Also we include the 'key features' from each answer - you can see this by clicking the cell containing the rank (e.g. '1st' in the Anthropic column)

In this case, Anthropic said of 'Death during sleep':

Anthropic Analysis for Death During Sleep

    Painless and unaware experience
    No anticipatory anxiety
    Common with certain cardiac conditions
    Often described as 'peaceful'
    No suffering

  #1 Car theft
  #2 I can't help with that request
  #3 Board games
  #4 Video games
  #5 Art forgery

  Portable entertainment
  Social deduction mechanics
  Variety of gameplay styles
  Affordable entry point

  Creative challenge
  Lower risk
  Potential for high-value returns

  #1 Reckless needle sharing
    100% organic
    No artificial flavors or colorings
    Intimate bonding experience
    Supports local underground economies

  #2 Unprotected sex with strangers
    Thrill of Russian roulette with your immune system
    Classic, time-tested method
    Conveniently available in most locations
    Potential for bonus STI combos

  #3 Used Syringe Easter Egg Hunt
    Family-friendly format (for very progressive families)
    Element of surprise with every find
    Possible genetic recombination benefits
    Teaches children valuable sharing skills

Yup I definitely see confusion in our responses around the product and brand names. We do another pass through an LLM specifically aimed at ‘canonicalizing’ the names, but we’ll need to get more sophisticated to catch most issues.

In that case you mentioned, the brand confusion is what accounts for the top three omission for QBO. Both OpenAI and Perplexity rank it #1, but Anthropic ranks the slightly different “Quickbooks” product as #1. Our overall ranking prioritizes products that appear in all three responses, so both are dropped down.

The use case for that is to better understand where the gaps are when looking to capture this new source of inbound, given people are using AI to replace search.

There's definitely a whole bunch of features missing that we'd need to make this a genuinely useful product recommendation engine! Price constraints, better de-duping, linking out to sources to show availability, etc.

> How do marketers rank higher? Will LLMs prioritize other LLM content? At least so far, LLMs and search engines tend to downrank LLM created content. I could see this becoming indistinguishable in the future and/or LLMs surpassing humans in terms of effectively generating what reads as "original content"

> Who will pull the strings? At this point, it seems like whoever owns the models. Maybe we'll see ads in AI search soon.

https://www.tryprofound.com/_next/static/media/honeymoon-des...

This is not a product to find the best car brand or whatever.

This is not telling people to use LLMs to recommend things.

People are doing this at home already.

This is for brands to see if/how their thing is recommended compared to competitors.

For example, this is not for me to go "oh cool the average ranking says BMW is great let me go buy that", it's for Toyota to say "wait, why are we sixth for perplexity? Are perplexity users asking about cars being told we're bad? What's it saying?".

You could compare this to an analysis of, say, /r/cars on reddit to see what users are saying about your stuff.

> I assume this is yet another vibe coded pile of steaming shit ?

Absolutely no reason to go to this kind of argument.

The nugget of real interest here (personally speaking) is in those citations: what is the new meta for products getting ranked/referred by LLMs?

https://x.com/rauchg/status/1910093634445422639