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 →https://eureka.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/gray-code-to-binary-code-conversion-circuit-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-10-27 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Semiconductors & MicroelectronicsGray Code to Binary Code Conversion Circuit Patents
436 simple patent families and 889 published records on Gray-to-binary conversion circuits, led by one filer at 6.4% with a long tail behind it.
889
Published Records
436
Simple Patent Families
6%
Families Naming the Largest Filer
22%
In Force at Cut-off
889 published records collapse into 436 simple (DOCDB) families; the difference is the same invention filed in more than one country. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD is named on 28 of the 436 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 In force = 192 of 889 records still granted and maintained at the data cut-off; the rest are pending, withdrawn, refused or lapsed.
- 436 simple patent families and 889 published records sit behind this search, with no date limit applied, so the set spans whatever years the matching records were filed in.
- Samsung Electronics Co Ltd is named on 28 of the 436 families, 6.4%, the highest single-row share among the 96 listed filers.
- 64 of the 96 listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each, a long tail behind the single largest row.
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this search covers
This landscape is built from a search for Gray code and Gray coding terms alongside binary code or converter language inside patent titles, abstracts and claims. It returns 889 published records, which de-duplicate down to 436 simple patent families once the same invention filed across multiple countries is collapsed to one entry. No date filter was applied to the search string, so the set reflects whatever years the matching records happen to fall in, not a chosen window.
The gap between 889 records and 436 families is expected: one invention filed in several receiving offices produces several published documents but counts once as a family. Coding and code-conversion circuitry (H03M) and pulse/logic circuit elements (H03K) carry the largest shares of the IPC mix here, which fits a search built around a specific conversion-circuit term rather than a broader digital-systems query.
Records vs. families in scope
Counted over all 889 published records, including filings from before 2007; the filing-trend chart below covers only the 329 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. Filings held by named individuals rather than organisations are removed where they can be identified (4 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 96 filers returned for this search; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 96 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 Gray Code to Binary Code Conversion Circuit Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-27. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The data
Filing trend and technology split
Two views of the same 436-family, 889-record set: how published records have arrived by earliest filing year, and which IPC subclasses carry the largest share of the families in scope.
Published records by earliest filing year (329 of 889 published records)
Filing counts are shown by earliest filing year, running from 18 records in 2007 to a peak of 31 in 2022. Records from 2022 onward are still filling in as later filings publish, so that stretch of the chart understates its eventual count and should not be read as a drop in filing activity.
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 (329 records); the 889 total quoted above includes earlier filings outside the window.
IPC subclass share of families in scope
H03M (coding and code conversion) appears on 52.3% of the 436 families and H03K (pulse technique and logic circuits) on 18.3%. Because a family can carry more than one IPC class, these and the other subclasses shown on the chart add up to more than 100% between them.
Shares are the percentage of the 436 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 Gray Code to Binary Code Conversion Circuit Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-27. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Gray Code to Binary Code Conversion Circuit Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about gray code to binary code conversion circuit patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaExample record
A record from the result set
First record returned
Gray code-to-binary code converter and devices including the same
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.
The abstract describes a converter built from multiple parallel-in parallel-out (PIPO) latches, each latching a parallel input Gray code into a parallel output Gray code on a sampling signal, feeding a parallel-in serial-out (PISO) circuit. That PISO stage converts the latched Gray code into a binary code and outputs it bit by bit, from least significant bit to most significant bit, by changing the arrangement of a first group of switches.US20230262363A1, filed by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., published 2023-08-17. This is the first record returned by the database's default ordering, not a ranking by citations, breadth or date.
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 Gray Code to Binary Code Conversion Circuit Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-27. 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
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 →Key figures
Reading the filer and technology counts
Three figures from this search, reported as counted, none of them ranks a company's portfolio or reads a trend into the technology split.
Largest single filer
6.4%
of 436 families
Samsung Electronics Co Ltd: 28 of 436 families
Samsung Electronics Co Ltd is named on 28 of the 436 simple patent families in scope, 6.4%. This is the single highest row in the listed filers; it says nothing about the scope or enforceability of any of those 28 families.
