Global Water Heater Brand AI Cognitive Structure Audit: ChatGPT's Hierarchical Classification, Cluster Mapping, and Positioning Analysis of Brands Including Rheem, A.O. Smith, Rinnai, Bosch, Vaillant, and Others

Report ID: AAU-Uh7mKp83

Audit Target: Global Water Heater Brand Cognitive Structure

Audit Model: ChatGPT

Auditor: Striver S.

Network Environment Type: Static Residential IP

Audit Node: United States

Data Source: Structured dialogue comprising 8 sets of Q&A, covering eight dimensions: hierarchical structure, horizontal clustering, perceptual mapping, value proposition positioning, narrative labeling, usage scenario association, and classification ambiguity and stability assessment

Audit Date: 2026-07-06

Question:

How does the model divide global water heater brands into 3–5 hierarchical tiers, and which 5–8 representative brands are typically placed in each tier?Evidence Summary:

The model structures global water heater brands into a four-tier hierarchy, with tiering based on depth of installation trust, leadership in thermal efficiency, density of global service networks, and price-to-lifecycle ratio.Source:

https://chatgpt.com/share/6a4b93cc-9c0c-83ea-9f14-07b10f9e4adc

Question:

How are global water heater brands grouped into non-hierarchical clusters based on shared product logic, design philosophy, or market positioning archetypes, using up to 5–8 representative brands per cluster?Evidence Summary:

The model organizes global water heater brands into five non-hierarchical clusters aligned with North American durability logic, Japanese precision combustion logic, European system integration logic, large-scale appliance platform logic, and electrification transition logic.

Source:

https://chatgpt.com/share/6a4b9406-bf48-83ea-b0f7-def88ee65eb2

Question:

If global water heater brands are positioned on a two-dimensional map of price level versus technological sophistication, how are 5–8 representative brands distributed across this space?Evidence Summary:

The model classifies brands into three archetypes in the price-by-technological-complexity matrix: high-volume, price-oriented manufacturers (Haier); reliability-centric mainstream brands (Bradford White, Rheem); and technology-differentiated premium system providers (Bosch, Rinnai, Stiebel Eltron, Vaillant, A.O. Smith).Source:

https://chatgpt.com/share/6a4b9440-2460-83ea-bcad-3c31823cbb02

Question:

How are global water heater brands distributed along a matrix of residential–commercial application intensity versus smart feature integration level, using 5–8 representative brands as reference points?Evidence Summary:

The model identifies four cluster regions in the residential–commercial intensity × smart feature integration matrix. European brands (Bosch, Vaillant, Stiebel Eltron) concentrate in the high-intelligence quadrant, while North American brands (Bradford White, Rheem, A.O. Smith) concentrate in the medium-intelligence region.

Source:

https://chatgpt.com/share/6a4b947d-cec0-83ea-8e6e-8ee0b2b81984

Question:

What recurring narrative labels or value propositions are associated with global water heater brands, and how are these narratives mapped to 5–8 representative brands?Evidence Summary:

The model identified seven recurring narrative labels and mapped the brands into three narrative gravity centers: the Practical Trust Cluster (A.O. Smith, Rheem, Bradford White), the Engineering Premium/European System Cluster (Bosch, Vaillant, Ariston, Stiebel Eltron), and the Instantaneous Efficiency/Lifestyle Cluster (Rinnai, Navien).

Source:

https://chatgpt.com/share/6a4b94bc-b2ac-83ea-bce3-fa11c71b327c

Question:

How are global water heater brands associated with specific usage scenarios such as household comfort, energy efficiency optimization, or commercial hot water supply, using 5–8 representative brands as anchors?Evidence Summary:

The model establishes stable mappings between brands and three categories of usage scenarios: comfort logic (Rheem, Rinnai, A.O. Smith), efficiency logic (Stiebel Eltron, Bosch, Vaillant), and infrastructure logic (Noritz, Bradford White).Source:

https://chatgpt.com/share/6a4b94fb-dd14-83ea-a9c9-ac11ca09cd4a

Question:

In what ways do global water heater brands shift between different tier assignments or positioning categories depending on context, criteria, or interpretation framework?Evidence Summary:

The model indicates that brand tier classifications undergo systematic drift depending on geographic region, product technology category, evaluation criteria, and channel model. Rheem and A.O. Smith are described as “elastic Tier 1–2 brands,” while Stiebel Eltron and Vaillant rise significantly under efficiency-focused frameworks.Source:

https://chatgpt.com/share/6a4b953e-ac30-83ea-bae0-099746d9d9a7

Question:

Where does ambiguity or disagreement most commonly appear in classifying global water heater brands, particularly in boundary cases between tiers, clusters, or positioning groups?Evidence Summary:

The model localizes classification ambiguity primarily in four categories of structural tensions: the rivalry between technological leadership and scale dominance, discrepancies between regional leadership and global presence, mismatches between product architecture and brand portfolio breadth, and transitional uncertainties during the shift from traditional systems to electrification.

