Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 6, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Estimating advertising performance in cold-start settings is challenging because historical logs are unavailable before launch. Large language models (LLMs) offer a potential alternative by simulating persona-conditioned user responses, but it remains unclear which design choices actually drive LLM-based persona simulation. Using real Google Ads e-commerce campaign data across five demographic segments, we identify three signal-form dimensions that affect simulation quality: (i) a demographic anchor without noisy rich attributes, (ii) a relative qualitative banner-blindness signal rather than quantitative anchors, and (iii) prompt phrasing. On this campaign, our method attains an MAE of 24.9 and a MAPE of 26.1%, a 51.3% lower MAE than the best tested non-LLM baseline and 77.3% lower than an LLM configuration using explicit CTR anchors. Systematic ablations show that minimal demographic descriptions achieve lower mean error than richer persona configurations, while relative qualitative cues substantially outperform the tested quantitative anchors. We additionally compare these configurations with direct-prior and rule-based baselines and with alternative LLM configurations.