Regional and supply-chain research

Automotive Lidar Adas Sensing Keyword Candidate Study

Automotive Lidar Adas Sensing Keyword Candidate Study. A dated 48-record cohort study compares composition, parent sets and evidence coverage. Comparative structure study; archive date 2026-10-16.

Revision and archive snapshot: 2026-10-16

Swipe tables sideways to see all columns.

Research findings

Comparative structure study

The largest recorded reporting jurisdiction, Beijing, contains 12 records (25.0% of this 48-record cohort). The remaining cohort contains 36 records. The comparison concerns archive composition.

The recorded industry label New-energy vehicles accounts for 35.4% here (17/48), compared with 5.0% in the parent set (960/19,297), an absolute gap of 30.4 percentage points.

16/48 companies link to pages with existing source-supported excerpts (33.3% of the cohort). The other 32 records remain usable for archive composition, but do not support new operating case studies.

1 keyword candidates match only a company name, with no matching term in recorded products or sub-industry fields. Product evidence is needed before treating these as operating businesses in this segment.

Company cohortDirectly linked pagesShare of public archiveArchive date
48480.2%2026-10-16

An ID-deduplicated archive snapshot, not the whole market, current recognition or operating results.

Comparable sets and compositional differences

The parent set, All public archive records, contains 19,297 records. This cohort contributes 48 (0.2%); 19,249 records remain after excluding it.

CategoryCohort count/baseReference: All public archive recordsGap (pp)Representation ratioRest count/base
industry · New-energy vehicles17/48 · 35.4%960/19,297 · 5.0%+30.47.12943/19,249
sub-industry · Intelligent driving and automotive electronics13/48 · 27.1%75/19,297 · 0.4%+26.769.6862/19,249
chain role · Automotive and transport equipment / Complete systems and use-case applications14/48 · 29.2%712/19,297 · 3.7%+25.57.90698/19,249
reporting jurisdiction · Beijing12/48 · 25.0%1,351/19,297 · 7.0%+18.03.571,339/19,249
reporting jurisdiction · Shanghai10/48 · 20.8%1,131/19,297 · 5.9%+15.03.551,121/19,249
chain role · Automotive and transport equipment / Core components and digital hardware8/48 · 16.7%506/19,297 · 2.6%+14.06.36498/19,249
industry · Next-generation information technology18/48 · 37.5%5,226/19,297 · 27.1%+10.41.385,208/19,249
reporting jurisdiction · Shenzhen6/48 · 12.5%1,398/19,297 · 7.2%+5.31.731,392/19,249
chain role · Electronic information and digital technology / Core components and digital hardware10/48 · 20.8%3,137/19,297 · 16.3%+4.61.283,127/19,249
industry · Advanced equipment11/48 · 22.9%4,918/19,297 · 25.5%-2.60.904,907/19,249

Ratio of label participation, not market share; multi-label counts overlap.

Excluding this cohort, the recorded industry label New-energy vehicles covers 943/19,249 remaining records (4.9%), an absolute gap of 30.5 percentage points from this cohort.

Concentration and cross-sectional structure

The full reporting jurisdiction distribution has 13 labels; the top 3 contain 29/48 records (60.4%).Other known labels contain 19 records.

For 48 records with known labels, the effective category count is 6.5, versus 13 actual labels. Definitions and scope are in the methodology.

The table shows ten labels; 3 others are included in the calculations above.

Recorded labelRecordsShare of cohort
Beijing1225.0%
Shanghai1020.8%
Jiangsu714.6%
Shenzhen612.5%
Anhui48.3%
Zhejiang24.2%
Xiamen12.1%
Guangdong12.1%
Hebei12.1%
Hunan12.1%

Record counts do not rank supply capability or economic size.

