Prior art

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 12293691, I would typically perform a detailed search using the USPTO Patent Public Search tool or Google Patents. However, as I cannot directly interact with these live databases in a dynamic fashion to retrieve all citations and then analyze them, I will rely on the information provided in the "Full patent text" you supplied. The "Prior art keywords" and "Definitions" sections often highlight key prior art that the patent itself seeks to distinguish from.

Based on the provided patent text, "Patent Document 1" is repeatedly referenced as relevant prior art that the current invention aims to improve upon. The text explicitly states: "FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating an arrangement of pixels as improvement of an array of pixels according to Patent Document 1 and allocation of luminance." and "the pixel array of Patent Document 1 is a pixel array effective in increasing the opening ratio of a high resolution OLED display device."

The core problem US12293691 seeks to address, the "color edge" phenomenon, is directly linked to the pixel array described in Patent Document 1. "the color edge is the problem in using the pixel array of Patent Document 1."

Therefore, based solely on the provided patent text, Patent Document 1 is the most relevant prior art.

To provide a full citation, publication/filing date, and description for Patent Document 1, I would need its specific patent number or other identifier, which is not provided in the excerpt. Without that, I cannot fulfill that part of the request precisely.

However, I can describe the aspects of "Patent Document 1" as they are characterized within US12293691, and how the current patent attempts to overcome its limitations under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (anticipation):

Most Relevant Prior Art (as described within US12293691):

• Full Citation: "Patent Document 1" (Specific patent number or publication not provided in the text).
• Publication/Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
• Brief Description: Patent Document 1 describes a color image display method using subpixels of red, green, and blue. It proposes a pixel array where columns with alternately arranged red and green subpixels, and columns with blue subpixels, are alternately arranged. This array is effective in increasing the opening ratio of a high-resolution OLED display device. It includes two types of pixels with different arrangements of blue subpixels.
• Potential Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102: While US12293691 claims to improve upon Patent Document 1, the elements of displaying a color image with red, green, and blue subpixels, arranged in a matrix, and specifically the pixel array structure where blue subpixels are arranged in columns distinct from columns of alternating red and green subpixels, would likely be anticipated by Patent Document 1. The key distinction, and therefore the basis for non-anticipation for US12293691, lies in the luminance allocation unit and its method of adjusting subpixel luminances to reduce color edge, which Patent Document 1 is stated to lack. Therefore, claims in US12293691 that solely describe the basic pixel arrangement and subpixel colors, without the specific luminance allocation mechanism, might be anticipated by Patent Document 1. For example, claims that generally describe "a display unit where a plurality of first pixels including subpixels of three colors and a plurality of second pixels including subpixels of the three colors are alternately arrayed in row and column directions, an arrangement of the subpixels in the first pixel and an arrangement of the subpixels in the second pixel being different from each other" (as stated in the definition of "a display device" in the full patent text) could potentially be anticipated by Patent Document 1 if the specific arrangements are the same. However, claims that include the "luminance allocation unit which allocates luminance of a subpixel of a first color... to a subpixel of the first color in the second pixel adjacent to the first pixel with a predetermined ratio..." would likely not be anticipated by Patent Document 1 because the patent specifically states that the "color edge is the problem in using the pixel array of Patent Document 1," implying Patent Document 1 does not teach this solution.