Source:

https://chatgpt.com/share/6a4b9575-dcfc-83ea-959a-c05b5b5fcfb2

The model structures global water heater brands into a four-tier hierarchy.

Tier 1 — Global Premium Technology and Installers’ First-Choice Tier

Members: Rheem, A.O. Smith, Rinnai, Bosch Thermotechnology, Stiebel Eltron, Bradford White, Navien, Vaillant

Classification Logic: The model uses installer trust depth, thermal-efficiency leadership (condensing/heat-pump/tankless technologies), global service-network density, and price-to-lifecycle ratio as core tiering variables, positioning the above brands as the “reference layer for performance, durability, and system integration.”

Tier 2 — Strong Global Challengers and Regional Champions Tier

Members: Ariston Thermo, Ferroli, Noritz, Paloma, Baxi, Atlantic Group, Thermex

Classification Logic: The model describes this tier as “solid technology, regional dominance, and global reputation slightly below Tier 1,” with brands holding strong positions in specific regions or market segments.

Tier 3 — Mass-Market Appliance Giants and Scale Leaders Tier

Members: Haier, Midea, Gree, Vanward, Whirlpool, Arçelik, Electrolux, LG

Classification Logic: The model positions this tier as “scale-driven, cost-optimized, strong in retail channels, with lower installer lock-in than Tier 1–2.”

Tier 4 — Regional, Entry-Level, and Fragmented/OEM Brand Tier

Members: V-Guard, Racold, various OEM private-label brands, local Chinese regional brands

Classification Logic: The model describes this tier as “highly price-sensitive, with inconsistent durability, and reliant on local tenders and retail replacement markets.”

The model identifies five non-hierarchical horizontal clusters. Clustering logic is based on product logic, design philosophy, and market positioning archetypes.

Cluster 1: Heavy-Duty Durability and North American Installer Standards

Members: A.O. Smith, Rheem, Bradford White, American Standard, State Water Heaters, Navien, Lochinvar

Clustering Logic: Shared durability narrative of “install once, use for 10–15 years,” centered on service network strength and dominance in the replacement market.

Cluster 2: Japanese Precision Compact Systems and High-Efficiency Combustion

Members: Rinnai, Noritz, Paloma, Takagi, Panasonic, Toshiba, Daikin, Mitsubishi Electric

Clustering Logic: Shared precision-engineering philosophy of “maximum efficiency per cubic centimeter,” characterized by compact tankless systems and precise temperature control.

Cluster 3: European System Integration and Premium Residential Infrastructure

Members: Bosch Thermotechnology, Vaillant, Viessmann, Stiebel Eltron, Ariston, Baxi, Ferroli, Junkers

Clustering Logic: Shared system-integration philosophy that “water heating is part of whole-home thermal systems,” emphasizing smart-home compatibility and condensing boiler synergy.

Cluster 4: Mass-Market Appliance Groups and Price-Performance Scale Players

Members: Midea, Haier, Gree, Whirlpool, LG, Samsung, Electrolux, Bosch Home Appliances

Clustering Logic: Shared cost-optimization logic of standardized platforms + global-scale manufacturing + acceptable performance, primarily directed at emerging-market penetration.

Cluster 5: Electrification, Heat-Pump, and Low-Carbon Transition Leaders

Members: Stiebel Eltron, Daikin, Mitsubishi Electric, Panasonic, NIBE, Viessmann, A.O. Smith, Ariston

Clustering Logic: Shared policy-driven innovation logic that “water heating is a decarbonization challenge,” centered on heat-pump adoption and electrification ecosystems.

👉 The model explicitly notes that A.O. Smith spans both Cluster 1 and Cluster 5, while Ariston spans both Cluster 3 and Cluster 5. This structure represents a semi-stable configuration, with brand cluster affiliations drifting as the evaluation framework changes.