The largest intersection, Beijing × New-energy vehicles, contains 7 records, or 58.3% of the 12 records carrying the Beijing label.

reporting jurisdictionindustryIntersection recordsCohort share
BeijingNew-energy vehicles714.6%
ShanghaiAdvanced equipment48.3%
ShanghaiNext-generation information technology36.2%
BeijingAdvanced equipment36.2%
JiangsuNew-energy vehicles36.2%
ShenzhenNew-energy vehicles36.2%
ShanghaiNew-energy vehicles24.2%
BeijingNext-generation information technology24.2%

A cell contains company IDs carrying both labels. It does not establish procurement, supply or investment relationships between firms. Multi-label cells may overlap.

This page displays 8 of the full cross-tab’s 26 non-empty cells; the other 18 remain in the analysis.

Evidence coverage and strength of conclusions

Record fieldNon-empty/cohortCompletion
Company name48/48100.0%
reporting jurisdiction48/48100.0%
industry48/48100.0%
Recorded products48/48100.0%
sub-industry48/48100.0%
Chain labels48/48100.0%

Non-empty fields are not necessarily accurate or supported by originals.

Scope of source supportCount
Profiles with source-supported excerpts16
Distinct corresponding companies16
Reviewed Chinese/English paragraph pairs16

Counts concern existing reviewed bilingual excerpts, not re-certification of originals or entire reports.

Matched fieldCandidatesCohort share
Company name12.1%
Recorded products4287.5%
Sub-industry612.5%

An ID may match several fields, so counts may exceed the cohort total. Matches establish search relevance only.

Among the translated non-broad query terms, “automated driving” has the most matches: 28/48. Name, product and sub-industry fields match 1, 24 and 4 records respectively; the largest field is product field. Fields can overlap, and a term remains a search link rather than verified business activity.

Selected query termCandidates/shareName matchesProduct fieldSub-industry
automated driving28 · 58.3%1244

Selected broad terms and specific segment terms, not the full query. Terms and fields can overlap and must not be summed. Counts show lexical sensitivity; no records are removed without primary evidence.

1 candidates match only a name, or lose all product-field matches after the full company name is removed while sub-industry also has no hit. This transparent string test locates copied company descriptions; it does not establish that a company does not operate the business.

Intersection with 2026 local lists

8 of this cohort’s 48 records link through existing company-ID mappings to 2026 lists from all jurisdictions (16.7%). This intersection measures list linkage, not successful recognition or company growth.

Observation setList recordsNew-applicant recordsReview recordsMapped company IDs
National list records linked to this cohort’s IDs8088

List rows and company IDs are separate counts, not new firms or final recognition.

Stored 2026 local-recommendation records, sources and stage definitions

Recorded roles and delivery checks

Delivery framework, stages and original sources

Related studies and shared records

Shared records with Steer By Wire Adas Components Keyword Candidate Study: 47; records in this cohort but outside that set: 1. The intersection/union ratio is 38.5%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Shared records with Photoelectric Sensor Lidar Components Keyword Candidate Study: 11; records in this cohort but outside that set: 37. The intersection/union ratio is 19.6%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Company samples and record links

CompanyJurisdictionRecorded industry
Shanghai Like Technology Co., Ltd.ShanghaiNew-energy vehicles
Shenzhen Blue Whale Zhilian Technology Co., Ltd.ShenzhenNew-energy vehicles
Anhui Zhongke Xingchi Automatic Driving Technology Co., Ltd.AnhuiProducer services
Benewake (Beijing) Co., Ltd.BeijingNext-generation information technology
Jiluo Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.ShanghaiNext-generation information technology
TBK Power Technology Co., Ltd.ShanghaiAdvanced equipment
Suzhou Zhitu Technology Co., Ltd.JiangsuNext-generation information technology
Heilongjiang Huida Technology Co., Ltd.HeilongjiangNext-generation information technology

Stable-ID samples, not rankings; metrics use the full cohort.

Directly related profiles and reports

Methodology

Read ID deduplication, comparison, batch and evidence definitions