"Since last year's disastrous rollout of Google's AI Overviews, the world at large has been aware of how AI-powered search results can differ wildly from the traditional list of links search engines have generated for decades. Now, new research helps quantify that difference, showing that AI search engines tend to cite less popular websites and ones that wouldn't even appear in the Top 100 links listed in an "organic" Google search."
"Overall, the sources cited in results from the generative search tools tended to be from sites that were less popular than those that appeared in the top 10 of a traditional search, as measured by the domain-tracker Tranco. Sources cited by the AI engines were more likely than those linked in traditional Google searches to fall outside both the top 1,000 and top 1,000,000 domains tracked by Tranco."
Traditional Google link results were compared to AI Overviews, Gemini-2.5-Flash, GPT-4o's web search mode, and GPT-4o with Search Tool. Test queries were drawn from ChatGPT WildChat submissions, AllSides political topics, and the 100 most-searched Amazon products. Sources cited by generative search tools skewed toward less popular domains per Tranco rankings, frequently falling outside the top 1,000 and even the top 1,000,000 domains. Gemini showed a strong tendency to cite unpopular domains, with the median cited source outside Tranco's top 1,000. GPT-4o with Search Tool accessed the web only when the model determined external information was needed.
Read at Ars Technica
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]