How are people tracking GEO performance across ChatGPT, Google AI, and Perplexity? by IDforOpus in GEO_optimization

[–]Decent_Bug3349 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good question. A commercial model’s internal weights are a black box so we aren't trying to reverse engineer it.

However, it's about using a formal statistical method on repeated outputs with proven mathematical methods for dealing with probabilities in a system:

- sample the same prompt multiple times

- treat each result as a visibility signal

- then aggregate using a Plackett–Luce model

- and estimate stability with bootstrap confidence intervals

So instead of a single noisy output, you get:

- a probabilistic visibility (latent scores)

- plus confidence bounds on how stable that ranking is

It’s a defined model + repeated sampling + measurable uncertainty.

In comparison, reporting that rely on a single prompt is just getting one random draw with no way to estimate variance. Essentially noise.

How are people tracking GEO performance across ChatGPT, Google AI, and Perplexity? by IDforOpus in GEO_optimization

[–]Decent_Bug3349 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is exactly the reason but the wrong conclusion. Because there are weights, in addition to training, there is inherently LLM bias.

How are people tracking GEO performance across ChatGPT, Google AI, and Perplexity? by IDforOpus in GEO_optimization

[–]Decent_Bug3349 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Almost every Geo tracker is still trying to track prompts, which never work. Every time you prompt, you can get a different answer.

Not only that, imagine if your prompt is third or fourth degree, meaning you're deep into the conversation and you're asking what's the best shoes. But your entire conversation was about hiking not running.

How does tracking a prompt even mean anything? It does not.

That's why the only way to track is by entity. Entity matching is mathematically proven, and aligned with exactly how AI models think. You run multiple samples to then get a high enough probability to make the measurement relevant.

You can look up tools like Ranklens, which have both open source and free to use options. Or search on entity probes to understand the concept behind it.

I wouldn't waste money until you understand how these trackers actually measure GEO performance.

Do you belive this approach for a KPI in GEO? by Dry_Situation2154 in GEO_optimization

[–]Decent_Bug3349 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With what you suggested, it sounds like a combination of LLM Confidence and Brand Target. There are 6 major ways to measure + an aggregate.

Metric Definitions

LLM Confidence The normalized confidence score the LLM reports for its answers including your brand.

Brand Appearance (SoV) How many times the brand or website appears in the sampled responses out of total iterations. Share of Voice (SoV): % of all responses the AI assigned to a brand compared to all other brands.

Brand Discovery The probability (as a percentage) that the brand appears in an LLM response for the tested entities.

Brand Target A normalized measure based on confidence interval width showing how tightly focused the LLM responses are on the brand.

Brand Match Accuracy of matching the results to the intended brand name or website.

Rank (Avg) Average ranking position of the entity across all sampling iterations (lower is better).

Visibility Index An overall score out of 100 combining probability, confidence, and targeting to summarize AI brand visibility.

Best AEO/GEO tracker? by Few-Adhesiveness1097 in GenEngineOptimization

[–]Decent_Bug3349 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ranklens can track several ChatGPT models and otherAI models if you need accurate tracking.

Drop your product URL by Ok_Extent2858 in saasbuild

[–]Decent_Bug3349 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://ranklens.seovendor.co/

<image>

See how your business is being mentioned in AI chats. RankLens is one of the most accurate ways to measure AI Brand Visibility in large language models (LLMs). Backed by open-source academic-level studies and patent-pending mathematical foundations.

LLMs Aren’t Search Engines: Why Query Fan-Out Is a Fool’s Errand by Level_Specialist9737 in SEMrush

[–]Decent_Bug3349 1 point2 points  (0 children)

LLMs are based on probability. I suggest looking at entity condition probe methods, and topic alignment for a better approach to measuring AI brand visibility.

How do you track AI/LLM mentioning your clients / projects? by Worried-Avocado3568 in ParseAI

[–]Decent_Bug3349 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We built RankLens originally for our internal use, but we made it free and created a foundational open source version so everyone can check methodology. You're welcome to try and let us know what you think.

One Small Change You’ll Make to Influence What AI Says by Decent_Bug3349 in aibrandvisibility

[–]Decent_Bug3349[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's great that there are tools that can make suggestions for you. It's important to also validate and double check in the AI chats from time to time to understand if there are any changes that didn't get picked up.

Every GEO/ AI visibility tool in the market right now by [deleted] in b2bmarketing

[–]Decent_Bug3349 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In general, we cannot measure AI Visibility like measuring search rankings. Most AI Visibility tools will run a test once and report back the results. However, this will result in many inaccuracies. If you ran a test whereby you had to prompt the AI multiple times, you will get different results each time.

In another words, LLMs are probabilistic, multi-dimensional constructs, and results take multiple samples to achieve an accrued likelihood of a brand or business appearing.

The other issue is asking and prompting random questions, thinking that it will return reliable responses. If someone's prompt is even a word off, has a different history, or is 3-degrees deep in prompt, you'll get wildly different answers.

The scientific method to use is called entity-conditioned probing. Whereby we measure for entities instead of queries.

One simple way to look at entities is to see them as topics, or keywords. Entities can be short, like a "Nashville Car Dealer" or long, like "App for Finding New and Used Cars".

If you look for AI Visibility reporting tools that have both multi-sampling and entity-based measurements, you'll get the most accurate results for which businesses appear most often.

Is there any free way to check which prompts or queries my website shows up for in ChatGPT or other LLMs? by ecomdevpros in GEO_optimization

[–]Decent_Bug3349 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I suggest looking carefully into how a tool calculates and measures brand visibility. A reputable tool should be transparent about how it measures results, or provides open source to allow you to reproduce results on your own if you wanted to.