——DeepSeek's current judgment rules and information recognition experience
The judgment rules discussed in this article specifically refer to DeepSeek's current search and information recognition mechanisms, and do not represent the general rules of all AI search products. Each point below is followed by "What enterprises should pay attention to when building an official website," which specifically analyzes what matters enterprises should note for their official websites.
I. How DeepSeek "sees" a website: the multiple networks of discovery mechanisms
DeepSeek's understanding of a website begins with “discovery.” But discovery does not equal trust; it only puts the website into the candidate pool. DeepSeek's current discovery mechanism does not rely on a single channel, but operates in parallel across multiple paths.
Point 1: Sitemap is a proactively submitted “content map.” It lists the URLs of important pages that the website wants to be crawled, along with their last update times. AI crawlers read the Sitemap to understand the website structure, and the lastmod timestamp is a key “freshness signal” that directly affects revisit frequency. DeepSeek has opened a webmaster platform that allows proactive Sitemap submission, which is the most direct way to “feed information.” But it is important to understand clearly: submitting a Sitemap only guarantees “being seen,” not “being trusted”; whether it is ultimately indexed and cited depends on content quality and relevance.
What enterprises should note when building official websites: Enterprises should treat the Sitemap as official website infrastructure, not as a task that ends once it is submitted. Specifically: First, generate a complete, accessible
sitemap.xmlfor the official website, covering core pages such as product pages, solution pages, news and updates pages, and FAQ pages; Second,lastmodmust truthfully reflect the substantive content update time; do not batch-refresh it to the current day on every release, otherwise it will weaken the credibility of the freshness signal; Third, proactively submit the Sitemap to the DeepSeek webmaster platform and regularly check crawl and indexing status; Fourth, the Sitemap only solves “being seen,” and enterprises still need high-quality product descriptions, technical documentation, cases, and verifiable information to solve “being trusted.” Do not treat the Sitemap as an SEO shortcut; it is only an entry point.
Point 2: RSS/Atom is a faster “new content bulletin board.” Compared with the full indexing of Sitemap, RSS announces new content in chronological order, which is especially critical for AI search that pursues timeliness.
What enterprises should note when building official websites: If an enterprise official website publishes news, product updates, industry analysis, or technical blogs over the long term, it should deploy RSS/Atom feeds and retain discoverable subscription links on its pages. Note: only put content with real information value into RSS; do not stuff promotional posters and empty advertorials into the feed; each item should have a clear title, publication time, summary, and link to the original text; update frequency should be stable, avoiding long periods of inactivity followed by sudden batch pushes. The value of RSS lies in “timely announcement of new content,” and enterprises should treat it as a regular channel for official website content operations, not as a technical decoration.
Point 3: Platform ecosystems are the “information rich mines” that DeepSeek prefers more. A key reality is that DeepSeek does not view all websites equally. For Chinese content, its indexing and citations are more inclined toward high-quality, high-authority platforms, such as Zhihu, CSDN, Blog Garden, Alibaba Cloud Developer Community, and other in-depth content platforms. This means that for the same article, the probability of being discovered on these platforms is much higher than on an isolated personal official website.
What enterprises should note when building official websites: Enterprises cannot just guard an isolated official website. The correct approach is a dual track of “platform matrix + official website authoritative source”: publish in-depth content on high-quality platforms such as Zhihu, CSDN, vertical industry communities, and developer communities to attract discovery and citation; at the same time, ensure that the official website is the authoritative master copy of this content, including complete parameters, official documentation, update records, and contact information. Note: content published on platforms should not contradict information on the official website; platform articles should guide users back to authoritative pages on the official website, but should not be made into pure advertisements; the official website should assume the role of “final trustworthy source,” while platforms assume the role of “discovery entry.” Enterprises should treat platform ecosystems as distribution networks and the official website as the trust foundation.
Point 4: Link tracking and emerging protocols (such as llms.txt) are also continuously expanding the discovery network. But no matter which path is used for discovery, the website only enters the candidate pool—real screening happens in the quality judgment stage.
