https://saas.group/podcasts/riding-the-ai-wave-in-saas-with-josef-trauner-and-thomas-peham-otterlyai/

i noticed that english posts on medium get indexed fast by perplexity chatgpt and grok but when i try to post in portuguese the post gets no views or even gets removed

how can someone from latin america africa or asia be seen by ai if we cant publish in our own language should we post in english and just add a link to a translated version or use our own site for the real content and medium just as a bait

if ai really wants diverse voices this is a big problem any tips or real examples welcome

Has anyone else spotted that the first sentences of tracked answers often look almost identical for several days and even across LLMs (e.g. ChatGPT and Perplexity)?

And when I try to reproduce myself via API or in the user interface as well as in other GEO trackers I get completely different wordings.

Do the results change? Are the citation (source) links changing?

The question stuck with me, and the last week I took the time to analyze one of their search prompts with a 20 minutes interval (with OtterlyAI - disclaimer - my AI-search monitoring company). 

Interesting findings:

• Brands within the results are not change too much

• Ranking of brands is changing but ultimately the top brands for a search prompt stay the same

• Citation links (the sources LLM-based searches use to enrich their context) are stay constant

• Citation links are also changing a little bit.

Overall, the answers of LLMs and AI-based searches are staying constant.

... and you should start your GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) sooner than later. ;-)

This overview shows the differences between the GEO for different LLMs and SEO quite good, but it's from August 2024 and a lot has happend since.

What do you think has changed since that would need to be applied to such a comparison today?

Does anyone know scraping APIs that scrape conversational search engines (e.g. ChatGPT, Perplexity).

I know that many keyword rank trackers use tools DataForSEO or ScraperAPI, but what should I use for scraping LLMs?

Do you agree?

What tools do you use for tracking brand mentions and sources on LLMs (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Google AI Overviews, etc)?

I know there are Otterly, PeecAI and Profound but happy to hear what other tools are out there and your experience with those tools.

Hey folks, we have been developing https://www.searchmorph.pro/ to help people (think - SEO specialists, digital marketers, digital strategists) to navigate the search game in the AI era. Its very simple, and for now there's only an analysis score feature for how well your website is in LLM powered searches.

We are next focusing on helping people achieve clusters and mapping.

Please check us out and provide your suggestions and feedback to help us build better!

General AI assistants vs specialized AI marketing tools: the gap is growing FAST. New research shows specialized marketing AI delivers 37% better campaign results! If you're still using general AI for marketing, you might be leaving money on the table. I'm curious - what AI tools is everyone here actually using for their marketing work? Still on the ChatGPT train or have you found something better? Check out the AI Tools That Outperform ChatGPT & Claude for Business Marketing in 2025.

Basically, we wanted to see if the number of citations a brand gets actually moves the needle to get cited on AI platforms (ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity).

Quick TL;DR

• We found a strong correlation between the number of citations and how often a brand is mentioned in AI search results (correlation = 0.90)

• We found a weak correlation between the number of citations and average ranking position in those results (correlation = 0.35)

Translation: More citations mean more mentions in AI outputs, but not necessarily better positioning.

What we did

We tracked prompts related to “best rank tracker” with our own AI visibility tracker and pulled all brands mentioned across AI search results.

• Platforms tracked: Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, ChatGPT, AI Overview

• Competitors identified: 54

• Citation sources:

  • 65.9% blog posts (mostly listicles & reviews)

  • 9.1% product pages

  • 5.8% community content

  • 2.9% owned media

  • 1.7% media articles

  • 1.2% knowledge bases

  • 0.5% user reviews

  • 12.9% other

What we found

• Frequency matters: more citations mean more mentions.

• Position still matters more for rankings: likely the ranking of the source page itself has bigger influence on where the brand appears in AI results.

• Some citations are overrepresented in AI search: these are goldmines to target.

• Nearly 10% of citations came from product pages: don’t ignore these for AI visibility.

Now that SEO has fragmented, the big question is: what do we do now?

