A Shopping Agent for Addressing Subjective Product Needs
Open accessAbstract
In e-commerce, customers often struggle to find relevant items when their needs involve subjective properties characterized by personal or collective perception, tastes, and opinions, which are typically not captured in catalog data. This challenge is particularly pronounced in event-based scenarios like gifting, where selecting the right product involves complex subjective reasoning. Customer reviews can be a valuable source of subjective information to bridge this gap. Consequently, customers often spend significant amount of time navigating multiple products and reading numerous reviews to find suitable gifts that meet their needs. In order to reduce the effort involved, we propose an agentic approach driven by large language models to streamline this process by autonomously executing various user actions. These include computational tasks like vagueness detection and subjective product needs extraction, conversational interactions to gather missing user information, and web browsing actions that search for product details, reviews, and review images. Additionally, the agent employs generative actions to synthesize gifting ideas and explanations, helping users discover suitable products more efficiently. The proposed approach not only reduces the cognitive burden on users but also facilitates the exploration of a wider range of products. Our solution highlights the potential of autonomous agents to handle subjective queries in e-commerce, enhancing personalization, product…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Agents already perform, albeit imperfectly, tasks such as shopping, negotiation, or search for products on e-commerce sites.
“This possibility is near, as agents already perform, albeit imperfectly, tasks such as shopping (Dammu et al. 2025), negotiation (Zhu et al. 2025), or search for products on e-commerce sites (Zeff 2025;Allouah et al. 2025).”
From The Coasean Singularity? Demand, Supply, and Market Design with AI Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Dammu et al. 2025
Cites
WebShop: Towards Scalable Real-World Web Interaction with Grounded Language Agents
Yao, S., Chen, H., Yang, J., & Narasimhan, K. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2207.01206 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Coasean Singularity? Demand, Supply, and Market Design with AI Agents
Shahidi, P., Rusak, G., Manning, B., Fradkin, A., & Horton, J. (2025) · doi:10.3386/w34468 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Allouah, A., Besbes, O., Figueroa, J., Kanoria, Y., & Kumar, A. (2025) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5381574 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Allouah, A., Besbes, O., Figueroa, J. D., Kanoria, Y., & Kumar, A. (2026) · Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2026 · doi:10.1145/3774904.3792943 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Allouah, A., Besbes, O., Figueroa, J. D., Kanoria, Y., & Kumar, A. (2025) · arXiv
- Authors
- Dammu, P. P. S., Alonso, O., & Poblete, B.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Amazon (United States) (US)
- Amazon, Seattle, WA, United States
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Eighteenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2025-03-10
- Pages
- 1032-1035
- OpenAlex
- W4407953163
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3
- FWCI
- 8.00
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web Data Mining and Analysis
- Keywords
- shopping agents, gift-giving, customer reviews, large language models, chatbots, generative AI agents, e-commerce personalization, product recommendation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review