https://eureka.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/short-read-sequence-alignment-to-reference-genome-algorithm-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-10-16 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Bioinformatics

Short-Read Sequence Alignment to Reference Genome Algorithm Patents

83 patent families and 202 records on short-read alignment to reference genomes, with filers, IPC mix and filing history to 2026.

202
Published Records
83
Simple Patent Families
26%
In Force at Cut-off
US
Leading Jurisdiction

202 published records collapse into 83 simple (DOCDB) families; the difference is the same invention filed in more than one country. In force = 53 of 202 records still granted and maintained at the data cut-off; the rest are pending, withdrawn, refused or lapsed.

  • 83 simple patent families and 202 published records sit in scope, with no single filer holding more than 3 of the 83 families.
  • Two filers are tied at the top of the list, Hasso Plattner Institut fur Softwaresysttechn and Pacific Biosciences of California Inc, each on 3 of the 83 families.
  • Bioinformatics classification G16B covers the largest share of the pool, appearing on 67.5% of the 83 families, ahead of G06F (32.5%) and C12Q (26.5%).
Check your own idea
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this dataset covers

This page covers patent documents matching the search string ("sequence alignment" OR "read mapping" OR "read alignment") AND ("reference genome" OR "reference sequence") AND algorithm across title, abstract and claims. The search carries no date limit, so the 83 simple patent families and 202 published records shown here span whatever filing years the matching documents happen to fall in, not a chosen window. G16B (Bioinformatics) is named on the largest share of these families, followed by G06F and C12Q.

83 simple patent families is a small pool. The figures and tables on this page are a starting point for a targeted search, not a complete map of short-read alignment filing activity, a different phrasing of the search string could return a materially different set.

Records vs. families in scope
  1. HASSO PLATTNER INSTITUT FUR SOFTWARESYSTTECHN3
  2. PACIFIC BIOSCIENCES OF CALIFORNIA INC3
  3. NAT YANG MING CHIAO TUNG UNIV2
  4. THE BROAD INST INC2
  5. HARBIN INST OF TECH2
  6. UNIV OF WASHINGTON2
  7. FOUNDATION MEDICINE INC2
  8. AMBRX INC2
  9. VERENIUM CORP2
  10. CHANGZHOU MATERNAL & CHILD HEALTH CARE HOSPITAL2

Counted over all 202 published records, including filings from before 2007; the filing-trend chart below covers only the 188 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 (8 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 73 filers returned for this search; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 73 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 Short-Read Sequence Alignment to Reference Genome Algorithm 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
The numbers

Filing activity and classification mix

Figures below are drawn directly from the search result: published records, simple patent families, and the IPC subclasses attached to them.

Filing trend by earliest filing year (published records) (188 of 202 published records)

Records counted by earliest filing year ran from 7 in 2007 to a peak of 23 in both 2021 and 2022, then down to 3 by 2026. Records from 2022 onward are still filling in as later-filed applications publish, so the recent downward slope reflects publication lag rather than a drop in filing.

Filing trend by earliest filing year (published records) (188 of 202 published records)0613192572007200920112013201520172019232021232023202532022 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 (188 records); the 202 total quoted above includes earlier filings outside the window.

IPC subclass coverage (share of 83 families)

G16B appears on 67.5% of the 83 families, G06F on 32.5%, and C12Q on 26.5%. Because a family can carry more than one classification, these shares add up to more than 100%.

IPC subclass coverage (share of 83 families)G16B · Bioinformatics5667.5%G06F · Electric digital data processi…2732.5%C12Q · Measuring & testing involving …2226.5%C07K · Peptides & proteins1214.5%A61K · Medicinal preparations1012.0%C12N · Microorganisms & genetic engin…1012.0%G16H · Healthcare informatics78.4%G01N · Material analysis & testing67.2%Other1821.7%

Shares are the percentage of the 83 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 Short-Read Sequence Alignment to Reference Genome Algorithm 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 Short-Read Sequence Alignment to Reference Genome Algorithm Patent Landscape with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about short-read sequence alignment to reference genome algorithm 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 database
US11929150B22024-03-12

Methods and apparatuses for performing character matching for short read alignment

HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD.

The abstract describes a seed search of a short read against a reference sequence using a Burrows Wheeler Transform algorithm to find seed candidates, stopping the search once matches fall below a threshold. Each seed candidate is extended to the length of the short read, and base-pair comparisons are run between the remaining unmatched sequence and the corresponding region of each extended candidate.This is the first record the database returns under its default ordering, not the most cited, newest or broadest document in scope. Whether this filing blocks any particular design depends on reading its granted claims directly, an abstract and a family count cannot establish claim scope.

US11929150B2, patent drawing 1US11929150B2, 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 Short-Read Sequence Alignment to Reference Genome Algorithm 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 →
Signals

What the figures show

Three observations drawn directly from the counts behind this search, each tied to the unit it was measured in.

Filer spread
2 filers tied at 3 families
top count, simple patent families

No single top filer

Hasso Plattner Institut fur Softwaresysttechn and Pacific Biosciences of California Inc each appear on 3 of the 83 simple patent families, the highest count in the listed filers. 71 of the 73 listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each.

Counted in simple patent families.
Classification mix
67.5% of families
share carrying G16B

Bioinformatics classification on the majority of families

G16B (Bioinformatics) is attached to 56 of the 83 simple patent families, 67.5% of the pool. G06F (32.5%) and C12Q (26.5%) are the next most-carried subclasses; a family can carry more than one, so shares exceed 100% combined.

Counted in simple patent families; subclasses overlap.
Legal status
53 of 202 records
granted and in force

Roughly a quarter in force at retrieval

53 of the 202 published records, 26%, were granted and still in force at the 2026-10-16 retrieval date. The remaining records are pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed or not determinable, and that breakdown is not available on this page.

Legal status at retrieval date, counted in records.
Filing window
23 records, 2021 & 2022
peak year count

Peak publication year reached twice

The filing trend, counted by earliest filing year in published records, reached its highest point of 23 records in both 2021 and 2022. Years from 2022 onward are still filling in as later applications publish, so the drop seen after that point reflects publication lag, not a decline in filing.

Counted in published records by earliest filing year.
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 short-read sequence alignment to reference genome algorithm 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 Short-Read Sequence Alignment to Reference Genome Algorithm 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

This page is a starting point built from one search string. Refining the scope or reading specific claim sets is the next step for any decision that rests on it.

Narrow or widen the search string

Try adjacent phrasing, mapping tool names, specific algorithm families, or related IPC subclasses, to see whether the 83-family pool shifts materially under a different query.

Open Eureka to rerun this search

Pull granted claims before relying on scope

Family counts and abstracts cannot establish what any single filing blocks. Read the granted claim set directly for any record that matters to a filing or clearance decision.

Explore full records in Eureka

Track the listed filers directly

With no filer holding more than 3 of the 83 families, watching named organisations individually is more informative here than reading concentration into the counts.

Set up filer tracking 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 Short-Read Sequence Alignment to Reference Genome Algorithm 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

Questions practitioners ask about this landscape

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Short-Read Sequence Alignment to Reference Genome Algorithm 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 Short-Read Sequence Alignment to Reference Genome Algorithm Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole short-read sequence alignment to reference genome algorithm 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:(("sequence alignment" OR "read mapping" OR "read alignment") AND ("reference genome" OR "reference sequence") AND algorithm)

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 (G16B) carries 67.5% 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 202 records and 83 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 (8 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 73 filers returned, ordered by count alone; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 73 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 (53 of 202). 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.