Of the 248 domains that entered our AI-cited set on Aug 31, 87 (35.1%) were cited again on Sep 7. Incumbents held at 79.9% (247 of 309). Fifth weekly transition inside the pre-registered bands

Method, stated before the numbers

Same instrument as every week: 12 pinned questions a small business might ask about its own AI visibility, sent to ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Claude through their APIs, three independent samples each, 144 answers per run, fired around 13:07 UTC on Mondays. A domain is cited in a run if it appears in at least one engine-returned citation array that run (hostname minus www, one count per answer). An entrant for run N is a domain cited in run N and not in run N-1; an incumbent is cited in both; survival means cited again in run N+1. The 2026-09-07 run completed 144 of 144 answers and returned citations in 130, citing 552 distinct domains (breadth: 452 cited by one engine, 67 by two, 28 by three, 5 by all four).

The computation is the committed script `content/news/entrant_survival_cut.mjs`, unchanged since last week. It reads only the seven stored weekly cut files and writes `content/news/entrant-survival-cut-2026-09-07.json`. Its self-checks include reproducing the three transitions published on 08-24 exactly (29.4 / 27.5 / 30.1 for entrants, 77.9 / 76.5 / 75.0 for incumbents) and matching this run's churn, survival and entrant counts to the stored cut; 10 of 10 pass. Anyone with the cut files gets the same tables.

The five transitions

The 2026-09-07 run itself: 223 of the 557 domains cited on 08-31 dropped out (40.0%), 334 stayed, 218 entered (204 cited by one engine, 14 by two), and 26 incumbents climbed from one engine to two or more. Those 218 entrants are next week's test population. askedabout.com was cited in 5 of the 144 answers, down from 8 last week; our row is published because the instrument measures us on the same terms as everyone else.

Who introduced the entrant matters, and the ordering moved again

Last week the ordering was Perplexity, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini from most to least durable. This week ChatGPT-introduced entrants rose again, from 38.8% to 49.4%, and passed Perplexity-introduced entrants, which fell from 66.7% to 46.4%. Gemini is last for the second week (24.6%), and Gemini introduced the most entrants (114 of 248). Claude's cell is 35 entrants. "Any engine" counts a domain as surviving if any of the four cited it the next week; "same engine" requires the introducing engine to cite it again.

Being cited more than once in your first week still separates the survivors

Entrants cited in a single answer on 08-31 came back 24.6% of the time (42 of 171). Two answers: 61.5% (24 of 39). Three or more: 55.3% (21 of 38). Last week the same buckets read 19.7% / 55.6% / 73.9%. The single-answer figure moved up from about one in five to one in four, and the two-answer bucket is the most durable this week where three-plus was last week; the split that holds every week is single-answer against the rest. Breadth reads the same way: 82 of 242 one-engine entrants came back (33.9%) against 5 of 6 two-engine entrants (83.3%).

The survivors that grew, and the domains that have never left

6 of the 87 survivors were cited by more engines this week than the week they entered. The eight survivors with the most answers on 09-07 are below. Separately, 139 domains have been cited in all seven runs since 2026-07-28 (last week 150 had been in all six; 11 of those missed this run). The top of that list is the same kind as every week: community sites, review aggregators and vendor pages.

Our own contacted entrants, stated

We wrote to 8 of the 08-31 entrants with their own row. 2 of the 8 were cited again on 09-07 (chadworks by ChatGPT, improvemarketing by Gemini). All 8 had been cited in one or two answers, so the base rates for that group are 24.6% and 61.5%; 2 of 8 is consistent with them and too small to say anything else. A ninth entrant we chose not to write to also came back. We report it because the number would be reported if it had gone the other way.

The pre-registered read: three statements, three results

1. 1(A) Of the 248 domains that entered on 08-31, between 20% and 40% are cited again on 09-07: 35.1%, inside the band.
2. 2(B) Of the 309 incumbents, between 65% and 85% are cited again: 79.9%, inside the band.
3. 3(C) Single-answer entrants survive at a lower rate than both multi-answer buckets: 24.6% against 61.5% and 55.3%, as stated.

The read held. The bands are re-registered for the 2026-09-14 run rather than narrowed after a fifth pass: (A) of the 218 domains that entered on 09-07, between 20% and 40% are cited again on 09-14; (B) of the 334 incumbents, between 65% and 85% are; (C) single-answer entrants survive at a lower rate than both multi-answer buckets. Any of the three outside its statement is a falsification and will be published as one. The run fires 2026-09-14 around 13:07 UTC; the read publishes that day or the next.

Artifact

`content/news/entrant-survival-cut-2026-09-07.json` holds the seven run summaries, the five transitions, the per-engine, per-breadth and per-answer-count survival tables, the 87 survivors with their 08-31 and 09-07 engines, the pitched-entrant read, the pre-registered read and 10 self-checks (0 failed). It is produced by `content/news/entrant_survival_cut.mjs` from the stored weekly cuts `growth/citations/cited-domain-cut-2026-07-28.json` through `cited-domain-cut-2026-09-07.json`, which are themselves produced by `growth/citations/cited_domain_cut.mjs` from the engines' returned citation arrays. Written without em dashes.