A technical explanation of the way this solution works:
Substantially it is an indirect injection but with the lower injector angled in a way to spray directly through the central transfer port (not sure how it is called in English), this way - for homologation - they can use ~only this injector and inject fuel at the last possible moment, before the piston goes up closing the central transfer port, thus most of the gases going out to the exhaust (short-circuit) will be only air, or very lean mixture.
The other injector (the upper one), on the other hand, does not allow this subtlety and essentially sprays "free" inside the crankcase, 100% an indirect injection, thus ensuring a good homogenization of the mixture, fuel that in this case will reach the cylinder from all the transfer ports, not just the central one, like in the lower injector case.
Advantages over the TPI would be better homogeneization (thus higher torque down low), disadvantages would be that it can "load" the crankcase much more than the TPI does.
All in all, I think that KTM and Beta fuel injections will have similar performance, with Beta having stronger low RPM torque (at least on the stock bikes, as homogeneization can be improved much on the TPI through two solutions) but the KTM working slightly better as throttle response.
But it's impossible to make precise evaluations of performance (be it torque, power or driveability) from just reading a patent, because to assess the performance, the design of a fuel injection is very important, but nonetheless is also the implementation and the components used.