting with before treating any ranking on this page as settled.

Scale
6 families / 25 records
families vs. records

A small, de-duplicated pool

The search string resolves to 6 simple patent families behind 25 published records. The gap between the two counts reflects multiple publications or jurisdictions per invention, not 25 separate inventions.

Counted across the full matched filing history, no date limit applied.
Filers
2 families, top row
largest single filer count

One filer at 2, the rest at 1

The listed filer with the most families is named on 2 of the 6; the fifth-ranked listed filer is named on 1. The filer list excludes individual-named filings, which are still counted in the dataset totals, and rows cannot be summed because one family can name more than one filer.

Based on the top 6 listed filers returned by the data endpoint, not the full filer set.
Legal status
12 of 25
records granted and in force

Under half in force at retrieval

12 of the 25 published records were granted and still in force at the 2026-10-26 retrieval date. The remaining 13 cover pending, withdrawn, refused and lapsed status without a further breakdown, and status changes continuously after retrieval.

Legal status is a snapshot, not a quality or enforceability measure.
Technology
83.3% of families
G01N share

G01N carries the highest IPC share

G01N (material analysis & testing) appears on 5 of the 6 families in scope, the highest share of any subclass here. Four other subclasses each appear on 1 family; shares are measured against families, not records, and sum to more than 100% because a family can carry several subclasses.

Subclasses below the reporting threshold are not named in this page.
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 chemometric variable selection algorithm for process analytical technology spectral data patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Derived observations on the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Chemometric Variable Selection Algorithm for Process Analytical Technology Spectral Data Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Next Steps

Taking this further

This page is a first read on a narrow search string, not a finished claim map.

Pull the granted claims

A family count or an abstract cannot tell you what a granted claim actually requires. Read the claim set of any record that matters to a project before treating it as a reference point.

Explore in Eureka

Widen or vary the search string

With only 6 families returned, adjacent terms or synonyms for variable selection, wavelength selection or specific spectroscopic modalities may surface records this exact string missed.

Run a new search in Eureka

Track legal status changes

12 of 25 records were in force at retrieval; status shifts over time as applications grant, lapse or get withdrawn. Re-check status before relying on any single record.

Monitor records in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Suggested next steps. No new data: every figure named here is one of those above. Derived from one Patsnap search for Chemometric Variable Selection Algorithm for Process Analytical Technology Spectral Data Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Chemometric Variable Selection Algorithm for Process Analytical Technology Spectral Data Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Research Chemometric Variable Selection Algorithm for Process Analytical Technology Spectral Data Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole chemometric variable selection algorithm for process analytical technology spectral data patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka
How this page was built, and what the numbers do and do not mean

Search. Every figure on this page comes from one Patsnap search, run once and not edited afterwards. This is the exact search string:

TAC:(("variable selection" OR "wavelength selection") AND chemometric AND (spectral OR spectroscop*))

Reading the field codes: TAC searches the title, abstract and claims of each record, not the full description. The search string sets no date limit, so the scope is every matching record in the database regardless of when it was filed. It is not restricted to recent years. How this string was built matters for how far the counts can be pushed. It was generated in batch from a topic list rather than hand-crafted for this page, and the result set is not manually screened. A keyword search over title, abstract and claims both over-captures (unrelated filings that happen to use the same words) and under-captures (the same invention written in different words). This page cannot measure either effect, so read every figure here as what this particular string returned, not as what exists in the field. One subclass (G01N) carries 83.3% of the patent families, so this search returned a classification-tight set.

What is being counted. Two different units appear on this page and they are not interchangeable. The filer list and the technology split are counted in simple (DOCDB) patent families: one invention counts once however many countries it was filed in. The total, the jurisdiction split and the filing-year chart are counted in published records: the same invention counts once per publication. For this search that is 25 records and 6 families. Record counts reward filing in many jurisdictions; family counts do not. Shares are only ever taken against a denominator in the same unit, and each one names it.

Who the filers are. Names come from Patsnap's standardised assignee field, as recorded on the documents themselves. They are not rolled up to corporate group: a parent and its subsidiaries appear as separate entries, and a portfolio acquired from another company stays under the name on the document unless the assignment is reflected there. This list is meant to carry organisations, not people. Filings held by a named individual are identified by matching the assignee against the inventors on the same search, and, for names written in Chinese, Japanese or Korean characters, by the name carrying no organisational suffix; those are removed from the list (3 of them here). Neither test is exhaustive: the inventor list it matches against is itself capped, and a personal name written in Latin script with no organisational wording in it cannot be told apart from a short company name by rule. So an individually held filing can still appear in the list. Those filings stay inside every total and share on this page either way, so the listed entries can add up to less than the total. A record shown in full further down still names its assignee exactly as the patent office records it, including where that is a person: that name is how the record is identified and checked. What is left out of the ranking is people as ranked entries, not people as cited sources. The table shows the top 6 of the 6 filers returned, ordered by count alone; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 6 is not every filer. One patent family can name several filers and each is counted separately, so these rows are not slices of a divided whole: adding them together over-counts, and this page deliberately publishes no combined "top five" share for that reason. See every filer, individuals included

Dates. The year chart counts by earliest filing year, not publication year. A filing only becomes visible once it publishes: roughly 18 months for most routes, and up to 30 months where a PCT application enters national phase. Measured across these pages, the year four back from today still holds only about 89% of its eventual count. 2022 onwards are therefore shaded on the chart as still filling in. The data behind this page was retrieved on 2026-10-26.

Legal status. "In force" counts documents whose legal status at retrieval was granted and maintained (12 of 25). Everything else is pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed or not determinable, and those states are not broken out here because the underlying codes do not separate them cleanly. Legal status changes continuously and is reported per document, not per family. Get the status breakdown in Eureka

Classification. The technology split uses IPC subclasses (four characters, for example H01M). A single record usually carries several, so the shares add up to more than 100% and a record can appear in more than one bar. Subclass is a coarse grouping; it describes the field a record was classified into, not what the claims cover. Break the classes down to subgroup level

Who wrote the words. The tables, charts, counts, shares and patent numbers on this page are produced directly from the search result by a program; none of them are written or estimated by a language model. The surrounding prose, headings, FAQ answers and the answers in the question panel are drafted by a language model that is given those same figures and is not permitted to introduce others. Prose can still mis-describe a correct figure, so where the two disagree, the tables and charts are the record.

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 limitations that apply to every figure above. Recent filings are under-counted, because an application is not public until roughly 18 months after filing and database loading adds further delay. The search string defines and constrains everything shown: records that use different terminology, or that sit outside the fields searched, are absent and cannot be counted. Applicant names, classification codes, legal-status codes and citation records are taken as recorded and may contain errors, duplicates, omissions or stale entries. Ordering by volume is not a measure of quality, scope, enforceability or commercial value, and a larger portfolio is not a stronger one. 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, validity or infringement search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. No attorney-client relationship is created by it. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently against the primary records 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.

The question panel. The answers behind the suggested questions on this page were written when the page was generated, not in response to your click. The progress steps that play before an answer appears are an animation of how that analysis was done; nothing is being searched or computed at that moment. Typing your own question instead opens Patsnap Eureka, which does run it live.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.