mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Few-Shot and Training-Free Review Generation via Conversational Prompting

arXiv 2509.20805 ↗First posted 25 Sep 2025cs.CL cs.IRcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Personalized review generation helps businesses understand user preferences, yet most existing approaches assume extensive review histories of the target user or require additional model training. Real-world applications often face few-shot and training-free situations, where only a few user reviews are available and fine-tuning is infeasible. It is well known that large language models (LLMs) can address such low-resource settings, but their effectiveness depends on prompt engineering. In this paper, we propose Conversational Prompting, a lightweight method that reformulates user reviews as multi-turn conversations. Its simple variant, Simple Conversational Prompting (SCP), relies solely on the user's own reviews, while the contrastive variant, Contrastive Conversational Prompting (CCP), inserts reviews from other users or LLMs as incorrect replies and then asks the model to correct them, encouraging the model to produce text in the user's style. Experiments on eight product domains and five LLMs showed that the conventional non-conversational prompt often produced reviews similar to those written by random users, based on text-based metrics such as ROUGE-L and BERTScore, and application-oriented tasks like user identity matching and sentiment analysis. In contrast, both SCP and CCP produced reviews much closer to those of the target user, even when each user had only two reviews. CCP brings further improvements when high-quality negative examples are available, whereas SCP remains competitive when such data cannot be collected. These results suggest that conversational prompting offers a practical solution for review generation under few-shot and training-free constraints.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Sep 2025.

Builds on

18 of 30 references.

References · 18

  1. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
  2. 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,442
  3. 2020TweetEval: Unified Benchmark and Comparative Evaluation for Tweet Classificationcited by 417
  4. 2024LLM Agents Grounded in Self-Reports Enable General-Purpose Simulation of Individualscited by 249
  5. 2024Bridging Language and Items for Retrieval and Recommendation: Benchmarking LLMs as Semantic Encoderscited by 224
  6. 2024From Persona to Personalization: A Survey on Role-Playing Language Agentscited by 212
  7. 2023Is ChatGPT a Good Recommender? A Preliminary Studycited by 193
  8. 2024Mind Your Step (by Step): Chain-of-Thought can Reduce Performance on Tasks where Thinking Makes Humans Worsecited by 109
  9. 2024OpenReviewer: A Specialized Large Language Model for Generating Critical Scientific Paper Reviewscited by 65
  10. 2025Personalized Generation In Large Model Era: A Surveycited by 45
  11. 2025Learning without training: The implicit dynamics of in-context learningcited by 43
  12. 2024An Information-Theoretic Analysis of In-Context Learningcited by 40
6 more
  1. 2024XRec: Large Language Models for Explainable Recommendationcited by 35
  2. 2019Towards Controllable and Personalized Review Generationcited by 24
  3. 2023Explainable Recommendation with Personalized Review Retrieval and Aspect Learningcited by 19
  4. 2024Review-LLM: Harnessing Large Language Models for Personalized Review Generationcited by 14
  5. 2019Generating Long and Informative Reviews with Aspect-Aware Coarse-to-Fine Decodingcited by 13
  6. 2025Modeling Earth-Scale Human-Like Societies with One Billion Agentscited by 8

Built on by

Not cited yet.