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 →72 patent families and 940 records cover wavefront parallel processing for video entropy decoding, led by a single filer on 20.8% of families.
940 published records collapse into 72 simple (DOCDB) families; the difference is the same invention filed in more than one country.
This search pulls records matching wavefront parallel processing (or the acronym WPP) combined with entropy or decoding terms, within video-related filings. It returns 72 simple patent families and 940 published records, with no date limit set on the search itself. The technology composition is concentrated: H04N (pictorial communication, i.e. video/TV) appears on 97.2% of the families in scope.
72 families is a small pool. The figures below describe what this particular search returned, not the shape of a field or an industry, treat this page as a starting point for a closer search rather than a finished map.
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; 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 33 filers returned for this search; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 33 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.
The two views below use different units, published records for the trend, and simple patent families for the IPC composition, so the figures are not directly comparable to each other.
Records run from 2011 (4) with a peak of 276 in 2013. Years from 2022 onward are still filling in as later-filed applications continue to publish, so the recent end of the chart understates eventual totals and should not be read as a decline.
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 2011-2026 (939 records); the 940 total quoted above includes earlier filings outside the window.
H04N (pictorial communication, video/TV) is named on 97.2% of the 72 families in scope. Because a single family can carry more than one IPC class, subclass shares in the underlying chart add up to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 72 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 video codec wavefront parallel processing for entropy decoding patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA video encoder generates a bitstream that includes a syntax element indicating whether a picture is encoded using wavefront parallel processing (WPP) across the whole picture, or encoded tile-by-tile without WPP. A video decoder parses that syntax element and, depending on its value, decodes the picture entirely using WPP or decodes it without WPP on a per-tile basis.US9332259B2, assigned to Qualcomm Incorporated, published 2016-05-03. This is the first record the search returns under default ordering, not a ranking by citations, scope or relevance.


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 →Three figures from this dataset, reported as counted, with no ranking or interpretation added.
Qualcomm Inc is named on 15 of the 72 simple patent families in scope (20.8%). This is a single-row share and does not describe any other filer or any combination of filers.
23 of the 33 listed filers (organisations only) hold 2 or fewer simple patent families each. The listed rows sum to more than the 72-family total because a family can name more than one filer, so the rows are not additive.
The IPC subclass H04N (pictorial communication, video/TV) is attached to 70 of the 72 families in scope (97.2%). Other subclasses returned by the search sit well below this share.
The dataset holds 940 published records against 72 simple patent families, reflecting the same inventions republished across multiple offices rather than 940 separate inventions.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to video codec wavefront parallel processing for entropy decoding patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
This page reports counts from one search string. Confirming scope, status or relationships between filers requires pulling the underlying documents.
Family counts and abstracts cannot establish what any patent covers. Pull the granted claim set for any record that matters to your work before drawing conclusions about scope.
Open EurekaA single search string can miss adjacent terminology or catch unrelated fields. Testing variants helps separate genuine coverage from noise in a pool this size.
Explore in EurekaThis page does not include legal status data. Status changes continuously and needs to be checked directly against the record of interest.
Search in EurekaThis search returns 72 simple patent families and 940 published records matching wavefront parallel processing (or WPP) combined with entropy or decoding terms in video-related filings. The family count de-duplicates the same invention filed in multiple countries, while the record count counts each publication separately, so 940 is not 940 separate inventions. No date limit was applied to the search, so this reflects every matching record the search string returns, not a fixed time window.
Qualcomm Inc is named on 15 of the 72 simple patent families in scope, the highest share of any single filer at 20.8%. That figure describes one row in the filer list and cannot be added to any other filer's count, because a single family can name more than one filer and the rows overlap. 23 of the 33 listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each, which is a long tail rather than a concentrated field by any filer below the top row.
US9332259B2, assigned to Qualcomm Incorporated and published 2016-05-03, describes a video encoder that signals, via a syntax element in the bitstream, whether a picture is coded entirely using wavefront parallel processing or coded tile-by-tile without it; a decoder reads that element and decodes accordingly. This description comes from the abstract only. What the granted claims actually require, and how broadly they reach, has to be read from the claim set itself rather than inferred from the abstract or from any family count.
The published-record trend runs from 4 records in 2011 to a peak of 276 in 2013, counted by earliest filing year. Years from 2022 onward are still filling in, because applications filed recently take time to publish, so the most recent part of the chart understates its eventual total rather than showing a real decline. With this publication lag in mind, no growth or slowdown figure is reported on this page because the recent years are not yet complete.
H04N, the subclass for pictorial communication including video and TV, is attached to 70 of the 72 simple patent families in scope, a 97.2% share. Other IPC subclasses returned by the search sit at much lower shares and some may reflect the search string matching unrelated fields rather than a genuine secondary branch of this technology. Because a family can carry more than one IPC class, subclass shares do not sum to 100%.
Go past this page: query the whole video codec wavefront parallel processing for entropy decoding 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:(("wavefront parallel processing" OR WPP) AND (entropy OR decod*) AND video)
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 97.2% 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 940 records and 72 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. 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 33 filers returned, ordered by count alone; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 33 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. Legal status was not available for this search, so no in-force figure is shown. 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