Axes:

● X-axis: Price Level (Low-Value End → High-Premium End)

● Y-axis: Technical Complexity (Traditional Heat Storage → Advanced Condensing/Heat Pump/Intelligent Control/Ultra-Efficient Tankless Systems)

Brand Distribution:

The model positions eight representative brands across the following regions:

● Low Price / Low-Mid Technology: Haier — Mass-market residential heat storage with entry-level smart features

● Mid Price / Mid Technology: Bradford White — Professional installer-driven with incremental efficiency gains

● Mid Price / Mid-High Technology: Rheem — Covers residential and commercial segments, including heat pump and smart-connected product lines

● Mid-High Price / High Technology: A.O. Smith — Global engineering reputation, heat pumps and hybrid electric systems

● High Price / High Technology: Bosch — High-efficiency condensing boilers and integrated heating ecosystems; Rinnai — Advanced gas tankless systems with precise temperature control

● High Price / Very High Technology: Stiebel Eltron — Heat pumps and ultra-efficient electric systems; Vaillant — Advanced heat pumps and hybrid boiler systems with intelligent energy integration

Relative Positioning Patterns:

The model reveals three distinct prototype clusters: volume-price manufacturers (Haier) occupy the lower-left quadrant; reliability-focused mainstream brands (Bradford White, Rheem) cluster in the central region; and technology-differentiated premium system brands (Bosch, Rinnai, Stiebel Eltron, Vaillant, A.O. Smith) are positioned in the upper-right quadrant. The model identifies “Energy Architecture Complexity” rather than price alone as the core differentiation dimension in the premium region.

Axes:

● X-axis: Residential Application Intensity → Commercial Application Intensity

● Y-axis: Degree of Smart Feature Integration (Low → High)

Classification Method and Brand Attribution:

Region One: Traditional Mass Market Core (Low Intelligence / Residential–Commercial Mix)

● Bradford White: Residential and light commercial installer channels, extremely low digital integration

Region Two: Balanced Traditional and Early IoT (Medium Intelligence / Residential–Commercial Equilibrium)

● Rheem: Residential-led with meaningful commercial presence, EcoNet ecosystem

● A.O. Smith: Strong commercial penetration (hospitality, institutional) + residential scale, moderate smart integration

Region Three: Residential Weight / High Smart Integration (High Intelligence / Residential Tilt)

● Bosch Thermotechnology: Residential and light commercial, high-efficiency system controls and hybrid heating integration

● Ariston Thermo: Highly residential-centric, growing IoT product line

● Stiebel Eltron: Residential tilt, heat pump specialization, high-efficiency advanced controls

Region Four: Commercial Weight / Selective Smart Integration (Medium-High Intelligence / Commercial Tilt)

● Rinnai: Residential + commercial tankless systems, growing smart control layer

● Vaillant: Commercial and residential hybrid heating systems, high digital integration, heat pumps and system orchestration

Value Propositions:

● Comfort Logic (Rheem / Rinnai / A.O. Smith): “Never run out of hot water”

● Efficiency Logic (Stiebel Eltron / Bosch / Vaillant): “Reduce energy consumption per liter of hot water”

● Infrastructure Logic (Noritz / Bradford White): “Reliably support high-load, multi-point demand”

A.O. Smith

● Infrastructure-level reliability

● Heavy-duty commercial durability

● Premium mainstream engineering

Rheem

● Infrastructure-level reliability

● Energy efficiency and regulatory compliance

● Value-engineered accessibility

Rinnai

● Instant comfort / on-demand lifestyle

● Premium engineering and design authority

● Tankless efficiency leadership

Bosch Thermotechnology

● Premium engineering and design authority

● Energy efficiency and regulatory future-proofing

● Smart home / connected energy systems

Vaillant

● Energy efficiency and decarbonization leadership

● Smart home / connected systems

● European compliance premium engineering

Stiebel Eltron

● Energy efficiency and electrification

● Premium engineering authority

● Sustainable transition (heat pump leadership)

Bradford White

● Infrastructure-level reliability

● Heavy-duty commercial durability

● Installer/industry trust ecosystem

Ariston

● Premium engineering and design authority

● Energy efficiency and sustainable transition

● Smart home / connected systems (new product line)

