New: ChatGPT now sends real traffic to the websites it recommends. See why it matters →
Home › Leaderboard › Biorxiv.org

Biorxiv.org

Recommended by ChatGPT across 38 prompt topics people ask about
0
ESTIMATED
ChatGPT referrals / mo
Prompt topics
38
Monthly ChatGPT prompts
13K
Est. value / mo
$0
Avg rank
15.47
These aren't logged prompts (ChatGPT doesn't share those). They're the commercial topics people ask ChatGPT to recommend products for, sized from real search demand and verified by running each one through ChatGPT. How we estimate this.

Prompts where ChatGPT recommends Biorxiv.org

Each topic written the way a person would ask it. Estimated visits = this site's share of that prompt's demand.

What's the best 2017 mouse? rank 19 0 /mo What's the best protein? rank 15 0 /mo What's the best AI for biology? rank 6 0 /mo What's the best AI for biology questions? rank 7 0 /mo What's the best AI for medical research writing? rank 17 0 /mo What are the best AI sites for research? rank 19 0 /mo What's the best AI research paper summarizer? rank 20 0 /mo What's the best AI to summarize scientific articles? rank 12 0 /mo What's the best AI tool for medical research? rank 18 0 /mo What's the best AI tool for finding research papers? rank 18 0 /mo What's the best alkaline protein? rank 20 0 /mo What's the best artificial stems? rank 16 0 /mo What's the best biology software? rank 15 0 /mo What are the best bioinformatics journals? rank 16 0 /mo What's the best channel modulator? rank 16 0 /mo What's the best dual markers? rank 18 0 /mo What's the best editing mouse? rank 10 0 /mo What's the best free AI journal? rank 19 0 /mo What are the best free research paper websites? rank 14 0 /mo What's the best journal page? rank 18 0 /mo What's the best LLM for research papers? rank 18 0 /mo What's the best mosquito attractant? rank 14 0 /mo What's the best phylogenetic tree visualization software? rank 14 0 /mo

Different ways people phrase this prompt. We merge them into one category, and the full ranking covers them all.

View full details for this prompt →
    View full details for this prompt →

    Proof: a real ChatGPT answer

    One of the 5 runs for What's the best 2017 mouse?, verbatim.

    ChatGPT:
    1. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
    2. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
    3. nature.com
    4. sciencedirect.com
    5. cell.com
    6. springer.com
    7. wikipedia.org
    8. nih.gov

    Where Biorxiv.org ranks

    How often ChatGPT places this site at each position across its prompt topics.

    #18
    most common spot
    0%
    of the time in the top 3
    #1
    0
    #2
    0
    #3
    0
    #4
    0
    #5
    0
    #6
    3
    #7
    1
    #8
    0
    #9
    0
    #10
    1
    #11
    0
    #12
    1
    #13
    0
    #14
    5
    #15
    4
    #16
    6
    #17
    2
    #18
    7
    #19
    5
    #20
    3

    Who else ChatGPT recommends

    Sites that come up for the same prompts as Biorxiv.org, ranked by how many topics they share.

    nature.com
    34 shared
    sciencedirect.com
    33 shared
    springer.com
    32 shared
    pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
    32 shared
    wiley.com
    27 shared
    ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
    26 shared
    frontiersin.org
    24 shared
    mdpi.com
    22 shared
    researchgate.net
    22 shared
    arxiv.org
    21 shared
    cell.com
    18 shared
    tandfonline.com
    17 shared
    nih.gov
    16 shared
    plos.org
    14 shared
    scholar.google.com
    13 shared
    semanticscholar.org
    11 shared
    pnas.org
    10 shared
    elsevier.com
    8 shared
    ieeexplore.ieee.org
    8 shared
    sagepub.com
    7 shared
    How is this estimated?

    ChatGPT doesn't publish prompt data. We measure real demand for each commercial topic from Google search volume, scale it to ChatGPT's user base (about 1 ChatGPT user for every 8 Google searchers), and run each topic through ChatGPT 5 times to record which sites it recommends and in what order. A click-through-by-rank curve splits each topic's demand across the recommended sites. Every figure is a modeled estimate, not measured analytics. Full methodology →