GEO (Generative Engine Optimization): definition and differences from SEO

This article contains affiliate links: we may earn a commission. Learn more

GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) is what you do so that an AI like ChatGPT, Perplexity or Google cites a page in its answer. The term comes from a research paper published in November 2023. Google, meanwhile, has a section on it in its July 2026 guide: according to Google, optimizing for generative AI is still SEO, and several “GEO” tricks do nothing in its engine. Here is what each source says, and what you can do with it without kidding yourself.

We have not tested any GEO technique on our own site. This article compares sources (the research paper and the official documentation, read between October 18 and 21, 2026) and publishes no test results. How we test explains why some articles stay informational.

What is GEO (Generative Engine Optimization)?

GEO is the set of content and technical choices that aim to get a page used by a generative engine, meaning an engine that writes an answer from several sources: ChatGPT with web search, Perplexity, Google’s AI Overviews. In French it is called « optimisation pour les moteurs génératifs ».

The term is formalized in the paper “GEO: Generative Engine Optimization”, submitted to arXiv on November 16, 2023 by six researchers (Princeton, IIT Delhi and two independent researchers) and presented at the KDD 2024 conference. The authors describe a framework to help content creators improve their visibility in the answers of generative engines. The acronym can mislead: here it has nothing to do with geolocation.

What is the difference between GEO and SEO?

SEO aims to put a page high in a list of results. GEO aims to get a brand named or a page cited in a written answer. Both start from the same content, but they are not measured the same way.

They agree on one point: a page that Google has not indexed will not show up in its AI answers. Beyond that, GEO adds a difficulty SEO knows less well, measurement, because an AI’s answers vary from one try to the next. That is why our protocol asks for three tries per question.

What does the research behind GEO say?

The 2023 paper compares nine ways of rewriting a piece of content across 10,000 queries from 25 domains: adding statistics, quotes and sources raises visibility by 30 to 40% on the authors’ main metric, while keyword stuffing brings almost nothing. Here is what the authors report:

The “position-adjusted word count” measures, roughly, the share of the answer’s text that relies on your page, with more weight on sentences at the start of the answer. The nine methods are: authoritative style, statistics, keyword stuffing, cited sources, quotes, plain language, fluency, rare words and technical terms.

Four limits to read before turning this into a rule:

• The engine tested is a setup built by the authors: the top five Google results, summarized by gpt-3.5-turbo, with five answers per query at a temperature of 0.7. Perplexity is tested separately.
• The visibility metrics are defined by the authors themselves.
• The authors note that the effect varies by domain: a method that helps on one topic may change nothing on another.
• The paper dates from 2023 and was revised in June 2024. Nothing guarantees that ChatGPT or Google behave the same way in 2026.

What does Google say about GEO?

Google talks about it explicitly. Its guide “Optimizing your website for generative AI features on Google Search”, updated on July 10, 2026, has a section on “AEO” and “GEO”: according to Google, optimizing for generative AI search is optimizing for the search experience, so it is still SEO. It also tells readers to review third-party “AEO” or “GEO” advice and services with caution.

The same page lists what Google says you can ignore for Google Search: llms.txt files, breaking content into tiny pieces (“chunking”), rewriting content just for AI systems, seeking inauthentic mentions and overfocusing on structured data. What it puts forward: unique, useful content with your own point of view (a first-hand review rather than a summary of what already exists), pages that are indexed and crawlable, and tracking in Search Console.

On one point, this guide and the research paper diverge: the paper measures a gain after rewriting in a simulated engine, while Google writes that you do not need to write in a particular way for its generative AI. That is not necessarily a contradiction, since the engines differ, but the gain measured in 2023 cannot be carried over to Google on the paper’s word alone.

The technical requirements come from another Google page, on AI features, updated on December 10, 2025: the page must be indexed and eligible to be shown with a snippet, with no particular schema.org markup. The July 2026 guide adds that a site must be included in generative AI features in Search Console, and points to a “Generative AI performance” report for measurement. Google also says its features may run several related searches (“query fan-out”).

On October 20, 2026, we read 36 pages from the top results (by script) for “geo seo”, “generative engine optimization”, “geo vs seo”, “geo ia” and “geo definition”. None contains a link to Google’s documentation (developers.google.com), and seven mention the research paper. We did not judge their quality.

What do OpenAI, Perplexity and Anthropic say?

Their documentation describes bots and their roles, not how sources are chosen. OpenAI recommends allowing OAI-SearchBot to appear in ChatGPT search, and says GPTBot (model training) is a separate setting. Perplexity recommends allowing PerplexityBot. Anthropic says turning off Claude-SearchBot may reduce a site’s visibility in search.

The full table of bots and the commands to check them are in our free GEO audit guide, with the documentation as of October 18, 2026.

GEO, AEO, LLMO: are they the same thing?

These acronyms are often used as synonyms: GEO for generative engines, AEO for answer engines, LLMO for large language models. We found no official definition of any of them, and Google’s page on AI features uses none of them.

One trap for searchers: “AEO” also means Authorized Economic Operator, a customs status. Searches for “aeo” mix both meanings.

What should you do about GEO in practice?

In order, separating what is established from what is only a lead:

1. Check access (established by the documentation). Your key pages are indexed, and robots.txt blocks neither OAI-SearchBot, nor PerplexityBot, nor Claude-SearchBot. Allow about 24 hours for OpenAI to take a robots.txt change into account.
2. Keep the SEO basics (established by Google). Helpful, reliable, people-first content with your own point of view rather than a summary of what already exists, on technically compliant pages.
3. Add sourced figures, attributed quotes and links to sources on the pages that matter (lead: the effect was measured on a benchmark, not on real sites, and Google writes that rewriting for AI is not needed in its engine).
4. Do not stuff keywords (lead: the paper found almost no effect).
5. Measure before and after, with the protocol in our guide: 10 questions, 3 tries each, and a margin of error of about 18 points on 30 tries. Without a measurement, you cannot tell whether a change helped.

And how do you track the effect over time?

Repeating the measurement by hand every month gets long. We compared four paid tools, their prices and their free trials in our comparison of AI visibility tracking tools. Our pick to get started is Hikoo, which listed a 7-day trial with no credit card on October 12, 2026.

What we have not verified

• The effect of each technique on our own site: we applied none of them and publish no citation rate for our brand.
• The paper’s results on ChatGPT or Google in 2026: we have not reproduced them.
• The documentation from OpenAI, Perplexity and Anthropic, as of October 18, 2026, which may change.
• The “Generative AI performance” report and the inclusion setting in Search Console: we have not opened them in our own account.
• The quality of the 36 pages read from the top results: the script counted words and links, nothing more.
• Demand outside France: the search volumes we cite come from a tool that only covers France.