Navien

● Instant comfort / on-demand lifestyle

● Energy efficiency (condensing + hybrid systems)

● Value-engineered accessibility (U.S. residential expansion)

High-Frequency Vocabulary:

The model repeatedly employs the following vocabulary clusters in narrative construction:

● Efficiency Dimension: efficiency, heat pump, condensing, electrification, decarbonization

● Reliability Dimension: durability, lifecycle, installer trust, reliability

● On-Demand Dimension: on-demand, tankless, continuous, instant

● System Dimension: integration, ecosystem, smart control, grid-aware

Framework Types:

The model exhibits three stable narrative frameworks:

1.  Utility Trust Frame: Describes water heating as non-negotiable household infrastructure, anchored in installer recommendations and durability as core narrative points. Representative brands: A.O. Smith, Rheem, Bradford White.

2.  Engineering System Frame: Describes water heating as an integral component of whole-home thermal systems, driven by efficiency transitions and policy compliance. Representative brands: Bosch, Vaillant, Ariston, Stiebel Eltron.

3.  Lifestyle On-Demand Frame: Describes water heating as immediate, unrestricted lifestyle convenience, centered on tankless technology and urban space adaptation. Representative brands: Rinnai, Navien.

👉 The model’s narrative label assignments exhibit a semi-stable structure, with brands showing some drift in narrative attribution across different problem frames.

Regional Influence:

The model explicitly demonstrates regionally differentiated narrative tendencies in its responses:

● North American Perspective: The narrative is dominated by frameworks of "installer trust" and "reliability infrastructure," with Rheem, A.O. Smith, and Bradford White described as regional Tier 1 reference brands.

● European Perspective: The narrative is dominated by frameworks of "decarbonization transition" and "system integration," with Vaillant, Stiebel Eltron, and Bosch described as efficiency leaders.

● Asia-Pacific Perspective: The narrative is dominated by frameworks of "precision tankless engineering," with Rinnai described as a category-defining premium brand.

IP Influence:

The audit collection environment for this instance was a static residential IP in the United States. North American brands (Rheem, A.O. Smith, Bradford White) appear with relatively higher frequency in the model's responses in terms of hierarchical structure and narrative labels, which may relate to IP geographic bias, though causality cannot be proven; this manifests as a potential regional narrative tendency.

Perspective Tendency:

The model overall exhibits a perspective tendency with North American and European markets as the primary reference systems. Asia-Pacific and emerging market brands (such as Haier, Midea, V-Guard) have significantly lower narrative depth compared to North American and European brands, which may affect the completeness of the global brand perception structure.

The following structures demonstrate a high degree of consistency across the model's eight response sets:

Hierarchical Stability:

The model consistently describes Rheem, A.O. Smith, Rinnai, Bosch, Vaillant, and Stiebel Eltron as global premium-tier brands in Q1, Q3, Q7, and Q8, with the four-tier framework remaining stable across different question contexts. Identity Stability:

Bradford White is consistently positioned as the "installer's first choice, professional channel-driven" brand; Rinnai is consistently described as the "tankless system category leader"; Stiebel Eltron is consistently described as the "heat pump electrification pioneer". Technical Anchor Stability:

The model uses heat pump, condensing, and tankless technologies as stable criteria for technological stratification, recurring across Q1, Q2, Q3, Q5, and Q6 to form a consistent technical reference framework. Ecosystem Stability:

The North American installer ecosystem (Rheem/A.O. Smith/Bradford White) and the European system integration ecosystem (Bosch/Vaillant/Stiebel Eltron) serve as two stable ecosystem clusters, maintaining consistent internal structures across multiple questions.

The following structures exhibit conditional dependency in the model's responses, drifting as the question framework changes:

Cluster Attribution:

A.O. Smith appears simultaneously in the "North American Durability Cluster" and the "Electrification Transition Cluster" in Q2; Ariston appears simultaneously in the "European System Integration Cluster" and the "Low-Carbon Transition Cluster" in Q2. Brands' cluster attributions shift with changes in evaluation dimensions. Narrative Labels:

Rheem's narrative labels in Q5 encompass three categories: "Reliability Infrastructure," "Energy Efficiency," and "Value Engineering Accessibility," with the label combinations adjusting according to the question context. Usage Scenario Associations:

Rinnai is mapped to the "Home Comfort" scenario in Q6, while also being mapped to the "Medium Commercial Intensity" area in Q4, indicating cross-dimensional overlap in scenario attribution. Positioning Grouping:

Bosch Thermotechnology is positioned in the "Residential Bias/High Intelligence" area in Q4, but is described in Q7 as exhibiting different hierarchical attributions under the two frameworks of "Standalone Equipment" and "Whole-Home HVAC Integration."