What enterprises should note when building official websites: Enterprises should pay attention to emerging AI-readable protocols, for example by deploying
llms.txtin the official website root directory and using a clear structure to explain the website's core pages, product documentation, FAQ, and authoritative content entry points, making it easier for AI to understand the official website structure. At the same time, keep the internal link structure clear: there should be reasonable internal links among product pages, documentation pages, case pages, and the About Us page; avoid large numbers of dead links, orphan pages, and duplicate pages. Regarding external links, do not superstitiously buy backlinks; instead, naturally gain industry citations through high-quality content. Enterprises must understand: links and protocols are only channels for “being discovered”; whether official website content is specific, verifiable, and clearly structured determines whether it can pass subsequent screening.
II. How DeepSeek Determines Website Quality: A Dual-Layer Signal System, Not Word of Mouth
The authority of traditional search engines is built to a large extent on backlinks and brand reputation—a quantification of "human consensus." But DeepSeek's current judgment logic is different. After analyzing millions of AI citations, research firm Yext pointed out: AI does not directly use human trust signals such as "reputation accumulated over time." The reason is that word of mouth and backlinks often measure "attention rather than accuracy"—clickbait hits may gain a large number of links, but their content is not necessarily accurate. AI models also lack historical user behavior data to form "word-of-mouth" judgments. Therefore, DeepSeek's current weighting identification is more like a verifiability detection system than a reputation accumulation system.
Enterprises building official websites should note: Do not simply understand trust building for an official website as "a big brand and many backlinks are enough." DeepSeek's current mechanism values detectable structural signals more. Official websites should note: First, website information should be stable over the long term and consistent throughout, avoiding contradictory parameters for the same product on different pages; second, basic pages such as company introduction, qualifications, contact information, privacy policy, and update logs should be complete and authentic; third, do not rely on clickbait or exaggerated marketing rhetoric to create "attention"; instead, build credibility with verifiable product parameters, technical documentation, customer cases, and third-party certifications; fourth, the official website should maintain a stable domain and long-term accessibility, as frequently changing domains or a large number of invalid pages will weaken structural health. Brand reputation is a bonus, but the website's own structural health and information consistency are the foundation.
Layer 1: Source layer — authority (authority level, 0–4 points)
Viewpoint 5: authority evaluates the structured authority at the domain or platform level, answering "whether this source itself is trustworthy." A score of 3 or above is regarded as an "extremely authoritative source." Its basis for judgment is not subjective reputation but a series of quantifiable structural features: domain stability and history, cross-page information consistency, and platform-type preference. For example, technical communities such as Zhihu and CSDN receive a higher weighting foundation at the source level. authority is essentially a quantitative assessment of a website's structural health and long-term stability, rather than a mapping of subjective human reputation.
Enterprises building official websites should note: Official websites should focus on maintaining "structural health." Specific points to note: use a stable domain and renew it for the long term, avoiding frequent redesigns that cause large-scale URL failures; enable HTTPS site-wide; keep the company name, address, phone number, filing information, and product names consistent across all pages; trust pages such as About Us, Qualifications and Honors, Contact Us, Privacy Policy, and Terms of Service must be complete; product parameter pages, technical documentation pages, and FAQ pages should be clearly structured; avoid large numbers of empty pages, duplicate pages, and scraped content. Enterprises should also conduct regular on-site information audits to check whether the same product has contradictory descriptions on different pages.
authorityis not something that can be boosted through a single marketing campaign; it is accumulated through a long-term stable official website structure.
Layer 2: Content layer — rerank_score (reranking score, 0–3 points)
Viewpoint 6: rerank_score evaluates the quality of match between an individual web page's content and the current question, answering "whether this content is relevant to and good for this specific question." It integrates relevance, authority, and timeliness, and a score of 1.5 or above is regarded as a high-quality result. Specifically, it examines verifiability signals in the content itself: whether key data is supported by clickable, traceable backlinks; whether the content is organized in structures that AI can easily parse, such as FAQs, lists, and tables; whether the information is consistent with other content on the same site and sufficiently new (data from the past 90 days receives a bonus). The core of rerank_score is "matching the question", rather than a quality score that is universal across questions. The same piece of content may score high when answering question A but may score low when switched to question B.
