Constructive Solid Geometry Boolean Modeling Patents: Who Leads and Where the Field Is Thinning Out

The assignee ranking for this dataset covers 79 companies across 222 records, with the leading filer holding 30 records and a steep drop to 12 records at fifth place. The top five filers together account for 41.9% of all 222 records in scope, and the top ten extend that to 57.2%. Beyond the leaders, filing activity thins into a long tail, so most of the ranked companies hold only a handful of records each rather than a sustained portfolio.

G06T, image data processing and generation, covers 74.8% of the 222 records, making it the single largest classification by a wide margin. G06F, electric digital data processing, follows at 56.8%. Because a record can carry multiple IPC classes, these figures add up to more than 100%, but the pattern is clear: most claim drafting centers on geometry, rendering and image-processing pipelines rather than general control systems, which sit under 4%.

Filing activity in this dataset peaked in 2011 at 16 records and has not returned to that level in any later complete year, running from 8 records in 2007 through to the present. The 2026 figure shows 0, but that reflects the partial data cut-off rather than a real stop, since publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months. There are not enough complete recent years in this dataset to state a reliable growth rate.

Yes. A61B, diagnosis and surgery, accounts for 11.7% of the 222 records, and G16H, healthcare informatics, accounts for 7.2%, indicating a genuine secondary application of CSG Boolean techniques in surgical planning and healthcare software. A61F, implants and prostheses, is a smaller but distinct slice at 2.3%. This suggests the underlying geometric modeling techniques have migrated well beyond the original CAD and manufacturing use case.

The steep concentration at the top of the ranking, 41.9% of 222 records held by just five filers, contrasts with a long tail of 69 companies splitting the remainder thinly, which usually signals room to differentiate outside the core claims of the largest holders. The smaller IPC classes here, such as G05B control systems at 3.6%, G06G analogue computers at 2.7% and A61F implants at 2.3%, are comparatively under-claimed relative to the dominant G06T and G06F clusters. Anyone evaluating freedom to operate should read the leading filer's claims closely, since that portfolio carries the most weight in this dataset.