Skip to content
Research·Study 2 · v3 paper dated 2026-05-07

Outrigger AI Visibility Index: Off-Page Decomposition

This page summarises the v3 paper. The paper on Zenodo is the authoritative source.
Published preprint · Zenodo DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20076380
Off-Page Signals Have Model-Specific Effects on Generative AI Search Visibility: Evidence from a Cross-Platform Audit of 2,729 Businesses Across Five Generative AI Systems
Author:
House, Joel
Date:
2026-05-07
Version:
v3 (supersedes v1 and v2; v2 record at DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20048424 has been withdrawn)
Status:
Preprint — Not Peer Reviewed
License:
CC-BY-4.0
Withdrawn records:
v2 paper (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20048424) and the Phase 1 dataset (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20048614), both withdrawn 7 May 2026

What the paper studied

“The audit covers 2,729 businesses across 14 verticals (personal injury law; real estate; dental; accounting; med spa; home services / plumbing; financial advisors; SaaS — CRM; SaaS — project management; digital marketing agencies; e-commerce — baby/kids/family DTC brands; boutique hospitality; insurance brokers and comparison platforms; personal-finance and money-management apps) and four metropolitan markets (Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Sydney)”
v3 §3.2 Sample
“Sampling proceeded in two waves. Phase 1 (n = 1,004) sampled businesses URL-first, beginning with an industry-city directory query and verifying first-party domain ownership. Phase 2 (n = 1,725) sampled name-first, beginning with a business name and resolving the URL post-hoc via Apify Google SERP.”
v3 §3.2 Sample

Key findings

Roughly seven in ten businesses (69.5% of 2,729) were not mentioned by any AI system they were tested on. Gemini and Google AI Overviews were tested for a subset of the sample only.

Off-page presence (directories such as BBB, Yelp and Trustpilot, Wikipedia, LinkedIn company pages, and Reddit and Quora mentions) correlates with being mentioned by ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity after nine controls (v3 Tables 2–4).

Businesses cited as a source by Perplexity were roughly six times as likely to be mentioned in that response.

Off-page correlations (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity)

ModelPartial r95% CIBH q-valueSignificant
Claude+0.190[+0.147, +0.233]5.9e-14Yes
ChatGPT+0.128[+0.081, +0.174]4.5e-07Yes
Perplexity+0.110[+0.063, +0.156]1.4e-05Yes

Table 2. Reddit mention count → AI visibility, partial correlation by model. Rows for ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity shown.

ModelPartial r95% CIBH q-valueSignificant
Claude+0.203[+0.155, +0.248]1.0e-15Yes
ChatGPT+0.113[+0.062, +0.163]8.4e-06Yes
Perplexity+0.087[+0.041, +0.137]6.8e-04Yes

Table 3. Quora mention count → AI visibility, partial correlation by model. Rows for ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity shown.

ModelPartial r95% CIBH q-valueSignificant
Claude+0.219[+0.172, +0.266]4.5e-18Yes
Perplexity+0.124[+0.077, +0.173]8.9e-07Yes
ChatGPT+0.103[+0.054, +0.152]5.2e-05Yes

Table 4. Wikipedia presence → AI visibility, partial correlation by model. Rows for ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity shown.

“The single largest off-page partial r anywhere in the table is has_wikipedia → Claude (+0.219), and the second largest is quora_mention_count → Claude (+0.203).”
v3 §4.2 Per-model strict isolation is the headline finding

Domain Authority

“Domain Authority has a raw Pearson correlation of 0.337 with the composite visibility score on the Phase 1 sub-sample (n = 1,004) and 0.217 on the full sample (n = 2,200 businesses with non-null DA). After BH-FDR correction it remains significant as a raw correlation. In the multivariate L2-regularised logistic regression on n = 2,729 — which simultaneously estimates 22 features — its standardised coefficient is +0.139 with a bootstrap 95% confidence interval of [−0.031, +0.316], which crosses zero.”
v3 §4.4 Domain Authority is associated but loses multivariate significance
“We interpret this as confounding rather than absence of effect: high-DA businesses are systematically more likely to have Wikipedia entries, LinkedIn company pages, BBB and Yelp listings, and active YouTube channels, and the off-page indicators absorb most of the explanatory power that DA appeared to carry alone.”
v3 §4.4 Domain Authority is associated but loses multivariate significance

Directory presence by Domain Authority quartile

“We split the sample into Domain Authority quartiles and compared mean visibility scores between businesses with above-median directory_count and below-median directory_count within each quartile.”
v3 §4.7 Directory-presence lift by Domain Authority quartile
DA bucketAvg vis (low directory)Avg vis (high directory)Δ
Q1 (DA 1–20)2.47.2+4.8
Q2 (DA 20–39)9.614.1+4.5
Q3 (DA 39–59)11.119.5+8.5
Q4 (DA 59–98)7.027.2+20.2

Table 8. Directory-presence lift on visibility score by DA quartile (n ≈ 550 per quartile).

“One reading is that off-page presence has the most leverage for already-authoritative businesses; another is that directory coverage itself becomes more complete as DA rises, and the uplift in Q4 reflects the joint product of authority and coverage rather than a pure off-page effect. The dataset is consistent with either reading; the controlled trial in §7 is designed to discriminate.”
v3 §4.7 Directory-presence lift by Domain Authority quartile

What the findings are, and are not

“All of these findings are correlational. The dataset cannot adjudicate causality. A business that is mentioned on Reddit and on Wikipedia and that ranks in BBB and Yelp directories is likely to be a more established business with more brand equity, and brand equity itself plausibly drives both off-page presence and AI mention probability.”
v3 §5 Discussion
“Observational, not causal. The dataset cannot distinguish causation from confounding. Partial-correlation and OLS-residualisation analyses isolate linear contributions of a predictor controlling for a measured set of confounders; unobserved confounders (brand age, marketing spend, executive PR effort, demand-side prominence) are not controlled for.”
v3 §6 Limitations
“Stochastic AI outputs. Each (business, model, prompt) cell is a single sample from a stochastic process. We did not measure within-cell run-to-run variance.”
v3 §6 Limitations
“Single point in time. All probing was conducted in April–May 2026. AI model versions, training cutoffs, and grounding behaviour change frequently. Replication on the same sample at a later date would likely produce a different mention pattern at the margin.”
v3 §6 Limitations
“The author is the founder and operator of MentionLayer, a generative engine optimization platform whose product thesis overlaps with the research questions of this paper.”
v3 §3.1 Conflict of interest disclosure

Layer 3 (Phase 3) controlled trial: status

“These results are correlational. To test causal magnitude, a Phase 3 controlled trial is planned for May–July 2026, with the protocol pre-registered on the Open Science Framework before enrolment.”
v3 §7 Conclusion and Future Work
Status: Pre-registered on OSF (ZFA38, 7 May 2026); the trial did not launch; no businesses were enrolled. View the OSF registration (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/ZFA38)

Run it on your brand · ask about the paper · cite it

Cite as: House, J. (2026). Off-Page Signals Have Model-Specific Effects on Generative AI Search Visibility: Evidence from a Cross-Platform Audit of 2,729 Businesses Across Five Generative AI Systems (v3). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20076380


This is the second study in the Outrigger AI Visibility Index research series. Study 1 (Phase 1 baseline, superseded). Study 3 (Layer 3): Pre-registered on OSF (ZFA38, 7 May 2026); the trial did not launch; no businesses were enrolled.

The Outrigger AI Visibility Index: Off-Page Decomposition (v3 paper)