Enterprises building official websites should note: Official websites should organize content around "specific questions" rather than just posting brand promotion. Note: First, establish structured pages such as FAQs, parameter tables, selection guides, common troubleshooting, and comparison explanations for each product line; second, for key data, certifications, and test results, attach traceable sources or downloadable documents wherever possible; third, product pages should clearly state applicable scenarios, limitations, and differences from competitors, rather than simply piling up "industry-leading" and "disruptive innovation"; fourth, news and blog posts should indicate the actual publication time, and outdated pages should be updated regularly; fifth, the parameters, names, and models of the same product must be consistent across different pages.
rerank_scoreis a "question-matching score"; enterprises should produce content targeting customers' real search questions, rather than only producing self-praising content.
Viewpoint 7: The key insight of this two-layer system is that DeepSeek's current judgment mechanism does not "feel" reputation but "detects" signals. A large site with a good reputation in the traditional sense may still be filtered out at the rerank_score level if a piece of content is irrelevant to the question or outdated; conversely, a new site without brand endorsement may also have the opportunity to obtain a higher score if its content structure is clear, sources are verifiable, and data is fresh. The criterion for judging trust has shifted from subjective "feeling" to detectable "verification."
Enterprises building official websites should note: Small and medium-sized enterprises should especially note: do not give up on official website development just because "the brand is not big enough." DeepSeek's current mechanism leaves opportunities for official websites with clear structure and verifiable information. Enterprises should focus their efforts on: writing complete product documentation, making FAQs in-depth, making parameter tables accurate, clearly marking update times, writing specific customer cases, and placing contact information prominently. Do not build a three-page official website consisting only of "Company Profile + Product Images + Contact Us"; nor should you think that running ads or buying backlinks can replace official website content development. The official website should become a "detectable trust asset" rather than an "electronic brochure."
III. How DeepSeek Determines Whether a Single Piece of Information Is Reliable: Taking Describing Apples as Delicious as an Example
Website quality is a macro-level judgment, while whether a single piece of information is reliable is a micro-level judgment. For subjective experience descriptions such as "describing an apple as delicious," DeepSeek's current judgment logic is especially illustrative: it does not judge "whether this apple actually tastes good" (which cannot be objectively verified), but rather judges "whether this article's description of 'delicious' provides sufficiently specific, traceable, and structured information."
What enterprises should note when building a corporate website: Corporate websites often need to describe product experience, service outcomes, or customer value, and this type of content is most easily written as empty adjectives. Enterprises should note: do not just write "excellent experience," "remarkable results," or "unanimous customer praise"; instead, break subjective evaluations into perceptible and verifiable specific dimensions. For example, software products should not only say "efficient and convenient"; they should clearly describe operation steps, processing speed, compatible environments, data import methods, and limitations. Services should not only say "professional and reliable"; they should clearly describe service processes, response times, qualified personnel, and verifiable cases. Subjective descriptions on corporate websites must be supported by specific information; otherwise, they are easily classified as low-information-density content in AI judgment.
Reliable descriptions usually have the following characteristics:
Point 8: Break down specific sensory dimensions rather than make vague assertions. A reliable description breaks "delicious" into perceptible dimensions such as sweetness, acidity, crispness, juiciness, aroma, and aftertaste, with specific descriptions or data for each dimension; an unreliable one has only emotional exclamations like "Super delicious! Sweet and fragrant!" with no extractable sensory information.
What enterprises should note when building a corporate website: When describing products, enterprises should establish a "dimensional expression" template. For example, industrial equipment should clearly describe precision, power, consumables, applicable materials, and maintenance cycles; SaaS should clearly describe functional modules, deployment methods, integration interfaces, permission systems, and service levels; consumer goods should clearly describe materials, dimensions, usage scenarios, cleaning methods, and precautions. Each dimension should preferably have parameters, data, or verifiable explanations, avoiding only "high quality," "high performance," and "loved by users." Product pages on corporate websites should turn dimensions into tables or bullet points, rather than a pile of adjectives.
Point 9: Include traceable background such as variety, origin, and season. "Shaanxi Luochuan Fuji, picked in mid-October, with sufficient sugar development after two weeks of cold storage" provides background for judging whether the description is reasonable; while "this apple is delicious" lacks basic background and cannot be cross-checked.
