Sample AI Visibility Report
AI Search Visibility, Acme Dental Practice
acme-dental.example.com Niche: dentists Refreshed: 2026-05-29 09:14 UTC Confidence: 0.78 Headline numbers.
Per-engine Share of Model.
Different engines surface different brands. Knowing which engine sends which queries to you tells us where to focus the fixes.
Competitor leaderboard.
Share of brand mentions across the full query basket. Two competitors are running away with the citations.
Per-query scoreboard.
Drill into each query individually. Knowing precisely WHICH query × WHICH engine misses you tells us what to fix first.
dentists_best_private_dentist_veneers commercial "best private dentist for veneers UK"
High-value cosmetic procedure; high LTV.
dentists_invisalign_cost commercial "how much does Invisalign cost in London"
Price-discovery; most common pre-booking research.
dentists_implants_reviews_near_me commercial "dental implants reviews near me"
Local-pack + review-synthesis; leading indicator of conversion.
dentists_emergency_appointment_uk transactional "emergency dentist same day appointment UK"
Highest-intent query; same-day need.
dentists_safe_whitening_at_home informational "is at-home teeth whitening safe compared to dentist"
Top-of-funnel education; builds authority for later commercial intent.
What to fix first.
Three recommendations, prioritised by predicted lift. Each cites the underlying scoring gap and the structural / content fix that closes it.
Emergency same-day landing page
Why this matters: Zero engines cite you for 'emergency dentist same day appointment UK', the highest-intent transactional query in your niche.
Fix: Build a dedicated /emergency-dentist page with FAQ schema; explicit 'same-day' + phone CTA above the fold; testimonial verbatims.
Predicted lift: +8 to +14 pts SoM on emergency basket
Invisalign cost transparency
Why this matters: Perplexity + ChatGPT + Google AI Overview already cite competitors for cost queries, but the answers are vague.
Fix: Publish an Invisalign cost-by-case-complexity table with verifiable typical-range figures. Engines preferentially cite quantified claims.
Predicted lift: +4 to +7 pts SoM on price-discovery basket
Structural fix on implants page
Why this matters: Gemini + Claude cite you on implants reviews because of your existing FAQ schema. ChatGPT misses because your key claims sit mid-document.
Fix: Front-load the verifiable-stat (e.g. '94% 5-year survival rate from a 2024 BDJ meta-analysis') in the first paragraph + summarise again in a closing section.
Predicted lift: +3 to +6 pts SoM on implants basket
Methodology.
Every score above traces to a peer-reviewed method + an official-API probe.
- Share of Model (SoM) — target brand's mention count ÷ total mentions across the basket × competitive set.
- Position-Adjusted Word Count (PAWC) —
Imp = Σ wordcount(s) / exp(pos(s))per Aggarwal et al., GEO: Generative Engine Optimization, KDD 2024, arXiv 2311.09735. Up to ~40% citation-rate uplift, domain-dependent. - Composite Visibility —
V = 0.40·Coverage + 0.30·Position + 0.30·Influence. - Citation Probability —
P̂ = σ(w·features). Logistic heuristic with calibration priors; not a law.
Probes use official engine APIs, Perplexity sonar, OpenAI web search, Anthropic, Google Gemini, SerpAPI for Google AI Overviews. Never scraping.