https://eureka.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/phase-detection-autofocus-pixel-array-image-sensor-processing-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-10-16 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Image Sensors

Phase Detection Autofocus Pixel Array Image Sensor Patents

100 patent families and 276 records on phase detection autofocus pixel sensors; one filer holds 27% of families, most hold two or fewer.

276
Published Records
100
Simple Patent Families
27%
Families Naming the Largest Filer
67%
In Force at Cut-off

276 published records collapse into 100 simple (DOCDB) families; the difference is the same invention filed in more than one country. OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES INC is named on 27 of the 100 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 In force = 184 of 276 records still granted and maintained at the data cut-off; the rest are pending, withdrawn, refused or lapsed.

  • OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES INC is named on 27 of the 100 simple patent families in scope the largest single-row share among the 41 listed filers.
  • 37 of the 41 listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each pointing to a long tail of limited-volume filers behind the largest row.
  • H04N accounts for 77.0% of the 100 families and H01L for 32.0% with shares overlapping since a family can carry both classifications.
Check your own idea
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this dataset covers

This landscape covers 100 simple patent families (276 published records) returned by a search for phase detection autofocus and PDAF terms appearing together with pixel and sensor language in the title, abstract or claims. No date limit is applied to the search string, so the dataset reflects everything matching those terms rather than a fixed historical window, and the filing-trend chart elsewhere on this page shows only a recent window of that activity.

Filer names are not rolled up to corporate group, so a parent and any subsidiaries appear as separate rows, and the filer table lists organisations only, families held by named individuals are counted in the totals but not shown as rows. Read every share on this page against the denominator named next to it: family-based shares and record-based shares answer different questions and are not interchangeable.

Scope at a glance: 100 families, 276 records, 41 listed filers
  1. OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES INC27
  2. QUALCOMM INC17
  3. TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING CO LTD10
  4. GALAXYCORE SHANGHAI3
  5. SONY SEMICON SOLUTIONS CORP2
  6. ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES INC2
  7. GOOGLE LLC2
  8. APPLE INC2
  9. SK HYNIX INC2
  10. HUAIAN IMAGING DEVICE MFGR CORP2

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 share the name SEMICON (SEMICON COMPONENTS IND LLC, SONY SEMICON SOLUTIONS CORP). 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. Filings held by named individuals rather than organisations are removed where they can be identified (2 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 41 filers returned for this search; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 41 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 Phase Detection Autofocus Pixel Array Image Sensor Processing Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-16. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology

Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.

10,000 free credits to start
Data

Filing activity and technology composition

These figures are drawn directly from the 100 simple patent families and 276 published records returned by the search string, with each chart using the denominator stated in its own caption.

Filing trend by earliest filing year (published records)

Published records by earliest filing year run from 2 in 2013 to a peak of 43 in 2022; 2022 onward is shaded because publication lag means the most recent years are still filling in and should not be read as a decline.

Filing trend by earliest filing year (published records)0132538502201320142015201620172018201920202021432022202320242025220262022 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.

Technology composition by IPC subclass (simple patent families)

H04N (Pictorial communication) appears on 77.0% of the 100 families in scope and H01L (Semiconductor devices) on 32.0%; because a family can carry more than one IPC class, the shares across all 16 subclasses in the chart add up to more than 100%.

Technology composition by IPC subclass (simple patent families)H04N · Pictorial communication (video…7777.0%H01L · Semiconductor devices3232.0%G03B · Photographic apparatus1111.0%G02B · Optical elements & systems1010.0%G06T · Image data processing & genera…1010.0%H10F · Photovoltaic & light-sensitive…44.0%A61B · Diagnosis & surgery22.0%G01J · Radiation & light measurement22.0%Other88.0%

Shares are the percentage of the 100 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 Phase Detection Autofocus Pixel Array Image Sensor Processing Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-16. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Phase Detection Autofocus Pixel Array Image Sensor Processing Patent Landscape with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about phase detection autofocus pixel array image sensor processing patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Representative Filing

