Researcher profile

Riley Grossman

Riley Grossman contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

How Generative AI Disrupts Search: An Empirical Study of Google Search, Gemini, and AI Overviews

Generative AI is being increasingly integrated into web search for the convenience it provides users. In this work, we aim to understand how generative AI disrupts web search by retrieving and presenting the information and sources differently from traditional search engines. We introduce a public benchmark dataset of 11,500 user queries to support our study and future research of generative search. We compare the search results returned by Google's search engine, the accompanying AI Overview (AIO), and Gemini Flash 2.5 for each query. We have made several key findings. First, we find that for 51.5\% of representative, real-user queries, AIOs are generated, and are displayed above the organic search results. Controversial questions frequently result in an AIO. Second, we show that the retrieved sources are substantially different for each search engine (<0.2 average Jaccard similarity). Traditional Google search is significantly more likely to retrieve information from popular or institutional websites in government or education, while generative search engines are significantly more likely to retrieve Google-owned content. Third, we observe that websites that block Google's AI crawler are significantly less likely to be retrieved by AIOs, despite having access to the content. Finally, AIOs are less consistent when processing two runs of the same query, and are less robust to minor query edits. Our findings have important implications for understanding how generative search impacts website visibility, the effectiveness of generative engine optimization techniques, and the information users receive. We call for revenue frameworks to foster a sustainable and mutually beneficial ecosystem for publishers and generative search providers.

preprint2026arXiv

Inconsistencies in Classification of Online News Articles: A Call for Common Standards in Brand Safety Services

This study examines inconsistencies in the brand safety classifications of online news articles by analyzing ratings from three leading brand safety providers, DoubleVerify, Integral Ad Science, and Oracle. We focus on news content because of its central role in public discourse and the significant financial consequences of unsafe classifications in a sector that is already underserved by digital ad spending. By collecting data from 4,352 news articles on 51 domains, our analysis shows that brand safety services often produce conflicting classifications, with significant discrepancies between providers. These inconsistencies can have harmful consequences for both advertisers and publishers, leading to misplaced advertising spending and revenue losses. This research provides critical insights into the shortcomings of the current brand safety landscape. We argue for a standardized and transparent brand safety system to mitigate the harmful effects of the current system on the digital advertising ecosystem.