Based on the 96 listed filers, ordered by family count only.
Long tail
64 of 96
filers with ≤2 families
Most listed filers hold very few families
64 of the 96 listed filers hold 2 or fewer simple patent families each. That leaves a short list of filers with larger counts and a long run of filers with one or two filings apiece; filer rows are not summed here because a family can name more than one filer.
Filer rows overlap and are never added together on this page.
Technology split
52.3%
of 436 families
H03M carries the largest IPC share
H03M, coding and code conversion, appears on 228 of the 436 families (52.3%). H03K, pulse technique and logic circuits, appears on 80 families (18.3%). Because one family can carry several IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% together.
Shares are measured against the 436-family total, not against each other.
Legal status
22%
of 889 records
192 of 889 records were in force at retrieval
192 of the 889 published records (22%) were granted and still in force as of the 2026-10-27 retrieval date. The remainder cover pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed or undetermined status, which are not broken out separately in this dataset.
Status is a snapshot at retrieval, not a measure of claim quality.
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 gray code to binary code conversion circuit patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Derived observations on the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Gray Code to Binary Code Conversion Circuit Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-27. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Next steps
Where to take this from here
This page reports counts and shares from one search string. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate view takes a closer read of individual families.
Pull the granted claims on the largest filers
Family counts show how many inventions a filer has in this set, not what any of their claims actually cover. Reading the claim set directly is the only way to know what a specific family blocks.
Explore filers in Eureka →Check which records are still live
22% of the 889 records were in force at retrieval. Status changes continuously, so a current check matters more than this snapshot for any filing decision.
Run a status check in Eureka →Look past the top IPC subclasses
H03M and H03K carry the largest shares of the IPC mix here, but the chart on this page shows the full subclass spread beyond what the prose covers.
View the full IPC breakdown 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 Gray Code to Binary Code Conversion Circuit Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-27. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions on this dataset
This search returns 889 published records, which collapse to 436 simple patent families once the same invention filed in multiple countries is counted once. No date limit was applied to the search, so this reflects every matching record the search string caught, not a chosen time window. The 889-to-436 gap is normal: a single invention filed in the US, Europe and Japan produces three published records but one family.
Samsung Electronics Co Ltd is named on the most families in this set, 28 of the 436 (6.4%). Behind that single row, 64 of the 96 listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each, so the field has one larger row and a long run of smaller ones rather than several roughly equal filers. Filer rows are not summed on this page because one family can name more than one filer, which would overstate any combined figure.
H03M, coding and code conversion, appears on 228 of the 436 families (52.3%), the largest share of any subclass in this dataset, and H03K, pulse technique and logic circuits, appears on 80 families (18.3%). Because a family can carry more than one IPC class, these percentages add up to more than 100% rather than partitioning the set. The chart on this page shows additional subclasses beyond these two, each covering a smaller share of the families.
No decline should be read from the most recent years on the chart. Published records are counted by earliest filing year, and recency means recent years are still filling in as later-filed applications work through publication, which typically takes around 18 months and can run to 30 months for PCT national-phase entries. The chart's shaded years from 2022 onward are understated for that reason, and the peak shown so far is 31 records in 2022.
192 of the 889 published records (22%) were granted and still in force as of the 2026-10-27 retrieval date. The remaining records cover pending applications, withdrawals, refusals, lapses and cases where status could not be determined, and this dataset does not break those categories out separately. In-force status is a snapshot that changes continuously and should not be read as a measure of how many of these filings succeeded.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Gray Code to Binary Code Conversion Circuit Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-27. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Gray Code to Binary Code Conversion Circuit Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole gray code to binary code conversion circuit patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
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:(("Gray code" OR "Gray coding") AND ("binary code" OR binary) AND ("conversion circuit" OR converter))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.
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 889 records and 436 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 (4 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 96 filers returned, ordered by count alone; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 96 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 2026-10-27.
Legal status. "In force" counts documents whose legal status at retrieval was granted and maintained (192 of 889). 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.