What enterprises should note when building a corporate website: Every important piece of information on a corporate website should have background. Product pages should clearly describe model, version, production location, applicable industry, launch time, and iteration records; case pages should clearly describe customer industry, usage scenario, implementation cycle, problems solved, and publicly available performance data; news pages should indicate publication time and author/department. Do not let the website be filled with "a customer spoke highly of it" without industry, scenario, and time. The more complete the background information, the better AI can judge whether the description is reasonable, and the easier it is for customers to cross-verify.
Point 10: Include comparisons or a reference frame. "Sweeter and crisper than Gala, but less aromatic than Aomori Fuji" provides relative coordinates, giving "delicious" a comparable scale; an isolated assertion of being the most delicious cannot be verified.
What enterprises should note when building a corporate website: Corporate websites should appropriately provide comparative references, but must pay attention to legal compliance and objectivity. You can provide "selection comparisons between different models," "feature comparisons between different packages," "explanations of differences between old and new versions," and "comparisons of applicable scenarios," rather than disparaging competitors. Comparison dimensions should be specific: processing capacity, number of interfaces, deployment cycle, service response time, applicable scale, etc. Isolated claims such as "industry first" and "far ahead" are difficult to verify; only comparisons with a reference frame, dimensions, and conditions are more likely to be judged credible.
Point 11: Include verifiable sources or structured presentation. Information from professional agricultural product reviews or agricultural institution reports, or presented in lists, tables, or bullet points, with key data having a measurement basis; pure marketing advertorials, adjective-stacked throughout, and empty AI-generated boilerplate are unreliable.
What enterprises should note when building a corporate website: Key data on corporate websites should be as traceable as possible: test reports, certification certificates, patent numbers, version numbers, test environments, statistical calibers, and downloadable white papers. In terms of page structure, use FAQs, lists, tables, and step-by-step instructions more often to facilitate AI parsing and quick access to information for customers. Note: do not hide key information in images; do not use large amounts of animations and pop-ups to interfere with reading; do not use AI to batch-generate marketing copy without factual support. A corporate website should become a "structured information source," not a "collection of visual posters."
Point 12: Acknowledge subjectivity and conditionality. "For people who prefer a crisp and sweet taste, it will be very appealing, but those who like a balanced sweet-and-sour taste may find it too sweet and cloying"—acknowledging that "delicious" varies from person to person actually increases credibility; absolute claims that "everyone thinks it is delicious" are often unreliable.
What enterprises should note when building a corporate website: Corporate websites should honestly explain the applicable boundaries of products. Clearly state "what scenarios it is suitable for, what scenarios it is not suitable for, what limitations it has, what prerequisites are required, and what differences exist between versions." Do not use absolute expressions such as "applicable to all enterprises," "everyone will like it," or "100% solves problems." Acknowledging conditionality does not weaken professionalism; instead, it increases credibility; absolute assertions are easily regarded as marketing talk and can easily create expectation gaps for customers.
Unreliable descriptions typically include the following characteristics:
Point 13: Only emotional exclamations with no sensory information; unverifiable absolute assertions; lack of basic background such as variety, origin, season, and storage; information that is self-contradictory or obviously contrary to common sense; AI boilerplate with flowery language but extremely low information density. The core logic here is: convert subjective assertions into verifiable signals, and replace emotional intensity with information density. DeepSeek cannot taste apples for you, but it can judge whether an article's description of "delicious" provides sufficiently specific, traceable, and comparable information.
What enterprises should note when building a corporate website: Enterprises should use the above "unreliable characteristics" as a self-check list for website content: delete adjectives that contain only emotion and no information; delete unverifiable absolute assertions such as "global leader," "industry first," and "perfect solution"; complete product background and applicable conditions; check whether different pages contradict each other; and clean up empty AI-generated copy. Before publishing website content, ask three questions: Does this sentence contain specific information? Does it have background or sources? Can customers make judgments based on it? If the answer is no, rewrite or delete it.
Ⅳ、A Key Correction: Being Multi-Dimensional Does Not Mean Being Reliable, and Being Single-Dimensional Does Not Mean Being Unreliable
This leads to a common misconception: the belief that "describing something from multiple dimensions and multiple angles makes it reliable, while describing it from only a few directions is just piling on words and unreliable." This understanding is largely correct, but it needs a key correction.
Viewpoint 14: Multiple dimensions + specific and verifiable = more reliable. Writing across multiple dimensions such as sweetness, acidity, crispness, juiciness, aroma, variety, place of origin, storage, and comparative references, with specific descriptions or data for each dimension, is indeed more credible.
