Skip to content

Three larger Qwen3 models leaned toward later-listed hotels, picking the first one only 18.5% to 22.9% of the time

Channel mix & planning



First-shown hotel selection rate by LLM, models below 50%

First-shown hotel selection rate by LLM, models below 50%
ModelFirst-shown selection rate (%)
GPT-5.4 Nano46.2%
Gemma3 1B44%
Claude Haiku 4.543.4%
Phi-3 Mini36.4%
DeepSeek-R1 7B29.4%
Phi-2 2.7B28.4%
Qwen3 30B-A3B22.9%
Qwen3 4B22.7%
DeepSeek-R1 1.5B19.8%
Qwen3 8B18.5%
Reader Note:
The share of tasks where the model picked whichever of the two reference hotels was shown first, pooled across both orderings; 50% means no position bias. Qwen3 30B-A3B: 22.9%, Qwen3 4B: 22.7%, Qwen3 8B: 18.5%. The smallest Qwen3 0.6B did the opposite at 98.5%. Synthetic NYC hotel tasks, not live shopping.
Evidence:
Experimental
Vendor interest:
None
Sample:
28 LLMs from 8 providers tested on 3,600 hotel choice tasks built from 179 real New York City hotel properties; each task was scored in both original and swapped orderings.

Good for

Backing budget and pricing decisions in similar situations.

Not for

  • Situations far from the one tested, without checking again.
  • This was measured in one market. It may not hold where you are.
  • The source never says when this data was collected. It could be considerably older than the publication date suggests.
  • The two groups were not split at random — they picked their own side. The difference may have been there before anything was measured.

Coming soon

This feature isn’t available yet.