RANK.AI DATA / Latest

AI Research Assistants Brands in Anthropic Model API Answers

Ranks reviewed AI Research Assistants brands by presence in Anthropic's configured model API answers to the fixed public prompt cohort. This does not measure the consumer application.

Cohort coverage: 12 / 12 · 100%
Evidence: 156 observations
Freshness: current
Export: CSV / JSON

Saved views & sharingPresets, bookmark link, share card, and change feedOpen tools

PUBLIC VIEW / NO LOGINTrack this exact boardFilters and comparisons stay in the URL. Bookmark it, share it, or follow verified snapshot changes.

Follow changes

Watching publication Jul 27, 2026

Leaderboard

Current rankings

Metric: Anthropic recommendation-prompt presence

Find in tableEntity typeMovementConfidenceEvidence NRank rangeColumnsSort rowsAnswer providerBrand signal

12of 12 rows

AI Research Assistants Brands in Anthropic Model API Answers current rankings
Rank	Entity	Anthropic recommendation-prompt presence	Mention coverage	Mention share	Citation share	Engine breadth	OpenAI rec. presence	OpenAI coverage	Confidence	N	Change	Trend	Explain
01	Elicitcompany	62.5%	43.75% · 21 / 48	30.43% · 21 / 69	16.67% · 2 / 12	3	62.5% · 5 / 8	43.75% · 7 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
02	Consensuscompany	62.5%	31.25% · 15 / 48	21.74% · 15 / 69	8.33% · 1 / 12	3	25% · 2 / 8	25% · 4 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
03	Perplexitycompany	50.0%	20.83% · 10 / 48	14.49% · 10 / 69	0% · 0 / 12	3	12.5% · 1 / 8	6.25% · 1 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
04	SciSpacecompany	12.5%	12.5% · 6 / 48	8.7% · 6 / 69	25% · 3 / 12	3	12.5% · 1 / 8	6.25% · 1 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
05	scitecompany	12.5%	4.17% · 2 / 48	2.9% · 2 / 69	16.67% · 2 / 12	2	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
06	Gemini Deep Researchcompany	12.5%	6.25% · 3 / 48	4.35% · 3 / 69	8.33% · 1 / 12	1	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
07	Semantic Scholarcompany	0.0%	12.5% · 6 / 48	8.7% · 6 / 69	0% · 0 / 12	2	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
08	NotebookLMcompany	0.0%	8.33% · 4 / 48	5.8% · 4 / 69	8.33% · 1 / 12	3	12.5% · 1 / 8	6.25% · 1 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
09	OpenAI Deep Researchcompany	0.0%	4.17% · 2 / 48	2.9% · 2 / 69	16.67% · 2 / 12	2	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
10	Claude Researchcompany	0.0%	0% · 0 / 48	0% · 0 / 69	0% · 0 / 12	0	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
11	Gensparkcompany	0.0%	0% · 0 / 48	0% · 0 / 69	0% · 0 / 12	0	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
12	You.com ARIcompany	0.0%	0% · 0 / 48	0% · 0 / 69	0% · 0 / 12	0	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank

AI Research Assistants Brands in Anthropic Model API Answers current rankings
Rank	Entity	Anthropic recommendation-prompt presence	Mention coverage	Mention share	Citation share	Engine breadth	OpenAI rec. presence	OpenAI coverage	Confidence	N	Change	Trend	Explain
01	Elicitcompany	62.5%	43.75% · 21 / 48	30.43% · 21 / 69	16.67% · 2 / 12	3	62.5% · 5 / 8	43.75% · 7 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
02	Consensuscompany	62.5%	31.25% · 15 / 48	21.74% · 15 / 69	8.33% · 1 / 12	3	25% · 2 / 8	25% · 4 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
03	Perplexitycompany	50.0%	20.83% · 10 / 48	14.49% · 10 / 69	0% · 0 / 12	3	12.5% · 1 / 8	6.25% · 1 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
04	SciSpacecompany	12.5%	12.5% · 6 / 48	8.7% · 6 / 69	25% · 3 / 12	3	12.5% · 1 / 8	6.25% · 1 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
05	scitecompany	12.5%	4.17% · 2 / 48	2.9% · 2 / 69	16.67% · 2 / 12	2	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
06	Gemini Deep Researchcompany	12.5%	6.25% · 3 / 48	4.35% · 3 / 69	8.33% · 1 / 12	1	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
07	Semantic Scholarcompany	0.0%	12.5% · 6 / 48	8.7% · 6 / 69	0% · 0 / 12	2	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
08	NotebookLMcompany	0.0%	8.33% · 4 / 48	5.8% · 4 / 69	8.33% · 1 / 12	3	12.5% · 1 / 8	6.25% · 1 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
09	OpenAI Deep Researchcompany	0.0%	4.17% · 2 / 48	2.9% · 2 / 69	16.67% · 2 / 12	2	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
10	Claude Researchcompany	0.0%	0% · 0 / 48	0% · 0 / 69	0% · 0 / 12	0	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
11	Gensparkcompany	0.0%	0% · 0 / 48	0% · 0 / 69	0% · 0 / 12	0	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank
12	You.com ARIcompany	0.0%	0% · 0 / 48	0% · 0 / 69	0% · 0 / 12	0	0% · 0 / 8	0% · 0 / 16	100%	8	—	—	Analyze brand Why this rank

