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 →230 patent families on reference data and cross-reference table management, with filer concentration and a filing trend through 2026.
520 published records collapse into 230 simple (DOCDB) families; the difference is the same invention filed in more than one country. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NA is named on 7 of the 230 patent families in scope. One patent family can name several filers, so these figures are not slices of a divided whole and do not add up. In force = 163 of 520 records still granted and maintained at the data cut-off; the rest are pending, withdrawn, refused or lapsed.
This landscape tracks 230 simple patent families (520 published records) returned by a search for reference data and cross-reference table management combined with mapping or lookup terms. No start year was set, so the records span whatever filing dates the matching documents carry, and the filing-trend chart below shows only a recent window rather than the full history.
Filer rows are organisations only, filings held by named individuals are stripped from the ranked list but remain inside every total and share quoted on this page. Because one family can name more than one filer, the rows in the table overlap and cannot be summed into a coverage or concentration figure.
Counted over all 520 published records, including filings from before 2007; the filing-trend chart below covers only the 365 records from 2007 onward, so the two charts are not the same set of documents. 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. 2 rows in this table start with the same name (ACCENTURE GLOBAL SERVICES LTD, ACCENTURE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD). They are left as separate rows, so the largest-filer figure above is per legal entity, not per group. Rows that look related still cannot be added together: one family can name several of them. Counted one by one, those rows between them cover more than the largest single row does, so the largest single row is not necessarily the largest filer in this field. How much those rows cover together is not something this dataset can say: one family can name several of them, so their counts cannot be added. Every ranking statement on this page is per individual filer row, never per group. Filings held by named individuals rather than organisations are removed where they can be identified (16 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 30 of the 84 filers returned for this search; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 84 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.
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Two views of the same 230 families: when the underlying records were filed, and which IPC subclasses they sit in.
Published records by earliest filing year ran from 11 in 2007 to a peak of 38 in 2019, with 15 recorded for 2026 so far. Records filed from 2022 onward are still publishing and are understated on the chart; this is a publication-lag effect, not a drop in 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 (365 records); the 520 total quoted above includes earlier filings outside the window.
G06F (electric digital data processing) carries the highest share at 66.1% of the 230 families, ahead of G06Q (business, commerce & admin data processing) at 31.3% and H04L (digital information transmission) at 18.7%. Families can carry more than one subclass, so these shares add up to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 230 patent families in scope. One patent family can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about data curation reference data cross-reference table management patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA method for joining an event stream with reference data includes loading a plurality of reference data snapshots from a reference data source into a cache. Punctuation events are supplied that indicate temporal validity for the plurality of reference data snapshots in the cache. A logical barrier is provided that restricts a flow of data events in the event stream to a cache lookup operation based on the punctuation events. The cache lookup operation is performed with respect to the data events in the event stream that are permitted to cross the logical barrier.Filed by Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC and published 2021-09-07. This is the first record returned under the database default order, not a ranking by citations, novelty or scope.


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.
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 →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 →These figures describe counts returned by the search. They say nothing about claim scope, validity or commercial value.
JPMorgan Chase Bank NA is named on 7 of the 230 simple patent families in scope (3.0%). This is the largest single-row figure in the listed filers; because families can name more than one filer, this number cannot be added to any other row to produce a combined share.
71 of the 84 listed filing organisations hold 2 or fewer simple patent families each. The list itself covers only organisations with at least one family and excludes individual-named filers, who remain inside the 230-family total.
G06F (electric digital data processing) appears on 152 of the 230 families (66.1%), ahead of G06Q at 31.3% and H04L at 18.7%. Families can carry multiple IPC subclasses, so these shares do not sum to 100%.
At the 2026-10-16 retrieval date, 163 of the 520 published records (31%) were granted and still in force. The remainder sit across pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed or undetermined states that are not broken out individually in this dataset.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to data curation reference data cross-reference table management patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
The figures here describe what the search returned. Narrowing the query or pulling granted claims directly is how to move from counts to a position.
A family count or an abstract cannot establish what a patent covers. For any record that matters to a filing decision, read the granted claim set directly.
Open Patsnap EurekaThis search used broad reference-data and lookup terms; some of the smaller IPC subclasses it returned likely reflect that breadth rather than a distinct technology branch.
Refine the search in Patsnap EurekaWith 71 of 84 listed filers holding 2 or fewer families each, watching how new filings add to the smaller rows over time may be more informative than the single largest row.
Set up filer tracking in Patsnap EurekaThis search returned 230 simple patent families, representing 520 published records, with no date limit applied. A simple family groups one invention's filings across countries, while the record count includes every publication of each family. No specific start year should be read into the dataset since the search was not date-restricted; the filing-trend chart on this page shows only a recent window, not the full history.
JPMorgan Chase Bank NA is named on 7 of the 230 simple patent families, the largest single filer row in the listed set of 84 organisations. Two rows beginning with Accenture and three beginning with Electronics & Telecomm Res Inst, Sensormatic Electronics Corp and Samsung Electronics Co Ltd appear separately in the list and are not merged or summed with each other. Beyond the largest rows, 71 of the 84 listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each, so filing activity is spread across a long tail of smaller filers rather than concentrated in a handful of names.
US11113197B2, filed by Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC and published 2021-09-07, describes a method for joining an event stream with reference data using cached reference-data snapshots, punctuation events signalling temporal validity, and a logical barrier that controls when stream events can trigger a cache lookup. This abstract describes what the invention is about, not what its granted claims legally require. Determining whether a specific design falls inside or outside this patent's protection requires reading the granted claim set directly, not the abstract or this family's record count.
This page does not show a growth rate for this dataset: the available years are too thin, and the two most recent years are affected by publication lag of up to 30 months, so their current counts understate the eventual total. The published-record series by earliest filing year ran from 11 in 2007 to a peak of 38 in 2019, with 2022 onward still filling in. No acceleration or decline should be read from the shape of the most recent years.
Of the 61 subclasses returned by this search, G06F (electric digital data processing) carries the highest share at 66.1% of the 230 families in scope, followed by G06Q (business, commerce and admin data processing) at 31.3% and H04L (digital information transmission) at 18.7%. Because a single family can carry more than one IPC subclass, these shares add up to more than 100% rather than partitioning the dataset. Smaller subclasses returned by the same search are not detailed here, as a broad search string can pull in documents from only loosely related fields.
Go past this page: query the whole data curation reference data cross-reference table management patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Search. Every figure on this page comes from one Patsnap search, run once and not edited afterwards. This is the exact search string:
TAC:(("reference data" OR "cross reference table") AND manag* AND (mapping OR lookup))
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 (G06F) carries 66.1% 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 520 records and 230 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 (16 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 30 of the 84 filers returned, ordered by count alone; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 84 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 2026-10-16.
Legal status. "In force" counts documents whose legal status at retrieval was granted and maintained (163 of 520). 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.
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.
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.
This page