"One of the things I keep seeing over and over in some of the advice and guidance and people are trying to figure out what do we do with the LLMs or whatever, is that turn your content into bite-sized chunks, because LLMs like things that are really bite size, right? So we don't want you to do that. I was talking to some engineers about that. We don't want you to do that."
"We really don't. We don't want people to have to be crafting anything for Search specifically. That's never been where we've been at and we still continue to be that way. We really don't want you to think you need to be doing that or produce two versions of your content, one for the LLM and one for the net."
"Let's assume that, in some edge cases, let's even assume maybe in more than some edge cases, you're finding you're getting some advantage here. Maybe tiny degree measure. "No, this is my secret weapon. It's doing it." Great. That's what's happening now. But tomorrow the systems may change. So you've gone through all this effort. You've made all these things that you did specifically"
Avoid converting content into bite-sized chunks solely to target LLM ranking preferences. Such fragmenting does not reliably improve search performance today and risks becoming ineffective as ranking systems evolve. Creating separate versions of content for LLMs and traditional search is not recommended. Small, short-term advantages from tailored chunking may occasionally appear, but system changes can negate those benefits and waste effort. Prioritize creating comprehensive, user-focused content that answers user needs; that content will align better with future LLM outputs and with broader search ranking objectives.
Read at Search Engine Roundtable
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]