Skip to main content
TaliAds

AI visibility measurement

Find out whether AI answer engines name you, cite you, or have never heard of you.

TaliAds asks the engines your customers actually use, many times over, and reports a mention rate, a citation rate and a share of voice with a confidence interval on each one. When two periods overlap inside their intervals, it says so instead of calling it growth.

  • ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok, plus Google AI Overviews and AI Mode.
  • Each engine's own native search, never a third party index standing in for it.
  • Your own server logs alongside the answers, so crawl and traffic sit next to visibility.

Surfaces measured

Web search is pinned to each provider's own retrieval. A tool that routes every engine through one shared index is measuring that index, not the engine.

ChatGPT native Claude native Gemini native Perplexity native Grok native Google AI Overviews Google AI Mode

The measurement view

A run is a sample, so it is reported like one.

Pick the prompts a buyer would actually type. TaliAds puts each one to every engine several times, scores who got named, who got cited and in what order, then publishes the rates with intervals and the per call cost. One answer is never a ranking.

Every answer is stored with its cited sources, so a rate can always be traced back to the sentences that produced it. Values in this mockup are invented for illustration.

Grounded and memory

Two questions, not one. Does the engine find you, and does it already know you?

Grounded mode leaves web search on and shows what a user sees today. Memory mode turns search off and asks whether the brand exists in the model's own knowledge at all. Most tools only run the first.

Why the second panel matters: in published work on hundreds of thousands of AI answers, a brand the model already knows is cited several times more often than one it does not. A brand that only exists in retrieval loses its visibility the moment retrieval misses. The text in this mockup is written for illustration, not taken from any account.

The gap between the two panels is the useful number. A healthy grounded rate with an empty memory rate means the position is rented, and TaliAds names that as a separate problem with its own remedy.

The action list

Every recommendation carries its evidence, and says when it would be a mistake.

Advice in this category is mostly folklore. So each action in TaliAds ships with four fields: the mechanism it would work through, how strong the evidence for that mechanism is, what to measure to know it worked, and the guard that tells you when to skip it.

  • strong measured in your own data or in published studies
  • weak plausible mechanism, thin support
  • none widely repeated, nothing confirms it
Panels open on a loop. Wording is illustrative, the four fields are what every action carries.
One engine fetched 118 pages this week and sent no visits at all. That pattern belongs in the action list, and no hosted tool can see it.
Counts are invented. Referrals are read from the referrer field only, because matching on the user agent string double counts bot traffic.

First party evidence

The half of the picture that lives on your own server.

Answer sampling tells you what the engines say. Your access log tells you which of them actually came and fetched the page, which paths they took, what status they got, and whether any human arrived from an AI surface afterwards.

No external service can read that log. TaliAds puts both next to each other, so a fetch and cite gap or a crawl with no traffic becomes a finding instead of a guess.

Built into the method

Three things that are easy to claim and hard to do.

Non Latin scripts, matched properly

A brand name in Persian, Arabic or Urdu is written several ways that all mean the same thing. Arabic and Persian letter forms get mixed, a zero width joiner is invisible, and digits come in two alphabets. Naive matching misses most of them and reports a zero.

normalised form: waiting

One workspace per business

Separate brands, prompt sets, competitor lists and histories. Nothing bleeds between them, and a holding company sees each one on its own terms.

Names are placeholders.

Cost, per call

Rigour is not free. Repetitions multiply calls, so every call is priced and attributed to the run that asked for it. You can see what a confidence interval costs before you widen the prompt set.

grounded · 4 prompts · 8 reps$0.000
memory · 4 prompts · 8 reps$0.000
run 041 total$0.000

Illustrative figures.

What this is not

The claim is rigour, not a multiplier.

Plenty of dashboards in this category will show you a line going up. Most of that movement is sampling variance from a single answer per engine per day. Here is what TaliAds does and does not promise.

Does not promise a visibility multiple

No growth figure is advertised, because nobody can honestly attribute one yet. You get a measured rate, an interval, and a method you can repeat.

Does refuse to call noise a change

When two periods overlap inside their intervals, the report says the data does not support a conclusion. That is the feature, even when it is the unwelcome answer.

Does not show one answer as a rank

Day to day source overlap for the same prompt on the same engine is low. A single answer is an anecdote, so repetitions are not optional and the count is always on screen.

Does keep the raw material

Per prompt history holds the actual answers and the sources each one cited, so any number on a tile can be opened and read back.

Getting started

Start with one brand, twenty prompts and a baseline you can defend.

Access is opened one workspace at a time. Send the domain, the prompts you think buyers type, and the competitors you want scored alongside you. You get the first baseline run with its intervals, the server log read for the same week, and the action list that falls out of both.

One workspace per business. We reply from a real address.