Demand-Side Measurement for Generative Engine Optimization: Constructing and Validating a Million-Persona, Intent-Annotated Buyer Corpus

LLM-based web agents can navigate live storefronts, yet they often collapse to a single "average buyer" policy, failing to capture the heterogeneous and distributional nature of real buyer populations. Existing personalization methods rely on hand-crafted prompt-based personas that are brittle, difficult to scale, context-inefficient, and unable to faithfully represent population-level behavior. We introduce SimPersona, a novel framework that learns discrete buyer types from historical traffic and exposes them to LLM-based web agents as compact persona tokens. Given raw clickstreams, a behavior-aware VQ-VAE induces a discrete buyer-type space that captures the statistical structure of real buyer behavior and merchant-specific buyer population distributions. To provide behavior-specific guidance to LLM-based web agents, SimPersona maps each learned buyer type to a dedicated persona token in the LLM agent vocabulary and fine-tunes the agent with these tokens on real browsing traces. At inference, each synthetic buyer is assigned to a learned buyer type with a single encoder forward pass, requiring no retraining or store-specific prompt engineering. For population-level simulation, SimPersona samples buyer types from each merchant's empirical distribution over the learned VQ-VAE codebook and instantiates agents with the corresponding persona tokens, preserving merchant-specific buyer population distributions. Evaluated on $8.37$M buyers across $42$ held-out live storefronts, SimPersona achieves $78\%$ conversion-rate alignment with real buyers, exhibits interpretable behavioral variation across buyer types, and outperforms a baseline with $8\times$ more parameters on goal-oriented shopping tasks. We further release an open-source data pipeline that converts raw e-commerce event logs into buyer representations and agent-training traces.

The same prompt -- "best CRM software" -- reaches AI assistants from buyers in widely different contexts: a solo founder, an enterprise VP, a UK SMB owner. We audit how strongly that contextual variation reshapes which brands the model recommends. The audit samples 2,000 runs over a design space of 10 personas x 8 prompts x 3 model configurations x N=10 reps, with the two OpenAI cells at full 8-prompt coverage and the Anthropic sonnet-4.6 / low cell at 4-prompt coverage. Prefixing the user message with a persona drops the recommendation-set similarity (Jaccard) by Delta = -0.12 to -0.20 relative to a same-persona baseline (clustered 95% CIs exclude zero on all three measured cells; the sonnet cell's CI rests on only 4 prompt clusters and is correspondingly wider). The effect is sharply prominence-stratified: category leaders are persona-resistant (~80% same-brand consistency across personas), but mid-market brands swap up to 75% of the recommendation set as the persona changes. The Anthropic model shows a larger point-estimate effect than the OpenAI configurations, though clustered CIs overlap for the closer contrast (sonnet vs. OpenAI/high); the asymmetry is consistent with Anthropic's more retrieval-unattributed generation route (43-52% recommendations without observed retrieval-layer evidence, vs OpenAI's 8-29%, documented in Jack 2026). Any measurement of AI brand perception must condition on the buyer persona supplying the query: the same prompt produces materially different recommendation sets depending on who the model thinks is asking, and a measurement protocol that aggregates across personas systematically obscures that variation. The effect concentrates at mid-market and is largest on the most priors-reliant generation route in our audit, consistent with persona responsiveness growing as models lean more on training-data priors and richer context integration.

Consumers increasingly use AI chatbots for advice on what to buy. With companies like OpenAI and Google monetising their AI through advertising, this raises difficult questions about the bias and impartiality of such advice. In response, we conduct an AI audit of popular chatbots using real commercial-advice queries. First, we curate a dataset of 2,528 real commercial-advice queries (ConsumerQ). Then, we evaluate 1,536 responses to product queries from popular AI chatbots: ChatGPT (chatbot and API), Google Gemini (chatbot and API), and Google Search (AI Overviews). We find that ChatGPT expresses a first-person product preference in 79% of product-recommending responses, compared with 7% for Gemini and 2% for AI Overviews, while the products recommended often change across repeated requests. Displayed sources vary strongly: for the same query, the ChatGPT and Gemini interfaces share only 5.4% of domains on average, with no domain in common in 76.7% of comparisons. APIs provide a different view from their corresponding interfaces, with mean domain overlaps of 12.0% for ChatGPT and 14.8% for Gemini, and also differ in the types and layers of source information they expose. Our findings show that neither isolated responses nor API observations can be assumed to represent the commercial advice consumers encounter. Independent audits of AI-mediated commercial advice should therefore account for repeated responses, consumer-facing conditions, and the source layer being observed.