AI News HubLIVE
原文2 min read

Shopping Reasoning Bench: An Expert-Authored Benchmark for Multi-Turn Conversational Shopping Assistants

The Shopping Reasoning Bench is a new benchmark created by retail domain experts, consisting of 525 missions (232 single-turn, 293 multi-turn) and 10,863 importance-weighted binary rubrics. It evaluates multi-turn reasoning capabilities such as preference refinement, trade-off analysis, and compatibility assessment in conversational shopping assistants. Evaluations of top models (GPT, Claude, Gemini) show overall pass rates of only 57-77%, with significant degradation in multi-turn tasks, highlighting a gap in expert-level advice.

SourcearXiv Computational LinguisticsAuthor: Shuxian Fan, Seonwoo Min, Youna Hu, Botao Xia, Jayakrishnan Unnikrishnan, Rowan Musselmann, Yifan Gao, Qingyu Yin, Priyanka Nigam, Bing Yin

[2606.12608] Shopping Reasoning Bench: An Expert-Authored Benchmark for Multi-Turn Conversational Shopping Assistants

[Submitted on 10 Jun 2026]

Title:Shopping Reasoning Bench: An Expert-Authored Benchmark for Multi-Turn Conversational Shopping Assistants

View a PDF of the paper titled Shopping Reasoning Bench: An Expert-Authored Benchmark for Multi-Turn Conversational Shopping Assistants, by Shuxian Fan and 9 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Conversational shopping assistants now serve hundreds of millions of customers, yet no existing benchmark jointly evaluates the open-ended multi-turn reasoning, domain expertise, and criterion-level quality that real shopping conversations demand. Shopping reasoning is unique among language model applications. Unlike factual question answering or verifiable code generation, it requires balancing subjective preferences, budget constraints, and cross-product trade-offs across multi-turn dialogue, capabilities absent from previous e-commerce and general-purpose benchmarks. We introduce the Shopping Reasoning Bench, an expert-authored benchmark of 525 missions (232 single-turn, 293 multi-turn) with 10863 importance-weighted binary rubrics authored by retail domain experts. These criteria are organized under a taxonomy of five reasoning categories and fifteen subcategories covering diverse demands such as preference refinement, trade-off analysis, and compatibility assessment. An evaluation of nine models across three families (GPT, Claude, Gemini) shows that pass rates reach only 57--77% overall. On multi-turn missions, all models score 13--29 points lower on optional above-and-beyond criteria than on required ones, and performance degrades 4--18 points as conversations progress. These gaps show that current models handle basic shopping assistance but fall short of expert-level advice, making Shopping Reasoning Bench a challenging testbed for future shopping assistant development.

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

Cite as: arXiv:2606.12608 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2606.12608v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.12608

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Seonwoo Min [view email] [v1] Wed, 10 Jun 2026 19:04:09 UTC (339 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Shopping Reasoning Bench: An Expert-Authored Benchmark for Multi-Turn Conversational Shopping Assistants, by Shuxian Fan and 9 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.CL

new | recent | 2026-06

Change to browse by:

cs cs.LG

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)