mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Language Models for Page-Level Layout Decisions in E-commerce Search

arXiv 2610.10920 ↗First posted 7 Oct 2026cs.LG cs.CL cs.IRcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

E-commerce search pages are critical touchpoints for millions of online shoppers. While traditional search engines return a ranked list of results, modern E-commerce search pages increasingly incorporate recommender system modules -- for example, secondary stacks that surface alternative product groupings at specific positions. When introduced appropriately, secondary stacks can improve user engagement; however, suboptimal placement may disrupt browsing flow and degrade the primary results. Unlike traditional search ranking, where evaluation techniques such as interleaving are well established, evaluating page-level layout changes e.g., when and where to insert a secondary stack remains challenging without costly online A/B testing. To address this, we study offline methods for evaluating whether a given layout decision -- specifically, the inclusion of a secondary stack at a particular position -- is beneficial to users. We investigate language models as scalable evaluators by comparing direct prompt-based, prompt-derived feature, and representation-based methods. Our results show that representation-based approaches consistently outperform prompt-based judging in predicting user engagement, suggesting they provide a reliable foundation for offline layout evaluation in E-commerce search.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 13 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2026.

Builds on

5 of 13 references.

References · 5

  1. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,065
  2. 2024ScreenAI: A Vision-Language Model for UI and Infographics Understandingcited by 97
  3. 2025MLLM as a UI Judge: Benchmarking Multimodal LLMs for Predicting Human Perception of User Interfacescited by 11
  4. 2024Large Language Models for Relevance Judgment in Product Searchcited by 8
  5. 2024LLMJudge: LLMs for Relevance Judgmentscited by 5

Built on by

Not cited yet.