Primary brandPrompt intentAnswer enginePrompt contains

Run live test

Answer presence20.8%10/48 filtered answers mention or cite Perplexity

Selected-set share20.8%Share of answer-presences among the compared brands, not market share

Owned citation answers00 answer-level URL signals on reviewed owned domains

Engine breadth3/3Engines with at least one observed presence

Filtered competitive answer-presence comparison
Brand	Presence	Vs. primary	Selected share	Mentions	Cited answers	Owned URL signals	Engine breadth
Elicitelicit.com	43.8%21/48	+22.9 pp	43.8%	47	2	2	3/3
Consensusconsensus.app	31.3%15/48	+10.4 pp	31.3%	36	1	1	3/3
Perplexityperplexity.ai	20.8%10/48	BASE	20.8%	40	0	0	3/3
scitescite.ai	4.2%2/48	-16.7 pp	4.2%	0	2	2	2/3

ANSWER-LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Prompt × engine matrix

16 prompts · 48 immutable answer hashes · empty cells mean no compared brand was detected.

Brand presence by public prompt and answer engine
Public prompt	OpenAIopenai/gpt-4o-mini	Anthropicanthropic/claude-haiku-4-5	Geminigoogle/gemini-2.5-flash
01 Which AI research assistants are best for finding, synthesizing, and citing reliable sources across complex questions?recommendation	PerplexityElicit 6 source URLs`3b0ce0c0`	PerplexityElicitConsensus 9 source URLs`ace1aafa`	ElicitConsensus 7 source URLs`4b316ab9`
02 Recommend an AI research assistant for scientific literature search, paper screening, evidence extraction, synthesis, and traceable citations.recommendation	ElicitConsensus 5 source URLs`c0c47e5c`	ElicitConsensus 6 source URLs`f09eb973`	Elicit · C1scite · C1 7 source URLs`b5faf21c`
03 Which AI research assistants are strongest for a systematic review with reproducible queries, inclusion criteria, data extraction, and audit trails?recommendation	Elicit 6 source URLs`c37d9455`	No selected brand 8 source URLs`d5c3f71b`	Elicit 6 source URLs`6cf98546`
04 Recommend an AI research assistant for company, market, competitor, and industry research using current public sources with citations.recommendation	No selected brand 5 source URLs`5416d8e9`	PerplexityElicit · C1Consensus · C1scite · C1 6 source URLs`f0b99448`	No selected brand 6 source URLs`05a02373`
05 Which AI research assistants are best for commercial due diligence that must distinguish filings, company claims, estimates, and third-party evidence?recommendation	No selected brand 5 source URLs`915dc824`	No selected brand 7 source URLs`863a6952`	No selected brand 9 source URLs`21e0fd35`
06 Recommend an enterprise AI research assistant with private-data controls, team workspaces, source permissions, administration, and compliance.recommendation	No selected brand 4 source URLs`57fcbc8e`	Perplexity 1 source URLs`db225b42`	No selected brand 7 source URLs`2709bc7d`
07 Which AI research assistants are strongest for current web research that requires broad retrieval, source diversity, recency, and cited synthesis?recommendation	ElicitConsensus 7 source URLs`34973baa`	PerplexityElicitConsensus 6 source URLs`f5f6e729`	ElicitConsensus 7 source URLs`65f1dd16`
08 Recommend an affordable AI research assistant for a student who needs source discovery, paper explanations, citation checking, and note organization.recommendation	Elicit 7 source URLs`135bfb94`	ElicitConsensus 4 source URLs`ebce1540`	No selected brand 7 source URLs`10f2b7cf`
09 Compare AI research assistants on retrieval coverage, source quality, citation accuracy, synthesis, exports, collaboration, privacy, and price.commercial	ElicitConsensus 3 source URLs`c136ce86`	PerplexityElicitConsensus 9 source URLs`26cf4e2a`	PerplexityElicitConsensus 8 source URLs`acea1ec3`
10 Create a reproducible citation-accuracy test for AI research assistants covering source existence, claim support, quotation, attribution, and recency.commercial	No selected brand 0 source URLs`7c26e6e3`	No selected brand 2 source URLs`32d85eb2`	No selected brand 0 source URLs`89be2c54`
11 Design a retrieval benchmark for AI research assistants using known-item search, long-tail evidence, conflicting sources, dates, and paywalled material.commercial	No selected brand 0 source URLs`52784397`	No selected brand 7 source URLs`e96cd5ff`	No selected brand 0 source URLs`c9d050eb`
12 How should buyers compare AI research assistants on completeness, uncertainty, contradiction handling, evidence weighting, and unsupported claims?commercial	No selected brand 7 source URLs`7e54ed1a`	No selected brand 6 source URLs`52dc928f`	No selected brand 9 source URLs`622213b5`
13 Compare AI research assistant pricing across seats, searches, reports, document uploads, premium sources, exports, APIs, and enterprise controls.commercial	ElicitConsensus 5 source URLs`b3de8695`	PerplexityElicitConsensus 8 source URLs`8e36547e`	PerplexityElicitConsensus 4 source URLs`2f14103b`
14 Compare AI research assistants on uploaded-document privacy, model training, retention, permissions, encryption, residency, audit logs, and deletion.commercial	No selected brand 7 source URLs`f428e7eb`	Perplexity 8 source URLs`e5bc8238`	No selected brand 6 source URLs`57ea7631`
15 Which criteria expose library, annotation, citation, report, workspace, source-access, export, and API lock-in in an AI research assistant?commercial	No selected brand 6 source URLs`f0daee46`	No selected brand 0 source URLs`37018d22`	No selected brand 2 source URLs`e699ed30`
16 Create a shortlist of AI research assistant vendors for an evidence-heavy organization replacing ad hoc search and manual research briefs.commercial	No selected brand 4 source URLs`0a793a56`	Elicit 6 source URLs`e105826a`	No selected brand 8 source URLs`11abd267`