What companies should pay attention to when building official websites: A corporate official website should establish a multi-dimensional product information system: product pages should cover at least functions, parameters, applicable scenarios, limitations, deployment/usage methods, maintenance instructions, FAQs, and related cases. Each dimension must contain specific information, rather than merely listing dimension names. For example, it is not enough to write only "superior performance, safe and reliable, comprehensive service"; instead, performance indicators, safety certifications, and service response times should be provided separately. Multiple dimensions are a good thing, but every dimension must be grounded in verifiable information.
Viewpoint 15: But multiple dimensions + empty piling up of words = still unreliable. If an article writes "sweet and delicious, crisp and juicy, rich in flavor, layered and rich, intoxicating," the dimensions may appear numerous, but if they are all clichéd adjectives with no specific information, context, comparisons, or sources, then it is not reliable—it is merely more elaborately padded.
What companies should pay attention to when building official websites: Corporate official websites should beware of false richness in which "there are many dimensions but they are all adjectives." For example, a product page may say "efficient, intelligent, safe, stable, flexible, easy to use, open, and reliable," but if each term is not followed by parameters, scenarios, or evidence, such a page has very low information density in AI judgment. Companies should rewrite each adjective as "specific manifestation + data/conditions + source of evidence." For example, change "efficient" to "processing 100,000 pieces of data in X seconds per run, with the test environment being..." Official websites should not fear having many dimensions; what they should fear is empty dimensions.
Viewpoint 16: A single dimension + deep specificity = can also be reliable. Writing only about one dimension, "crispness," but clearly explaining the variety, storage conditions, what apples it is compared with, the specific manifestation of crispness, and what texture preferences it suits—this kind of single-dimension description can likewise be reliable.
What companies should pay attention to when building official websites: Companies do not need to pursue being broad and comprehensive on every page. If a certain page on the official website solves only one problem, it can also be made very credible. For example, if it only explains "how to replace consumables for a certain model of equipment," then clearly write the applicable models, tools, steps, precautions, common mistakes, videos or diagrams, and how to contact support. If it only explains "how to configure a certain function," then clearly write the prerequisites, configuration items, examples, limitations, and troubleshooting methods. As long as a single-topic page is in-depth, specific, and actionable, it can also gain trust. Companies should create more "problem-oriented" in-depth pages, rather than only making general product introduction pages.
Viewpoint 17: The typical features of真正 unreliability are not "few angles," but rather: only emotional exclamations with no extractable information; absolute assertions that cannot be verified; lack of basic context; self-contradiction or violation of common sense; flowery language with extremely low information density; failure to acknowledge subjectivity and conditionality. In one sentence: Reliability = dimensions matching the question + specific and verifiable information for each dimension + context and references + acknowledgment of boundaries. Multiple dimensions are a bonus, but piling up dimensions does not equal reliability; a single dimension does not equal unreliability either. The key lies in information density and verifiability.
What companies should pay attention to when building official websites: Companies should turn this summary into official website content review standards: Does each page match users' real questions? Is each key conclusion supported by specific information? Is there product context, applicable conditions, and reference explanations? Are boundaries acknowledged? If a page is merely "many angles but empty information," or "few angles and no details," it should be rewritten. Official websites do not need every page to be long, but every page should have a clear question, specific information, verifiable evidence, and applicable boundaries.
V. Implications for Content Creators
Understanding DeepSeek's current evaluation rules has direct significance for creators who want to be recognized by AI search as high-quality content and cited in answers. For corporate official websites, these insights apply equally.
Point 18: Discovery is only the starting point; quality is the passport. Submitting a Sitemap, publishing RSS, and choosing high-quality platforms can all increase the probability of "being seen," but whether you are ultimately cited depends on the two-tier screening of authority and rerank_score. Do not expect that "submitting means it will be indexed"; continuously producing high-quality content is fundamental.
What enterprises should pay attention to when building official websites: Enterprises should shift official website operations from a "submit for indexing" mindset to a "continuous quality" mindset. Specific practices: establish a stable content update plan, publishing product updates, technical explanations, FAQ additions, and case reviews monthly or quarterly; configure a Sitemap and RSS for the official website, but do not only perform submission actions; regularly check which pages are indexed and which are not, and analyze the reasons; do not invest the entire budget in external promotion while neglecting the official website content itself. An official website is a long-term trust asset, and quality accumulation is more important than one-time submission.
