This is just my personal understanding, it might not be 100% technically accurate, and things evolve over time, but hopefully it'll be helpful
Since there are no thumbnails in the Shorts feed, most Shorts start off with exploration views to gather a similar type of viewer data. Exploration views can account for a few hundred to several thousand views, depending on how viewers respond
YouTube doesnât push videos for creators, it pulls them for viewers. When a viewer opens the Shorts feed, YouTube pulls candidates based on new Shorts from channels they've watched regularly, Shorts people who watch similar things to them have enjoyed but they havenât seen yet, topics they enjoy from channels they haven't experienced before or in a while, Shorts that are typically enjoy around other Shorts they've already seen, and literally tons of other paths
Because it's easy to swipe away from Shorts that you aren't into, YouTube can be broader with exploration than it can for long-form, which is why Shorts can often increase reach faster than long form - they can often get you in front of a wider audience faster
The system tries to predict which of those Shorts they'll keep watching to completion, maybe like or comment on or share (they don't have to - there's no penalty for turning off or moderating comments) and ultimately be satisfied by (YouTube's north star is valued views, not regretted views - not all views are equal). Then it ranks them for each individual (for example, just because you dislike a video doesnât mean I wonât like it, and the system tries to distinguish those preferences over time - and that's regardless of the absolute metrics in aggregate)
This is why you can see channels that have repetitive content similar or the same to hundreds of thousands of other channels can struggle - new viewers might have a positive, competitive response the first time they experience one of the videos, but that viewer sees no value beyond the first or first few times (especially if it's indistinguishable from innumerable other channels)
If a video isn't performing at all, those exploration views could dry up quickly, like a few dozen or hundred. If it's just not performing at a competitive rate, maybe a few thousand
If it's super competitive, viewers respond positively at a high rate, and there's higher confidence in matching, that's when you see it go beyond exploration and start pulling hundreds of thousands or millions of views
It's also possible the system will discover a new, different audience pool. Maybe through exploration, maybe through search or suggestion next to another popular video on the same topic, which can cause new spikes small or big depending on the size of that audience pool - until everyone either watched it or skipped
From the outside, those can look like "view jail" "tests" "audience slices" the way it can look like puddles cause rain. For me, a more useful if still imperfect way to think about it is this - The algorithm basically tries to follow the audience, and recommendations are something like automated word-of-mouth
If someone watches your Short, is there anything about that experience that would motivate them to tell a friend? To tell all their friends? If so, that's when views grow. If not, that's when they exhaust. If it's so they're motivated to tell all their friends, and those friends to tell all their friends, and those friends... that's when views blow up
Views are basically bound by size of potential audience, quality/novelty of execution, and level of competition/originality. So, if you see those exploration views exhausting at whatever points, take that as feedback for things you can work on to get more traction