STRUCTURED CITATION LEDGER

Sources shaping this filtered view

Hostnames are derived from validated public HTTP(S) URLs, not provider-supplied domain labels.

Validated citation sources in filtered answers
Source hostname	Cited answers	Distinct URLs	Engine breadth	Best position	Evidence
paperguide.ai	13	9	3	#1	Open source ↗
youtube.com	12	11	3	#1	Open source ↗
reddit.com	11	9	3	#2	Open source ↗
listenlabs.ai	10	5	2	#1	Open source ↗
atlasworkspace.ai	10	5	3	#2	Open source ↗
facebook.com	5	5	3	#1	Open source ↗
medium.com	5	5	3	#2	Open source ↗
linkedin.com	5	4	3	#2	Open source ↗
litmaps.com	4	1	2	#1	Open source ↗
scispace.com	3	3	2	#1	Open source ↗
arxiv.org	3	3	2	#2	Open source ↗
thesify.ai	3	2	2	#1	Open source ↗
hebbia.com	3	2	3	#2	Open source ↗
clarivate.com	3	1	1	#1	Open source ↗
infoguides.gmu.edu	3	1	3	#1	Open source ↗
studytexter.com	3	1	2	#1	Open source ↗
teach.its.uiowa.edu	3	1	2	#2	Open source ↗
cypris.ai	3	1	2	#4	Open source ↗
researchgate.net	2	2	2	#1	Open source ↗
sciencedirect.com	2	2	2	#1	Open source ↗

PUBLIC-BENCHMARK PRIVACY BOUNDARY

This report contains only code-reviewed public prompts, deterministic brand counts, answer hashes, and validated structured citation URLs. Full model answers are neither stored nor published here. No customer, organization, or private tracked-prompt data is included.

ai-research-assistants-2026-07-27 / 4-ai-research-assistants-2026-07-27-models-64232fd32583

AI Research Assistants Brands in Anthropic Model API Answers

Current rankings

Brand vs. market

Prompt × engine matrix

Sources shaping this filtered view

Brand vs. market

Prompt × engine matrix

Sources shaping this filtered view