Myth: sprinkle LSI keywords to boost relevance

Myth: sprinkle LSI keywords to boost relevance

Tools sell "LSI keyword" lists; the term itself is a misnomer that has misled a generation of writers.

Latent Semantic Indexing is a 1980s information-retrieval technique using singular value decomposition on a fixed document set. Google has stated plainly it does not use LSI — its scale and live index make the classic method impractical. "LSI keywords" as sold are just related terms, repackaged with a sciencey name.

The underlying instinct — cover semantically related concepts — is correct. The framing is wrong, and it leads to keyword-stuffing synonyms as if hitting a checklist.

— Cover related entities and sub-topics because they signal genuine depth, not because of "LSI"
— Skip tools that promise magic LSI terms; use them only as topic-coverage prompts

Nuance: modern systems do use embeddings (a far more advanced semantic method), so semantic relatedness matters — just not via the mechanism the myth names.

Method note: Google statements denying LSI use; IR literature on what LSI actually is.
Confidence: high