Point 19: Structure and traceability are hard currency. Attach clickable, traceable sources to key data; organize content with FAQs, lists, and tables to facilitate AI parsing and extraction of answer snippets; keep information self-consistent and avoid contradictions within the same site.
What enterprises should pay attention to when building official websites: Corporate official websites should prioritize building structured content templates: product specification tables, selection comparison tables, FAQ lists, implementation steps, troubleshooting tables, version update records, and download pages for certifications and test reports. Key data must be traceable to documents, certificates, test reports, or official statements; the model, specifications, and names of the same product on different pages must be consistent; outdated pages should be updated or marked as invalid. Enterprises can designate dedicated personnel responsible for "official website information consistency audits" to avoid the marketing, product, and technical departments maintaining different versions of the same information.
Point 20: Specificity, comparison, and boundaries are more powerful than piling up adjectives. Whether it is product reviews, experience sharing, or knowledge popularization, breaking vague assertions into specific dimensions, providing a comparative frame of reference, and honestly acknowledging subjectivity and applicable conditions will significantly improve the credibility score of the content.
What enterprises should pay attention to when building official websites: Corporate official websites should reduce "adjective marketing" and increase "specific information marketing." Product pages should clearly state specific specifications, applicable scenarios, and limitations; solution pages should clearly state selection differences for different scales and industries; case pages should clearly state customer background, implementation process, publicly disclosable results, and applicable boundaries; service pages should clearly state response times, service scope, and exclusions. Comparison content should be objective, lawful, and dimensional, and avoid disparaging competitors. Admitting "what it is not suitable for" builds more trust than claiming "it is suitable for everyone."
Point 21: Beware of AI boilerplate. Content with flowery language but extremely low information density is unlikely to score high at the rerank_score level. DeepSeek's current evaluation mechanism has a natural recognition disadvantage for text that "looks beautiful but contains no information"—because it cannot extract verifiable signals from it.
What enterprises should pay attention to when building official websites: Enterprises should establish "anti-AI boilerplate" standards for official website content: prohibit the batch generation of marketing copy without factual product support; prohibit the piling up of big words such as "empower, closed loop, ecosystem, disrupt, and lead" throughout the text; every paragraph of copy must be able to answer "what exactly is it, who is it useful for, what conditions apply, and where is the evidence." When the marketing department uses AI-assisted writing, it must add product specifications, customer scenarios, technical details, and human review. Before publishing official website content, conduct an "information density check": after removing adjectives, does the page still contain substantive information? If not, it should be rewritten.
Conclusion
DeepSeek's current search and information recognition mechanism is essentially a paradigm shift from "subjective reputation" to "verifiable signals." It does not sense reputation; it detects structure. It does not worship brands; it scrutinizes evidence. It is not satisfied with emotional intensity; it demands information density. For websites, it uses authority to assess the structural health of the source, and rerank_score to assess how well an individual piece of content matches a specific question. For a description, it breaks subjective assertions down into traceable, comparable signals with clear boundaries. Understanding this logic not only helps creators get valuable content seen and cited, but also helps every information user judge more clearly: is a description that looks "very comprehensive" a reliable multi-dimensional argument, or empty padding in a new wrapper?
Companies building official websites should note: a company should treat its official website as "verifiable trust infrastructure" to be operated, not as an electronic brochure. Prioritize five things: First, keep the domain stable, pages accessible, and basic trust pages complete; second, submit a genuinely updated Sitemap, deploy RSS, and build a content matrix on high-quality platforms, with the official website serving as the authoritative master copy; third, replace empty adjectives with structured content such as product specification tables, FAQs, selection comparisons, technical documentation, and case reviews; fourth, attach traceable sources to key data, keep information consistent across the site, and clearly define applicable boundaries and limitations; fifth, establish a content review mechanism to clean up AI boilerplate, absolute assertions, and self-contradictory information. Under DeepSeek's current judgment rules, the credibility of a company's official website no longer comes from how loudly it speaks, but from how specifically, how verifiably, and how honestly it speaks.