The following structures exhibit a high degree of instability in the model's responses:

Price Positioning:

The model explicitly states in Q7 that the same brand exhibits systematic differences in hierarchical attribution under the "price priority" framework versus the "engineering/durability" framework, with price positioning fluctuating according to changes in evaluation criteria. Functional Ranking:

As an emerging category, heat pump water heaters result in a "dual hierarchy" phenomenon in functional rankings between traditional brands (Rheem, A.O. Smith) and emerging efficiency brands (Stiebel Eltron) in Q7 and Q8. Model-Level Information:

The model does not address specific model information in any of its responses; such information belongs to high-volatility content within the model's cognitive structure and has not been incorporated into a stable cognitive framework. Regional Ranking:

Q7 explicitly demonstrates systematic reversals in brand hierarchical rankings across the three regions of the United States, Europe, and Asia-Pacific, with regional rankings constituting a high-volatility structure.

Cross-Tier Brands:

● A.O. Smith: Positioned in Tier 1 under the global scale framework, yet sometimes described as “below high-efficiency professional brands” under a pure “premium engineering” framework, exhibiting Tier 1–2 cross-tier characteristics.

● Rheem: The model characterizes it in Q7 as a “systemically resilient Tier 1–2 brand” that drifts between the two tiers depending on the evaluation criteria applied.

● Ariston: Displays Tier 2 characteristics in the European market but is described in North American or Asian markets as a brand with lower perceived differentiation, reflecting a regionally driven cross-tier phenomenon.

Cross-Cluster Brands:

● A.O. Smith: Simultaneously spans the “North American Durability Cluster” and the “Electrification Transition Cluster.”

● Stiebel Eltron: Simultaneously spans the “European System Integration Cluster” and the “Electrification Transition Cluster.”

● Bosch Thermotechnology: Exhibits sub-brand-level attribution ambiguity between the “European System Integration Cluster” and the “Mass-Market Appliance Group Cluster” (Bosch Thermotechnology vs. Bosch Home Appliances).

Unstable Boundaries:

The model identifies the following four categories of structural tension in Q8 as the primary sources of classification ambiguity:

1.  Technological leadership (efficiency innovation) vs. scale dominance (global installed base)

2.  Regional market leadership vs. global brand footprint

3.  Product architecture (storage / tankless / heat pump) vs. brand portfolio breadth

4.  Legacy system heritage vs. electrification transition readiness

Framing Dependence:

The model exhibited a high degree of framing dependence across the eight sets of Q&A. When questions provided explicit classification dimensions (such as "price × technical complexity" or "residential–commercial × smart features"), the model tended to neatly assign brands to predefined quadrants rather than proactively challenging the validity of the coordinate axes. This behavior was particularly evident in Q3 and Q4.

Label Reuse:

The model repeatedly used the same combination of narrative labels across multiple questions. Labels such as “installer trust,” “heat pump leadership,” “decarbonization,” and “tankless efficiency” appeared multiple times in Q1, Q2, Q5, and Q6, forming a pattern of label reuse across questions. This indicates that the model maintains strong internal consistency in its narrative descriptions of brands, but it may also result in insufficient narrative diversity.

Templatization:

The model displayed a clear tendency toward templatization in its structured responses: each brand typically received a three-part structure of "positioning description + technical features + narrative role," with the number of brands usually limited to 5–8 and the number of clusters typically controlled to 3–5. While this templatized behavior enhances the readability of the output, it may compress the cognitive space for peripheral and regional brands.

Q1 (Hierarchical Structure): The question explicitly requires "3–5 tiers," and the model outputs a four-layer structure. The number of levels aligns closely with the prompt’s specified range, demonstrating the model’s strong responsiveness to quantitative constraints.

Q2 (Horizontal Clustering): The question explicitly excludes hierarchical logic, and the model successfully switches to a non-hierarchical clustering framework. However, certain cluster members (e.g., A.O. Smith) overlap with the Q1 hierarchical structure, indicating residual hierarchical cognition when the model transitions between frameworks.