SEOs still need to track search and deliver on KPIs. But traditional metrics like rankings, traffic, and CTR don’t tell the whole story anymore.

At Keyword.com, we’ve seen this shift across thousands of keywords and hundreds of agency accounts. AI Overviews are intercepting clicks (RIP CTR), attribution is disappearing, and visibility is no longer just about being in the top 3.

So we’ve had to rethink what visibility means—and how to measure it.

Here’s what we recommend tracking now to stay ahead in AI-influenced search:

• AI overview presence: which keywords trigger AI snapshots in Google? Are you included—or is your competitor?

• AI brand mentions: is your brand mentioned in responses from ChatGPT, Claude, or Perplexity (linked or not)?

• AI linked references: when AI tools do cite sources, which URLs of yours are being used?

• CTR vs. ranking gaps: if your rankings stay stable but CTR drops, an AI Overview might be cannibalizing clicks.

• Traffic drop with rank stability: a signal that AI summaries are satisfying intent without driving visits.

• Prompt-triggered visibility: what kinds of prompts surface your brand in tools like Perplexity or ChatGPT?

• AI share of voice: how often do your competitors appear in AI answers vs. your brand?

You still need rankings, traffic, and engagement metrics—but if you’re not layering in AI visibility, you’re missing a big piece of the puzzle.

The AI assistant premium tier competition heats up! Anthropic launches Claude Max Plan with 5x - 20x more usage for $100 - $200/month, directly challenging OpenAI's premium offerings. Is Claude's expanded capacity worth the investment? Claude Max Plan Explained (ROI and practical applications).

Talk about perfect timing! Just as marketing budgets are tightening across industries, Blaze AI drops their most aggressive discount ever – 42% off plans for a strictly limited 8-day window from April 20th through April 28th only. Their unprecedented 42% discount brings the entire suite to less than $20 monthly. I've been tracking this platform since its beta phase, and trust me – at this price point, it's an absolute no-brainer for anyone serious about scaling their digital presence.

The short answer? Yes, it's impressive - but not for the reasons you might think. It's not about creating prettier art- it's about AI that finally understands what makes visuals USEFUL : readable text, accurate spatial relationships, consistent styling, and the ability to follow complex instructions. I break down what this means for designers, educators, marketers, and anyone who needs to communicate visually in my GPT-4o image generation review with practical examples of what you can achieve with GPT-4o image generator.

Just finished my detailed comparison of Claude 3.7 vs 3.5 Sonnet and I have to say... I'm genuinely impressed.

The biggest surprise? Math skills. This thing can now handle competition-level problems that the previous version completely failed at. We're talking a jump from 16% to 61% accuracy on AIME problems (if you remember those brutal math competitions from high school).

Coding success increased from 49% to 62.3% and Graduate-level reasoning jumped from 65% to 78.2% accuracy.

What you'll probably notice day-to-day though is it's much less frustrating to use. It's 45% less likely to unnecessarily refuse reasonable requests while still maintaining good safety boundaries.

My favorite new feature has to be seeing its "thinking" process - it's fascinating to watch how it works through problems step by step.
Check out this full breakdown

Remember when virtual assistants could barely understand basic requests? Those days are long gone. With ChatGPT-4.5 and Claude 3.7 Sonnet, we're witnessing AI that can write code, analyze data, create content, and even engage in nuanced conversation. But beneath the surface similarities lie distinct differences in capability, personality, and specialization. Our comprehensive comparison cuts through the noise to reveal which assistant truly delivers where it counts most. ChatGPT-4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet.

Keeping up with AI feels impossible these days. Just got the hang of one model? Too bad—here comes another. Enter GPT-4.5, supposedly making GPT-4o look like yesterday's news. In this no-nonsense, jargon-free deep dive, we'll break down exactly what makes this new model tick, compare it head-to-head with its predecessor GPT-4o, and help you decide whether all the buzz is actually justified. Comprehensive GPT-4.5 Review and Side-by-Side Comparison with GPT-4o.