there's a KDD paper on GEO that almost nobody is talking about. it found that letting AI rewrite your blogs cut citations by 22%.
this paper uses 171k real web pages, 2,700 queries, 9 domains, and a full retrieval → reranking → answer pipeline.
tl;dr: GEO optimizations to content are bullshit. To titles, meta descriptions, schema, maybe not 👀
What to actually do, with their numbers:
1. put the page's hard numbers in the meta description. retrieval +29%, citations +7%, the best single tactic in the study. the same stats added to the body cut citations 4%.
2. name the entity in the title. "Panel Clarifies Advice" → "IOM Panel Clarifies Vitamin D Guidance". retrieval +27%.
3. use plain language. simpler wording in metadata: retrieval +27%, citations +5%. adding jargon to the body: retrieval -14%.
4. never let AI rewrite your pages. retrieval -36%, reranking -42%, citations -22%.
5. answer in the first paragraph, use the product name instead of "it", and make every claim stand on its own. the paper's best method was built on rules like these. it got cited 58% of the time vs 50%, and a full position earlier in the answer.
6. only the top 10 results ever reach the model. 5.8% of pages "optimized" themselves from #10 to #11 and disappeared. If a page already gets cited, be careful touching it.
Personally, I'm always skeptical of stat-stuffed titles and descriptions, but I'll be trying some of these out.