Controlling Output Rankings in Generative Engines for LLM-based Search
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The way customers search for and choose products is changing with the rise of large language models (LLMs). LLM-based search, or generative engines, provides direct product recommendations to users, rather than traditional online search results that require users to explore options themselves. However, these recommendations are strongly influenced by the initial retrieval order of LLMs, which disadvantages small businesses and independent creators by limiting their visibility. In this work, we propose CORE, an optimization method that Controls Output Rankings in gEnerative Engines for LLM-based search. Since the LLM's interactions with the search engine are black-box, CORE targets the content returned by search engines as the primary means of influencing output rankings. Specifically, CORE optimizes retrieved content by appending strategically designed optimization content to steer the ranking of outputs. We introduce three types of optimization content: string-based, reasoning-based, and review-based, demonstrating their effectiveness in shaping output rankings. To evaluate CORE in realistic settings, we introduce ProductBench, a large-scale benchmark with 15 product categories and 200 products per category, where each product is associated with its top-10 recommendations collected from Amazon's search interface. Extensive experiments on four LLMs with search capabilities (GPT-4o, Gemini-2.5, Claude-4, and Grok-3) demonstrate that CORE achieves an average Promotion Success Rate of 91.4% @Top-5, 86.6% @Top-3, and 80.3% @Top-1, across 15 product categories, outperforming existing ranking manipulation methods while preserving the fluency of optimized content.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Feb 2026.
Builds on
16 of 24 references.
References · 16
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
- 2024GPT-4o System Cardcited by 4,588
- 2023Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Modelscited by 264
- 2024Does Refusal Training in LLMs Generalize to the Past Tense?cited by 79
- 2024JailbreakZoo: Survey, Landscapes, and Horizons in Jailbreaking Large Language and Vision-Language Modelscited by 70
- 2023GEO: Generative Engine Optimizationcited by 56
- 2024Jailbreaking Large Language Models Against Moderation Guardrails via Cipher Characterscited by 42
- 2024Adversarial Search Engine Optimization for Large Language Modelscited by 40
- 2024Manipulating Large Language Models to Increase Product Visibilitycited by 28
- 2024Ranking Manipulation for Conversational Search Enginescited by 26
4 more
- 2025CheatAgent: Attacking LLM-Empowered Recommender Systems via LLM Agentcited by 25
- 2024Stealthy Attack on Large Language Model based Recommendationcited by 19
- 2025StealthRank: LLM Ranking Manipulation via Stealthy Prompt Optimizationcited by 12
- 2025Are LLMs Reliable Rankers? Rank Manipulation via Two-Stage Token Optimizationcited by 9
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
- 2026EcoGEO: Trajectory-Aware Evidence Ecosystems for Web-Enabled LLM Search Agentscited by 3
- 2026When Optimization Becomes Manipulation: Defending Generative Search against Malicious Generative Engine Optimizationcited by 1
- 2026CHASE: How Content Ecosystems Are Reshaped When Ranking Is the Only Targetcited by 0
- 2026When Optimization Becomes Manipulation: Defending Generative Search against Malicious Generative Engine Optimization2 Sep 2026
- 2026CHASE: How Content Ecosystems Are Reshaped When Ranking Is the Only Target31 Aug 2026
- 2026EcoGEO: Trajectory-Aware Evidence Ecosystems for Web-Enabled LLM Search Agents13 May 2026