LLMs for Customized Marketing Content Generation and Evaluation at Scale

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.17863v1
• Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2025 00:28:35 GMT
• Title: LLMs for Customized Marketing Content Generation and Evaluation at Scale
• Authors: Haoran Liu, Amir Tahmasbi, Ehtesham Sam Haque, Purak Jain,
• Abstract summary: Offsite marketing is essential in e-commerce, enabling businesses to reach customers through external platforms and drive traffic to retail websites.<n>Most current offsite marketing content is overly generic, template-based, and poorly aligned with landing pages.<n>We propose MarketingFM, a retrieval-augmented system that integrates multiple data sources to generate keyword-specific ad copy.
• Score: 3.704327107754112
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Offsite marketing is essential in e-commerce, enabling businesses to reach customers through external platforms and drive traffic to retail websites. However, most current offsite marketing content is overly generic, template-based, and poorly aligned with landing pages, limiting its effectiveness. To address these limitations, we propose MarketingFM, a retrieval-augmented system that integrates multiple data sources to generate keyword-specific ad copy with minimal human intervention. We validate MarketingFM via offline human and automated evaluations and large-scale online A/B tests. In one experiment, keyword-focused ad copy outperformed templates, achieving up to 9% higher CTR, 12% more impressions, and 0.38% lower CPC, demonstrating gains in ad ranking and cost efficiency. Despite these gains, human review of generated ads remains costly. To address this, we propose AutoEval-Main, an automated evaluation system that combines rule-based metrics with LLM-as-a-Judge techniques to ensure alignment with marketing principles. In experiments with large-scale human annotations, AutoEval-Main achieved 89.57% agreement with human reviewers. Building on this, we propose AutoEval-Update, a cost-efficient LLM-human collaborative framework to dynamically refine evaluation prompts and adapt to shifting criteria with minimal human input. By selectively sampling representative ads for human review and using a critic LLM to generate alignment reports, AutoEval-Update improves evaluation consistency while reducing manual effort. Experiments show the critic LLM suggests meaningful refinements, improving LLM-human agreement. Nonetheless, human oversight remains essential for setting thresholds and validating refinements before deployment.

Related papers

• Self-Evolving Critique Abilities in Large Language Models [59.861013614500024]
  This paper explores enhancing critique abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We introduce SCRIT, a framework that trains LLMs with self-generated data to evolve their critique abilities.<n>Our analysis reveals that SCRIT's performance scales positively with data and model size.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-10T05:51:52Z)
• Towards Understanding the Robustness of LLM-based Evaluations under Perturbations [9.944512689015998]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) can serve as automatic evaluators for non-standardized metrics in summarization and dialog-based tasks.<n>We conduct experiments across multiple prompting strategies to examine how LLMs fare as quality evaluators when compared with human judgments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T13:31:58Z)
• Automatic Evaluation for Text-to-image Generation: Task-decomposed Framework, Distilled Training, and Meta-evaluation Benchmark [62.58869921806019]
  We propose a task decomposition evaluation framework based on GPT-4o to automatically construct a new training dataset. We design innovative training strategies to effectively distill GPT-4o's evaluation capabilities into a 7B open-source MLLM, MiniCPM-V-2.6. Experimental results demonstrate that our distilled open-source MLLM significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art GPT-4o-base baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T08:06:06Z)
• LLM-Cure: LLM-based Competitor User Review Analysis for Feature Enhancement [0.7285835869818668]
  We propose a large language model (LLM)-based Competitive User Review Analysis for Feature Enhancement.<n>LLM-Cure identifies and categorizes features within reviews by applying LLMs.<n>When provided with a complaint in a user review, LLM-Cure curates highly rated (4 and 5 stars) reviews in competing apps related to the complaint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-24T04:17:21Z)
• AI-Driven Review Systems: Evaluating LLMs in Scalable and Bias-Aware Academic Reviews [18.50142644126276]
  We evaluate the alignment of automatic paper reviews with human reviews using an arena of human preferences by pairwise comparisons. We fine-tune an LLM to predict human preferences, predicting which reviews humans will prefer in a head-to-head battle between LLMs. We make the reviews of publicly available arXiv and open-access Nature journal papers available online, along with a free service which helps authors review and revise their research papers and improve their quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-19T19:10:38Z)
• Reference-Guided Verdict: LLMs-as-Judges in Automatic Evaluation of Free-Form Text [12.879551933541345]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are capable of generating human-like conversations. Conventional metrics like BLEU and ROUGE are inadequate for capturing the subtle semantics and contextual richness of such generative outputs. We propose a reference-guided verdict method that automates the evaluation process by leveraging multiple LLMs-as-judges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-17T16:01:45Z)
• Auto-Arena: Automating LLM Evaluations with Agent Peer Battles and Committee Discussions [77.66677127535222]
  Auto-Arena is an innovative framework that automates the entire evaluation process using LLM-powered agents. In our experiments, Auto-Arena shows a 92.14% correlation with human preferences, surpassing all previous expert-annotated benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-30T17:19:19Z)
• Self-Improving Customer Review Response Generation Based on LLMs [1.9274286238176854]
  SCRABLE represents an adaptive customer review response automation that enhances itself with self-optimizing prompts. We introduce an automatic scoring mechanism that mimics the role of a human evaluator to assess the quality of responses generated in customer review domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-06T20:50:17Z)
• RepEval: Effective Text Evaluation with LLM Representation [55.26340302485898]
  RepEval is a metric that leverages the projection of Large Language Models (LLMs) representations for evaluation. Our work underscores the richness of information regarding text quality embedded within LLM representations, offering insights for the development of new metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-30T13:50:55Z)
• MLLM-Bench: Evaluating Multimodal LLMs with Per-sample Criteria [49.500322937449326]
  Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have broadened the scope of AI applications. Existing automatic evaluation methodologies for MLLMs are mainly limited in evaluating queries without considering user experiences. We propose a new evaluation paradigm for MLLMs, which is evaluating MLLMs with per-sample criteria using potent MLLM as the judge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-23T12:04:25Z)
• Calibrating LLM-Based Evaluator [92.17397504834825]
  We propose AutoCalibrate, a multi-stage, gradient-free approach to calibrate and align an LLM-based evaluator toward human preference. Instead of explicitly modeling human preferences, we first implicitly encompass them within a set of human labels. Our experiments on multiple text quality evaluation datasets illustrate a significant improvement in correlation with expert evaluation through calibration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-23T08:46:11Z)
• From Quantity to Quality: Boosting LLM Performance with Self-Guided Data Selection for Instruction Tuning [52.257422715393574]
  We introduce a self-guided methodology for Large Language Models (LLMs) to autonomously discern and select cherry samples from open-source datasets. Our key innovation, the Instruction-Following Difficulty (IFD) metric, emerges as a pivotal metric to identify discrepancies between a model's expected responses and its intrinsic generation capability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-23T09:45:29Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.