Selection Rate Optimization (SRO) is a new discipline focused on visibility in AI-powered search by measuring how often content is selected for grounding.
SRO — Selection Rate Optimization — is a new discipline coined by DEJAN that addresses visibility in AI-powered search (Google AI Mode, Gemini Chat, AI Overviews). It is the AI-native successor to traditional SEO click-through-rate optimization.
The core premise: ranking #1 in traditional search is necessary but no longer sufficient. In AI search, your page content goes through a grounding pipeline that extracts only select sentences to feed to the generative model. If your content isn’t selected and grounded, you’re invisible — even if you rank.
Selection Rate (SR) measures how often an AI system selects and incorporates a specific source from the total set of grounding results it retrieves.
SR = (Number of selections / Total available results) × 100
SR is the Gen AI equivalent of CTR. Unlike CTR, which requires a user click, SR captures the AI’s implicit selection behavior — what information actually influences outputs versus what gets retrieved but ignored.
DEJAN reverse-engineered Google’s Gemini grounding pipeline by examining raw groundingSupports and groundingChunks from the API. The pipeline operates in this sequence:
Key insight: Because snippets are query-dependent, the same page yields different extractions for different fanout queries.
Google uses extractive (not abstractive) summarization for grounding. This means it pulls exact sentences from your page — it does not rewrite or paraphrase your content for the grounding context.
¶ markers are treated as sentences and scored alongside prose.DEJAN successfully fine-tuned microsoft/deberta-v3-large to produce results similar to Google’s extraction behavior.
A pivotal finding from analysis of 7,060 queries with 2,275 tokenized pages and 883,262 total snippets:
Each query operates under a fixed grounding budget of approximately 2,000 words total, distributed across sources by relevance rank.
| Percentile | Total Words Per Query |
|---|---|
| p25 | 1,546 |
| p50 (median) | 1,929 |
| p75 | 2,325 |
| p95 | 2,798 |
This budget is remarkably consistent regardless of the number of sources used or the length of individual pages. The average grounding chunk is ~15.5 words.
The fixed budget is divided among sources based on relevance ranking:
| Rank | Median Words | Share of Total |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 531 | 28% |
| #2 | 433 | 23% |
| #3 | 378 | 20% |
| #4 | 330 | 17% |
| #5 | 266 | 13% |
The #1 source gets 2× the grounding of the #5 source. You’re competing for share of a fixed pie, not expanding it.
On average, only about one-third of a page’s content makes it through the AI search filter into the grounding context. But this varies dramatically by page length:
| Page Length | Avg Grounding Words | Coverage |
|---|---|---|
| <1K words | 370 | 61% |
| 1–2K words | 492 | 35% |
| 2–3K words | 532 | 22% |
| 3K+ words | 544 | 13% |
Grounding plateaus at ~540 words / ~3,500 characters. Pages over 2,000 words see sharply diminishing returns — more content dilutes your coverage percentage without increasing what gets selected.
Based on DEJAN’s annotated analysis of actual grounding extractions:
The primary bias affecting SR is the model’s internal relevance perception of the grounding entity (brand, site, source). This is essentially the model’s pre-existing “worldview” about how relevant a source is for a given topic — formed during training and fine-tuning.
If a brand is perceived as highly relevant for a topic (e.g., “custom cycling jerseys”), it’s much more likely to achieve a higher SR when supplied as a grounding source. A brand with low primary bias for that topic will be deprioritized even if it appears in the result set.
DEJAN developed a “Tree Walker” algorithm that walks the probability paths of what a model wants to say about a brand, identifying high-uncertainty spots — token positions where the model is least confident about associating a concept with the brand. These represent opportunities for brand-association strengthening.
Analysis of 158 grounding responses revealed a power-law relationship between snippet count and snippet length:
$$\bar{L} = 1283.15 \times N^{-0.07}$$
The exponent β ≈ 0.07 shows a weak but consistent compression effect: as more snippets are added, average snippet length decreases slightly. The system emphasizes coverage over brevity, compressing only mildly — a sign of balanced aggregation rather than aggressive summarization.
Total text volume remains relatively stable across responses, implying word-limit constraints operate at the response level rather than per snippet.
A tight 800-word page can get 50%+ of its content grounded. A 4,000-word page gets ~13%. Focus on making every sentence count rather than adding volume.
The lead/positional bias means sentences appearing early and standalone are much more likely to be extracted. Put your most important, query-relevant statements at the top.
Clear, factual, self-contained statements perform best. Each sentence should be able to stand alone as a useful answer fragment. Avoid sentences that rely heavily on surrounding context to make sense.
The AI decomposes prompts into sub-queries. Structure content to directly address multiple facets of intent, not just the primary keyword.
Google’s system ingests ToC entries, headers, and navigation artifacts as “sentences.” Clean, well-structured pages reduce noise competing with your actual content for selection.
Dan Petrovic suggested testing “small modular content pieces that can be assembled into different content units like lego blocks” — controlling completeness of context and avoiding undesirable narrative fragmentation.
Primary bias is the biggest lever on SR and it’s rooted in model training data. Invest in the traditional off-page and on-page signals that shape how models perceive your brand’s topical authority.
microsoft/deberta-v3-large.