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 →Covers 14 simple patent families and 51 published records on single-axis tracker backtracking control; two filers share the top count.
51 published records collapse into 14 simple (DOCDB) families; the difference is the same invention filed in more than one country. In force = 22 of 51 records still granted and maintained at the data cut-off; the rest are pending, withdrawn, refused or lapsed.
This search isolates records whose title, abstract or claims combine a single-axis tracker with backtracking logic tied to shading or shadow conditions. It returns 51 published records that de-duplicate to 14 simple patent families, with no date limit applied to the query itself. The filing-trend chart below shows a recent window only, and the most recent years are understated because publication takes time to catch up with filing.
Fourteen families is a small pool. The figures below describe what this particular search returned, not the shape of a market or an industry, and the page is best read as a starting point for a closer search rather than a finished map of the field.
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 (1 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 10 of the 10 filers returned for this search; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 10 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.
Two views of the same 14 families and 51 records: when the underlying documents were filed, and which IPC subclasses they carry.
Records run from 2012 through 2026, peaking so far at 13 in 2021. 2022 onward is still filling in as later filings publish, so the recent years should not be read as a drop-off.
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.
H02S (photovoltaic / solar power generation) appears on 71.4% of families, G05D (control of non-electric variables) on 35.7%, and F24S and H01L each on 28.6%. Families can carry more than one class, so these shares add up to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 14 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 single-axis solar tracker backtracking control algorithm patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe abstract describes operating a solar power plant by mapping tracker rows in three dimensions, measuring observed shading against an expected-shading calculation, and correcting the row position data from the comparison. A related method observes shading and light patterns across an array of tracker rows to correct the three-dimensional position inputs.This is the first record returned under the database's default ordering, not a ranking by citation, novelty or scope. US20260261239A1, filed by NextPower LLC, published 2026-09-03.
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 →Four figures from the same 14-family, 51-record set, each counted in the unit stated.
The search string returned 14 simple patent families and 51 published records with no date limit applied. The gap between the two counts reflects the same invention being filed or published in multiple jurisdictions, not 51 separate inventions.
Nevados Engineering Inc and NextPower LLC are each named on 3 simple patent families, the highest count among the listed filers. The list is organisations only; filings held by named individuals sit inside the totals but not in this ranking, and rows cannot be added together because one family can name more than one filer.
22 of the 51 published records (43%) were granted and still in force at the retrieval date. The remaining records are a mix of statuses not broken out in this dataset, and legal status changes continuously rather than measuring the quality of a filing.
The 51 published records were filed across 5 receiving offices: United States (23), Australia (8), Europe/EPO (8), WIPO/PCT (7) and India (5). These counts describe where applications were filed, not where any filer is based.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to single-axis solar tracker backtracking control algorithm patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
This page is a starting point built from one search string. Deeper work on backtracking control calls for claim-level reading and a broader query.
A family count or an abstract cannot establish claim scope. Read the granted claims of any record that matters to a specific design before drawing conclusions about it.
Open the record in EurekaA 14-family pool this small is sensitive to the exact wording of the query. Try adjacent terms for backtracking, row-shading and tracker control to see whether the pool grows.
Run a new search in EurekaThe listed filers here are organisations only, ranked by family count and capped at the top entries returned. Revisit the same query periodically to see how that list shifts.
Monitor filers in EurekaThis search returns 14 simple patent families and 51 published records, with no date limit applied to the query. The difference between the two counts is normal: one invention can be published multiple times across jurisdictions, and a family count de-duplicates that. There is no fixed year range to quote for this set, and the search string itself was not restricted by date.
The listed filers are ranked by simple patent family count, with Nevados Engineering Inc and NextPower LLC tied at 3 families each, the highest count among them. The filer list contains organisations only and is capped at the top entries the search returns, so it is not a complete picture of every applicant. Names are not rolled up to corporate groups, so a parent and any subsidiary would appear as separate rows rather than combined.
Published records in this set run from 2012 through 2026, with the highest count so far at 13 in 2021. Records from 2022 onward are still filling in because publication of a filing can lag its filing date by 18 months or more, so the most recent years understate the eventual count. The chart counts published documents, not de-duplicated inventions, so a rising or falling line reflects filing and publication activity rather than a trend in invention count alone.
At the retrieval date of 2026-10-20, 22 of the 51 published records (43%) were granted and still in force. The remaining records fall into pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed or undeterminable status, but this dataset does not break those categories out individually. In-force status is a snapshot that changes continuously and is not a measure of a patent's quality or commercial value.
Within the 14 simple patent families, H02S (photovoltaic and solar power generation) appears on 71.4%, G05D (control of non-electric variables) on 35.7%, and F24S (solar heat collectors) and H01L (semiconductor devices) each on 28.6%. A family can carry more than one of these classes, so the shares add up to more than 100% rather than summing to a whole. Smaller classes appear in the underlying chart but are not detailed here because a search string this broad can pull in unrelated matches at low counts.
The 51 published records were filed across 5 receiving offices: United States (23 records), Australia (8), Europe via the EPO (8), WIPO under the PCT (7), and India (5). These figures describe where applications were filed, not where any applicant is headquartered or incorporated, since this dataset holds no nationality information on any filer.
Go past this page: query the whole single-axis solar tracker backtracking control algorithm 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:(("solar tracker" OR "single-axis tracker") AND backtrack* AND (shading OR shadow))
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 (H02S) carries 71.4% 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 51 records and 14 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 (1 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 10 of the 10 filers returned, ordered by count alone; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 10 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 2026-10-20.
Legal status. "In force" counts documents whose legal status at retrieval was granted and maintained (22 of 51). 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.
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