Machine Generated Product Advertisements: Benchmarking LLMs Against Human Performance

Sanjukta Ghosh
12/27/2024
cs.CL

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 4 possible matches can be shown below.

Abstract

This study compares the performance of AI-generated and human-written product descriptions using a multifaceted evaluation model. We analyze descriptions for 100 products generated by four AI models (Gemma 2B, LLAMA, GPT2, and ChatGPT 4) with and without sample descriptions, against human-written descriptions. Our evaluation metrics include sentiment, readability, persuasiveness, Search Engine Optimization(SEO), clarity, emotional appeal, and call-to-action effectiveness. The results indicate that ChatGPT 4 performs the best. In contrast, other models demonstrate significant shortcomings, producing incoherent and illogical output that lacks logical structure and contextual relevance. These models struggle to maintain focus on the product being described, resulting in disjointed sentences that do not convey meaningful information. This research provides insights into the current capabilities and limitations of AI in the creation of content for e-Commerce.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 4 weaker matches are hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{ghosh2024machine,
  title  = {Machine Generated Product Advertisements: Benchmarking LLMs Against Human Performance},
  author = {Sanjukta Ghosh},
  year   = {2024},
  eprint = {2412.19610},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.19610v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2412.19610.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2412.19610)

Discussion