返回案例Back to cases
案例 02 · OEM / ODMCase 02 · OEM/ODM

妍色美妆 · 分品类测试
吸油纸 55.0%,痘痘贴 0%
Yanse · Category-scoped tests
Blotting paper 55.0%, acne patch 0%

两个数字来自不同品类、问题库和日期,必须分开解释。吸油纸专项为 2026-07-21 的 40 条四平台记录;痘痘贴为 2026-06-29 的 20 条独立基线,不能相减为“提升 55 个点”。The two rates come from different categories, query sets and dates. Blotting paper has 40 four-platform records dated 21 Jul 2026; acne patch has a separate 20-record baseline dated 29 Jun 2026. They cannot be subtracted into an uplift claim.

55.0%
吸油纸专项出现率blotting-paper rate
40
吸油纸答案记录blotting-paper records
4
吸油纸实测平台platforms tested
0%
痘痘贴独立基线acne-patch baseline
关键洞察Key insight

企业有可见度,不等于每个品类都有可见度Company visibility does not equal category coverage

吸油纸专项中,Gemini 100%、Perplexity 70%、ChatGPT 30%、Claude 20%,企业被提及时官网地址准确性为 100%。但痘痘贴独立基线仍为 0%。因此正确动作不是笼统宣传“品牌已被 AI 推荐”,而是按品类继续修理解、匹配与核验缺口。In the blotting-paper scope, Gemini was 100%, Perplexity 70%, ChatGPT 30% and Claude 20%, with 100% official-domain accuracy when mentioned. Yet the separate acne-patch baseline remained 0%. The correct next step is category-specific diagnosis, not a blanket “AI-recommended” claim.

执行方法Execution method

同一套五层诊断,按品类分别执行One five-layer diagnosis, executed separately by category

吸油纸用于定位平台差异;痘痘贴从 0% 基线重新建立买家问题、官网直答与外部证据。Blotting paper reveals platform differences; acne patch starts from its own 0% baseline with a fresh query map, direct answers and external evidence.

🎯

① 锁定问法 + 信源解剖Target & map sources

定位「吸油纸 / 痘贴 OEM」战场,解剖 AI 在油痘肌问法下吃哪些信源。
🔒 问法清单与信源权重为专有方法proprietary
Pin the oil-paper / acne-patch battlefield and map cited sources.

📄

② 官网知识化(油痘肌专题)Citable site

围绕油痘肌护理把产品力做成可被 AI 抽取的知识内容 + 结构化数据 + llms.txt。
🔒 内容结构为专有方法proprietary
Codify product strength into AI-extractable content + schema + llms.txt.

💬

③ 社区口碑(油痘肌主场)Community proof

在海外油痘肌护肤社区被真实提及——痘贴高搜索,社区信号对 AI 尤其有效。
🔒 渠道与方式为专有方法proprietary
Earn authentic mentions in acne-care communities.

🗂️

④ 五类结果 + 同口径复测Five outputs + like-for-like re-test

分别记录出现率、官网地址、竞品、信源与上下文原因;不同品类绝不合并成一条曲线。Track mention rate, official domain, rivals, sources and context separately; never merge category scopes into one curve.

已归档测试切片Archived test slices

按日期与品类看数据,不拼接因果Read by date and category, without invented causality

2026-06-29

企业通用问法General company queries

28 条、4 平台,整体出现率 21.4%。28 records, four platforms, 21.4% overall.

2026-06-29

痘痘贴专项Acne-patch scope

20 条独立基线,出现率 0%。20-record separate baseline, 0%.

2026-07-15

吸油纸 / 吸油膜扩展样本Blotting-paper / film extended sample

240 条记录,出现率 12.5%。问法与后续专项不同。240 records, 12.5%; query scope differs from the later focused sample.

2026-07-21

吸油纸专项Blotting-paper scope

40 条、4 平台,出现率 55.0%,官网地址准确性 100%。40 records, four platforms, 55.0% mention rate and 100% official-domain accuracy.

吸油纸专项 · 2026-07-21Blotting-paper scope · 21 Jul 2026

四个平台,差异必须拆开看Four platforms, each read separately

Gemini
10 records
100%
Perplexity
10 records
70%
ChatGPT
10 records
30%
Claude
10 records
20%
官网地址准确性Official-domain accuracy
被提及时when mentioned
100%

说明:以上不是当前实时排名,也不证明企业在所有吸油纸问法中都会出现。答案会随平台、问法、地区、语言与日期变化。These are not current live rankings and do not imply the company appears for every blotting-paper query. Answers vary by platform, query, region, language and date.

你的不同品类,
也应该分开测
Test each category
as its own scope

申请专业基线测试 →Request an expert baseline audit →

首选加微信 13925122895(微信同名)WeChat 13925122895