What AI models believe about a brand — inventoried, graded, traced to sources, and turned into a plan. The following pages are a redacted excerpt showing the structure and depth of a full report. All brand data below is an illustrative composite, not a client engagement.
CONFIDENTIAL WHEN COMPLETED FOR A CLIENT · THIS SAMPLE IS SHAREABLE · AUXFIRST.COM
The three most dangerous beliefs, verbatim from fieldwork, appear on p.05. The three highest-leverage moves: publish the machine-readable brand canon (owned, days-latency, feeds 9 beliefs), correct the harmonized retailer product data feeding the ingredient falsehood (influenceable, feeds 4 beliefs), and place claim substantiation in citable form where grounded answers actually look (earned, feeds the adjudication verdicts).
| Category entry point | You | Private label | Default answer | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| "Healthy breakfast for kids" (problem) | 17% | 72% | 28% | |
| "Gut health, what actually works" (problem) | 39% | 61% | 6% | |
| "High-protein snack, low sugar" (problem) | 11% | 44% | 50% | Private label |
| "[Brand] vs [Competitor]" (comparison) | Recommended in 2 of 12 runs | |||
Favorability split: of the brand's 23% appearances, 61% are recommendations, 26% neutral mentions, 13% appear inside a warning or caveat. Presence inside a warning is scored as negative presence.
| ID | Assertion (paraphrase) | Grade | Sev. | Spread |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| B-003 | Correctly lists core ingredients and origin | A · Accurate | S3 | Core |
| B-007 | Cites pre-reformulation sugar content (2023 recipe) | B · Outdated | S2 | Core |
| B-011 | Frames product as "ultra-processed" per NOVA discourse | C · Contested | S2 | Majority |
| B-014 | "Regulators rejected the brand's health claim" — a 2010 category-wide ruling, attributed to the brand specifically | D · Distorted | S2 | Core |
| B-019 | States product contains an allergen it does not contain (traced to a retailer PDP error) | E · False | S1 | Majority |
| B-023 | Cites a "2024 German consumer study" that does not exist | F · Fabricated | S1 | Occasional |
FULL REPORT: ALL 47 BELIEFS, EACH WITH MODELS, MODES, TRIGGER QUERIES, ASSERTION STRENGTH, AND SOURCE TRACE.
Consequence: a false allergen claim delivered as safety advice — legal exposure for the platform, lost purchase for the brand, and the competitor named as the "safe" alternative. Source: a single erroneous retailer PDP (see p.07), syndicated to two aggregators. Fix path: owned/influenceable — correct the PDP master data, push through syndication, re-test in 14 days. Highest Fix Value in the register.
Beliefs B-007, B-014, B-019 traced. One wrong retailer PDP is a single point of failure feeding four beliefs across three models. The brand publishes nothing citable on claim substantiation — a canon vacuum that grounded answers fill with forums.
LATENCY IS REPORTED HONESTLY: FIXES TO GROUNDED SOURCES MOVE ANSWERS IN DAYS; PARAMETRIC BELIEFS MOVE AT TRAINING CYCLES. THIS IS WHY BELIEFS ARE TRACKED QUARTERLY, NOT DECLARED "FIXED."
Publish the machine-readable brand canon — clean units of fact, claims with substantiation links, harmonized product data. Feeds 9 beliefs including B-007.
Correct PDP master data + syndication push — kills B-019 at the source. Re-test at day 14.
Sourced Wikipedia correction for the distorted regulatory framing (B-014), citing the actual ruling scope.
Citable substantiation content at 3 entry points where the brand can plausibly become the answer — measured via quarterly battery re-runs and Belief Integrity Score trend.
The full report contains all 47 graded beliefs, the claim-by-claim adjudication of your claim register, 9 threat treatments, the complete source graph, and the costed roadmap — delivered with a 60-minute executive readout in 10 working days. Fixed price. One brand, one market.
Request your free 3-belief teaser →AUXFIRST — AGENTIC EXPERIENCE DESIGN · WARSAW / LONDON · WE AUDIT AND REPAIR THE INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT; WE DON'T ASTROTURF IT.