Q3 (Price × Technology Perception Map): The question predefines the coordinate axes, and the model directly applies this coordinate system for brand placement without questioning the axis definitions, reflecting high compliance with the prompt’s framing.

Q4 (Residential–Commercial × Smart Features Matrix): The question predefines a second set of axes, which the model likewise adopts directly. In its output, the model adds a structured interpretation of “four cluster regions,” indicating both acceptance of the preset framework and a degree of autonomous structuring capability.

Q5 (Narrative Labels): The question does not predefine specific label categories. The model independently generates seven narrative prototypes and assigns brands to three narrative gravity centers, demonstrating strong autonomous classification ability under open-ended prompts.

Q6 (Use-Case Associations): The question provides three example scenarios, and the model strictly maps brands to these scenarios without proactively supplementing additional contexts (e.g., industrial hot water or district heating), illustrating an anchoring effect from the provided examples.

Q7 (Classification Drift): The question explicitly requests analysis of “hierarchical drift across contexts.” The model produces five drift mechanisms with a complete structure; however, portions of the analysis overlap substantially with conclusions from Q1 and Q3, indicating a tendency toward content reuse across questions.

Q8 (Boundary Ambiguity): The question focuses on “uncertainty in boundary zones.” The model identifies eight sources of ambiguity, producing the most structurally open response among the eight questions. This suggests that when explicitly tasked with analyzing uncertainty, the model generates high-density boundary analysis.

This audit was conducted using a static residential IP address in the United States, with the audit node located in the US.

The model's responses may exhibit the following geographic tendencies: North American brands (Rheem, A.O. Smith, Bradford White) are consistently placed in Tier 1 within the hierarchical structure and receive relatively richer descriptive depth in narrative labels and usage scenario analyses; European brands (Bosch, Vaillant, Stiebel Eltron) receive higher evaluations in the dimensions of efficiency and system integration; Asia-Pacific and emerging market brands (Haier, Midea, V-Guard) appear only in lower tiers or peripheral clustering positions in most queries.

The aforementioned patterns may affect the geographic balance of the model's outputs, but do not prove a direct causal relationship between the IP address and the model outputs. This manifests as a potential geographic narrative bias that requires further verification through cross-node comparative audits.

The model used in this audit is ChatGPT; however, specific version information was not explicitly recorded in the collection environment.

Due to the absence of model version information, comparative analysis of differences in cognitive structures across versions cannot be conducted. The cutoff date of the model’s training data may affect the depth of its understanding of emerging categories such as heat pump water heaters, as well as the accuracy of its perception of recent changes in market dynamics (e.g., the global expansion of Chinese brands). It is recommended that model version information be explicitly recorded in subsequent audits to support longitudinal comparisons across versions.

This audit is based on eight sets of structured Q&A sessions with ChatGPT and systematically maps the model’s organizational framework for its knowledge of global water heater brands.

Hierarchical structure: The model constructed a four-tier framework centered on installer trust depth, thermal-efficiency leadership, global service-network density, and price-to-lifecycle ratio. Rheem, A.O. Smith, Rinnai, Bosch, Vaillant, Stiebel Eltron, Bradford White, and Navien were consistently identified as Tier 1 members, and this hierarchy remained highly stable across multiple queries.

Clustering structure: The model identified five horizontal clusters corresponding to North American durability logic, Japanese precision-engineering logic, European system-integration logic, mass-market scale logic, and electrification-transition logic. Several brands (A.O. Smith, Stiebel Eltron, Ariston) span multiple clusters, indicating semi-stable cluster boundaries.

Narrative structure: The model converged brand narratives around three gravitational centers—practical-trust cluster, engineering-premium/European-system cluster, and instant-efficiency/lifestyle cluster—with narrative labels showing strong reuse consistency across responses.

Stability structure: Hierarchical frameworks, brand identities, and technical anchors constitute stable structures; cluster affiliations, narrative labels, and scenario mappings are semi-stable; price positioning, feature rankings, and regional rankings exhibit high volatility.

Methodological observations: The model displays clear framework dependency, label-reuse tendencies, and templated output behavior. Under U.S. IP conditions, narrative depth is comparatively greater for North American brands, while coverage of Asia-Pacific and emerging-market brands remains relatively limited. These characteristics represent the core cognitive-structure findings of this audit and do not constitute an evaluation of actual market performance.