A record from this result set

First record returned
US20210055502A12021-02-25

3D imaging using phase detection autofocus (PDAF) image sensor

OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

A 3D imaging system comprises a phase detection autofocus (PDAF) image sensor, a lens for imaging a cross-section of a 3D object on the PDAF image sensor and an actuator for driving the lens for focusing each cross-section of the 3D object on the PDAF image sensor. The actuator drives the lens until the PDAF image sensor identifies an image of a first cross-section of the 3D object in-focus and records the image of the first cross-section. The PDAF image sensor records images of subsequent cross-sections of the 3D object formed by the lens driven by the actuator on the PDAF image sensor. The recorded images of each cross-section of the 3D object are stacked to form a 3D image of the 3D object.This is simply the first record returned under the database's default order, not the most cited, newest or broadest filing in this dataset. Reading what it blocks or does not block requires the granted claim set, not this abstract.

US20210055502A1, patent drawing 1US20210055502A1, patent drawing 2
View this record in Eureka

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 Phase Detection Autofocus Pixel Array Image Sensor Processing Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-16. 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 →
Insights

What the filing and classification data shows

Three figures summarise the shape of this dataset: who files, what the family holds the most of, and how the technology splits across IPC subclasses.

Top filer
27 of 100 families
largest single-row share

OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES INC named on 27.0% of families

OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES INC is named on 27 of the 100 simple patent families in scope, the largest single-row figure among the 41 listed filers. This is a count of how many families name this filer; it does not establish anything about claim scope, validity or commercial outcome.

Filer table, simple patent families
Filer distribution
37 of 41 filers
hold 2 or fewer families

Most listed filers hold a small number of families

37 of the 41 listed filers hold 2 or fewer simple patent families each. The listed rows sum to more than the 100-family total because one family can name several filers, so this spread figure is reported on its own rather than combined into any aggregate share.

Filer table, simple patent families
Technology split
77.0% / 32.0%
H04N / H01L family share

H04N and H01L carry the largest shares of the IPC mix

H04N (Pictorial communication) appears on 77.0% of the 100 families and H01L (Semiconductor devices) on 32.0%. A family can carry both classifications, so the two shares overlap rather than summing to a combined total, and 16 subclasses appear in the dataset overall.

IPC composition, simple patent families
Legal status
184 of 276
records granted and in force

67% of records were granted and in force at retrieval

184 of the 276 published records (67%) were granted and still in force at the 2026-10-16 retrieval date. This is a snapshot of legal status at one point in time, not a measure of the quality or strength of any filing, and the remaining records are not broken out by status here.

Legal status, published records
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 phase detection autofocus pixel array image sensor processing 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 Phase Detection Autofocus Pixel Array Image Sensor Processing Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-16. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Next steps

Where to take this analysis

These figures describe the shape of the dataset; the questions below point to what a closer read in Eureka can add.

Check granted claim scope directly

Family and record counts cannot establish what any granted claim actually requires. Pulling the full claim set for records of interest, starting with the largest filer's portfolio, is the only way to read scope rather than count.

Open claim search in Eureka

Track the filing window as it fills in

Years from 2022 onward are still publishing and will add records to the trend chart over time. Revisiting the trend after further publication lag has passed gives a more complete read on recent activity.

Set a filing-trend alert in Eureka

Separate individual filers from organisations

The 41 listed filers are organisations only; the 100-family total also includes families held by named individuals. Reviewing the full filer set including individuals fills in the gap between the listed rows and the total.

View full filer list 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 Phase Detection Autofocus Pixel Array Image Sensor Processing Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-16. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions about this landscape

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Phase Detection Autofocus Pixel Array Image Sensor Processing Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-16. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Research Phase Detection Autofocus Pixel Array Image Sensor Processing Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole phase detection autofocus pixel array image sensor processing 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:(("phase detection autofocus" OR "phase detection AF" OR PDAF) AND pixel AND sensor)

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 (H04N) carries 77.0% 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 276 records and 100 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 (2 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 41 filers returned, ordered by count alone; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 41 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 (184 of 276). 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.