Two controlled answer collections
exposed low recurrence and changed the methodology
Measuring how AI answer engines represent an organization
Organizations measure what they publish and what customers say back. Almost none measure what AI answer engines tell people who ask about them.
Architect and sole operator — spec, schema decision, hand-curated panel, collection, and the companion value model.
Sampling standard set empirically rather than by instinct: measured 9% recurrence at three samples, which killed single-shot collection and triggered a staged convergence experiment.
That he can evaluate model behavior, contain over-claiming, and build a business case without inventing a number — in his own words rather than a vendor's.
View the evidence
Defined machine answers as a third collection surface rather than folding them into social listening. Scored three gaps: divergence from the organization's own account, from its ecosystem's, and assertions neither supports. Recorded two lanes per answer — trained belief versus live retrieval with citations. Derived prompts from the organization's own ecosystem, then curated by hand.
324 answers collected in the first run, 400 in the second, across four engines. A companion value model — Decision Exposure, not cost — with a measurement ladder that must resolve to material mismatch before any figure touches money, and a published validation cascade naming which of its own stages remain unproven.