PreprintCited by 21Topic ModelingInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorRecommender Systems and Techniques

eCeLLM: Generalizing Large Language Models for E-commerce from Large-scale, High-quality Instruction Data

Open access
Peng, Bo, Ling, Xinyi, Chen, Ziru, Sun, Huan, Ning, Xia·2024·arXiv

Abstract

With tremendous efforts on developing effective e-commerce models, conventional e-commerce models show limited success in generalist e-commerce modeling, and suffer from unsatisfactory performance on new users and new products - a typical out-of-domain generalization challenge. Meanwhile, large language models (LLMs) demonstrate outstanding performance in generalist modeling and out-of-domain generalizability in many fields. Toward fully unleashing their power for e-commerce, in this paper, we construct ECInstruct, the first open-sourced, large-scale, and high-quality benchmark instruction dataset for e-commerce. Leveraging ECInstruct, we develop eCeLLM, a series of e-commerce LLMs, by instruction-tuning general-purpose LLMs. Our comprehensive experiments and evaluation demonstrate that eCeLLM models substantially outperform baseline models, including the most advanced GPT-4, and the state-of-the-art task-specific models in in-domain evaluation. Moreover, eCeLLM exhibits excellent generalizability to out-of-domain settings, including unseen products and unseen instructions, highlighting its superiority as a generalist e-commerce model. Both the ECInstruct dataset and the eCeLLM models show great potential in empowering versatile and effective LLMs for e-commerce. ECInstruct and eCeLLM models are publicly accessible through https://ninglab.github.io/eCeLLM.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2402.08831

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Peng et al. (2024) show that instruction-tuning LLMs on large-scale e-commerce data meaningfully improves generalization to unseen products and tasks.

    “Domain-specific evidence reinforces this shift: Peng et al. (2024) show that instruction-tuning LLMs on large-scale e-commerce data meaningfully improves generalization to unseen products and tasks, and Hou et al. (2024) introduce Amazon Reviews 2023 together with a complex product search setting that emphasizes long, natural-language shopping contexts-the same regime E-GEO targets.”

    From E-GEO: A Testbed for Generative Engine Optimization in E-Commerce (2025) · cites this paper as Peng et al., 2024

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peng, B., Ling, X., Chen, Z., Sun, H., & Ning, X.
Affiliations
The Ohio State University (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4391835378
Cited by
21
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
Keywords
e-commerce, large language models, instruction tuning, out-of-domain generalization

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