Core product scope conflicts
Surfaces describe inconsistent capability boundaries.
DEMO / NOT A REAL BRAND DIAGNOSTIC
Defined-market GEO diagnostic · sample report
Demo data: Northstar Precision is fictional. Scores, platform results, dates and recommendations demonstrate report structure only and do not represent real platform performance.
The demo baseline suggests inconsistent shortlisting on high-intent questions, platform disagreement about core product scope and weak independent evidence. Priority should go to entity facts, answer-ready product blocks and third-party proof—not bulk generic content.
Surfaces describe inconsistent capability boundaries.
Independent trade evidence is not yet connected.
Official contact and inquiry paths provide a usable base.
Indexing is workable; Simplified Chinese and English entity structures need attention.
Product facts exist but lack self-contained answer blocks and independent proof.
| PLATFORM | Unaided mention | Cited after mention | Recommendation | Coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ChatGPT | 4 / 12 | 3 / 4 | 3 / 8 | 12 / 12 |
| Gemini | 6 / 12 | 4 / 6 | 4 / 8 | 12 / 12 |
| Perplexity | 2 / 12 | 2 / 2 | 1 / 8 | 12 / 12 |
Demo definition: cited-after-mention uses valid brand-mention runs as its denominator. Platform samples are not combined into a 36-run master rate.
Market sites use inconsistent product taxonomies, creating entity-mixing risk.
Add scope, limitations, data and sources so answers can be extracted independently.
Prioritize verifiable entity links through associations, customer cases and technical media.
Entity facts, Simplified Chinese and English structure, and critical action paths.
Answer-ready pages, cases, data and independent sources.
Retest the frozen panel and compare directional platform change.