Who Owns the AI Recommendation? A Multi-Industry Empirical Map of Brand Category Ownership Across Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.23057v1
• Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2026 09:10:54 GMT
• Title: Who Owns the AI Recommendation? A Multi-Industry Empirical Map of Brand Category Ownership Across Large Language Models
• Abstract summary: 3,750 responses spanning 50 brands, five industries, and 250 brand-free category queries on three models.<n>We propose three exploratory metrics: the Category Ownership Index (COI), a brand's share of mentions within a category; the Competitive Vacuum Index (CVI), flagging categories with no single leader; and the Displacement Score (DS), quantifying asymmetric substitution between brand pairs.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models now mediate how buyers discover products and services, making the competitive structure of AI-generated recommendations a strategic concern for brands. A basic question has lacked large-scale empirical answers: in a given category, which brand does a model recommend, and how concentrated is that ownership? Across 3,750 responses spanning 50 brands, five industries, and 250 brand-free category queries on three models (GPT-5.2, Google Gemini 3 Flash, and Perplexity sonar-pro), each query repeated five times under a dice-roll stability protocol, we propose three exploratory metrics: the Category Ownership Index (COI), a brand's share of mentions within a category; the Competitive Vacuum Index (CVI), flagging categories with no single leader; and the Displacement Score (DS), quantifying asymmetric substitution between brand pairs. In this sample, recommendation concentration was moderate: the mean Gini coefficient was 0.28 (95% CI [0.16, 0.41]), below the 0.60 power-law threshold we set. Competitive vacuums were rare, appearing in 8.0% of queries, so the models named at least one sampled brand in most cases. Cross-model agreement on the top-recommended brand was 41.6%: a top position on one model did not reliably hold on another. Displacement was industry-dependent, from co-recommendation in consulting (0.4:1) to one-directional substitution up to 4.3:1, with an unweighted mean of 2.4:1 across the five industries. A BERTopic check placed only 4.2% of discovered topic clusters outside the original categories. Within the scope studied, these results sit in tension with a strong winner-takes-all narrative around AI recommendation, and the three metrics offer a candidate, reproducible procedure for competitive-intelligence analysis that future work can validate.

Related papers

• NovGauge: A Fine-Grained Benchmark for Diagnosing LLMs' Capability in Paper Novelty Assessment [54.4265627247104]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in peer review at major AI conferences.<n>Existing benchmarks assess novelty as a single holistic score.<n>We present NovGauge, a human-anchored benchmark for fine-grained novelty assessment diagnosis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-10T08:34:56Z)
• Marginal Fidelity Does Not Establish User Simulation in Demographic Synthetic Survey Panels: Response Contracts, Support Collapse and Conditioning Failure [51.736723807086385]
  Population-marginal agreement is evidence about an elicitation contract and an estimand obtainable without simulated respondents, not evidence of individual simulation.<n>On nine aligned model-battery pairs, a no-persona population-prevalence query averages 6.27 MAE versus 12.39 for committed panels and wins all nine comparisons.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-07T10:22:22Z)
• Where Does the Noise Come From? A Variance-Components Decomposition of Non-Determinism in LLM Brand Answers [0.0]
  Teams measuring whether large language models recommend a brand face a problem: ask the same question twice and the answer moves.<n>We show that a measured brand score moves for at least four separable reasons: within-prompt resampling, prompt paraphrase, model identity, and query language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-14T22:12:52Z)
• Incumbent Advantage: Brand Bias and Cognitive Manipulation Dynamics in LLM Recommendation Systems [7.25871718341051]
  We study brand dynamics in skincare product search recommendations using large language models (LLMs)<n>We find that well-known brands get recommended 100% of the time when all products have the same specifications, but this dominance disappears with less than a +0.1-star rating advantage for a competitor.<n>Our results suggest that generative engine optimization (GEO) should be studied as an emerging marketing practice that shapes market competition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-16T02:54:34Z)
• Knowledge Index of Noah's Ark [63.143852586221534]
  We introduce KINA, an 899-item benchmark across 261 fine-grained disciplines.<n>We prove a bonus-on-bar tournament weakly FOSD-dominates flat payment in released-review quality.<n>The top model, Gemini-3.1-Pro-Preview, reaches 53.17%, followed by Claude-Opus-4.6 at 49.92% and GPT-5.4 at 48.55%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T17:06:49Z)
• Persona Conditioning of Brand Recommendations in Retrieval-Augmented Commercial Chat: A Prominence-Stratified Cross-Provider Audit [0.0]
  We audit how strongly that contextual variation reshapes which brands the model recommends.<n>The audit samples 2,000 runs over a design space of 10 personas x 8 prompts x 3 model configurations x N=10 reps.<n>Any measurement of AI brand perception must condition on the buyer persona supplying the query.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T16:43:38Z)
• Soohak: A Mathematician-Curated Benchmark for Evaluating Research-level Math Capabilities of LLMs [86.49905745865038]
  Soohak is a 439-problem benchmark newly authored from scratch by 64 mathematicians.<n>The dataset will be publicly released in late 2026, with model evaluations available upon request in the interim.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-09T17:14:22Z)
• Benchmark^2: Systematic Evaluation of LLM Benchmarks [66.2731798872668]
  We propose Benchmark2, a comprehensive framework comprising three complementary metrics.<n>We conduct experiments across 15 benchmarks spanning mathematics, reasoning, and knowledge domains.<n>Our analysis reveals significant quality variations among existing benchmarks and demonstrates that selective benchmark construction can achieve comparable evaluation performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-07T14:59:03Z)
• No-Human in the Loop: Agentic Evaluation at Scale for Recommendation [11.764010898952677]
  evaluating large language models (LLMs) as judges is increasingly critical for building scalable and trustworthy evaluation pipelines.<n>We present ScalingEval, a large-scale benchmarking study that systematically compares 36 LLMs, including GPT, Gemini, Claude, and Llama.<n>Our multi-agent framework aggregates pattern audits and issue codes into ground-truth labels via scalable majority voting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-04T22:49:39Z)
• Creativity Benchmark: A benchmark for marketing creativity for large language models [0.509780930114934]
  Creativity Benchmark is an evaluation framework for large language models (LLMs) in marketing creativity.<n>The benchmark covers 100 brands (12 categories) and three prompt types (Insights, Ideas, Wild Ideas)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-05T04:44:29Z)
• Toward Automatic Relevance Judgment using Vision--Language Models for Image--Text Retrieval Evaluation [56.49084589053732]
  Vision--Language Models (VLMs) have demonstrated success across diverse applications, yet their potential to assist in relevance judgments remains uncertain. This paper assesses the relevance estimation capabilities of VLMs, including CLIP, LLaVA, and GPT-4V, within a large-scale textitad hoc retrieval task tailored for multimedia content creation in a zero-shot fashion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-02T16:15:25Z)
• Advancing LLM Reasoning Generalists with Preference Trees [119.57169648859707]
  We introduce Eurus, a suite of large language models (LLMs) optimized for reasoning. Eurus models achieve state-of-the-art results among open-source models on a diverse set of benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-02T16:25:30Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.