How EraSO Makes GEO Work Checkable
Clients do not need to rely solely on a provider saying it is professional. You can inspect how it chooses questions, verifies facts, selects channels, and checks and corrects results after publishing. EraSO connects these tasks to specific materials and records.
Each stage leaves an inspectable record
- 01
Define the project
Agree on priority offerings, buyers, markets, objectives, scope, platforms, languages, observation period and evaluation criteria.
- 02
Build the knowledge base
Verify materials and connect companies, brands, products, conditions, versions and sources; record missing, conflicting or outdated facts.
- 03
Identify questions
Develop questions from company materials, industry research and buying decisions, disclose their basis, approve the set and capture baseline answers.
- 04
Produce answers
Use verified facts to build specific answers, website pages, comparisons, FAQs and evidence pages, with structured data where appropriate.
- 05
Publish sources
Select channels from observed industry citations, adapt content and record public URLs, review status and maintenance responsibilities.
- 06
Monitor feedback
Retest the agreed set on schedule; retain full answers, sources, times and modes while separating mentions from citations.
- 07
Improve from evidence
Investigate errors, missing answers and cited sources; update controlled pages, track third-party corrections and retest.
- 08
Support conversion
Check the website and inquiry path with traffic and sales feedback; separate attributable changes from unknown sources and do not equate mentions with sales.
Start with the buyer's decision, then design questions
We use company materials, industry research and the purchase process to identify who decides, what starts the search, which conditions matter and what comes next. Existing sales or support records are reused when available. Questions derived from materials identify their basis and are not presented as verified high-volume searches.
A restaurant point-of-sale system can be researched as follows:
| Buyer stage | Decision to make | Possible question | What content needs to answer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Need arises | Whether a small restaurant should replace its system | What point-of-sale system suits a small restaurant? | Suitability conditions and selection criteria |
| Compare options | Which functions are useful | Can delivery and dine-in orders be managed together? | Functions, limitations and how to verify them |
| Prepare to buy | How to reduce switching risk | Will changing the point-of-sale system disrupt trading? | Migration steps, client responsibilities and service boundaries |
This is a method example, not a client case or a high-frequency query statistic. Actual projects adapt to the specific product and materials.
Trace a fact to the content that uses it
Knowledge relationships manage facts: which business supports a claim, what the evidence is, and which pages or articles use it. If a service scope changes, we update the fact first, then locate the affected service page, FAQ and external articles.
We update pages we control directly. Third-party articles are recorded for contact and correction. Content that cannot be changed retains its status, and we retest whether AI still uses the old claim. Deleting an original article cannot be promised to remove every repost.
A relationship register can initially use structured tables. Graph systems, retrieval and automation are described according to their actual development status. A service method is not a claim that every software feature is live.
Channel selection has evidence you can revisit
A channel recommendation connects the buyer question, original AI answer, actual source page, business relevance and publishing availability. Appearance in a search source panel does not establish a citation in the answer. A link in an answer does not endorse every claim in that article.
Industry records assist research; they are not fixed channel rankings. A media name does not replace an explanation of why that channel fits this project.
Record publishing results separately from AI behavior
An article sent to 16 platforms can be live on some, under review on others and rejected elsewhere. Each platform therefore needs its own status. After publishing, verify the public URL, actual title and date. A Feishu manuscript link is not a platform article link.
Then retest agreed questions, retaining complete answers, dates, modes and sources. Clients can inspect the underlying records rather than seeing only favorable screenshots.
Every correction has a specific target
| Finding | What to check | Next action |
|---|---|---|
| AI confuses the brand | Operating company, brand relationship, official website and cited materials | Correct relevant public facts and retest |
| Target questions do not include the company among candidates | Audience scenarios, content coverage and procurement evidence | Add the relevant evidence and inspect channel fit |
| Descriptions contain outdated conditions | Fact versions, website pages and external articles | Update content we control and record third-party corrections |
| Visits produce no suitable enquiries | Product explanation, enquiry entry, handling and attribution | Improve conversion handling rather than assuming more articles are needed |
EraSO's value is that the next round can build on existing facts, content and observations. Scope and acceptance indicators are agreed per project; we cannot control every AI answer.
See the service · Verify company facts · Request an initial assessment
GEO foundations and delivery · Content governance and measurement
Maintained by the EraSO Content Team, operated by 深圳爱易搜科技有限公司. Updated on October 8, 2026.
Start with evidence
See where your brand truly stands in the AI landscape
Share the essentials and receive an initial assessment focused on evidence, issues, and priorities.