GEO-Bench: Benchmarking Ranking Manipulation in Generative Engine Optimization

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly rank products, documents, and recommendations for user queries, which makes manipulating these rankings a growing concern for fairness and information integrity. Research on generative engine optimization (GEO) has produced many manipulation methods, but each is evaluated on its own dataset with its own metrics, so their relative strength and detectability stay unclear. We present GEO-Bench, a benchmark that evaluates GEO ranking-manipulation attacks under one protocol. It unifies black-box prompt-based attacks (TAP, Zero-Shot), white-box gradient-based attacks (STS, RAF, StealthRank), and ten white-hat C-SEO strategies. We score every method on five datasets against a fixed open-weight ranker (Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct), using metrics for both effectiveness (NRG, Success@α, Promote@α) and stealth (keyword violation rate, perplexity ratio). Our evaluation shows that effectiveness and stealth trade off across adversarial attacks, that black-box content rewriting matches or exceeds gradient-based attacks on rank promotion while producing more fluent text and can evade both keyword- and perplexity-based detection on some domains, and that the access model does not predict attack strength. By standardizing datasets, attack implementations, and metrics, GEO-Bench enables the first direct comparison across these attack paradigms and supports the development of detection methods.

When Do "More Contexts" Help with Sarcasm Recognition?

Sarcasm recognition is challenging because it needs an understanding of the true intention, which is opposite to or different from the literal meaning of the words. Prior work has addressed this challenge by developing a series of methods that provide richer $contexts$, e.g., sentiment or cultural nuances, to models. While shown to be effective individually, no study has systematically evaluated their collective effectiveness. As a result, it remains unclear to what extent additional contexts can improve sarcasm recognition. In this work, we explore the improvements that existing methods bring by incorporating more contexts into a model. To this end, we develop a framework where we can integrate multiple contextual cues and test different approaches. In evaluation with four approaches on three sarcasm recognition benchmarks, we achieve existing state-of-the-art performances and also demonstrate the benefits of sequentially adding more contexts. We also identify inherent drawbacks of using more contexts, highlighting that in the pursuit of even better results, the model may need to adopt societal biases.