PALATE: Pretrained Autoregressive LATent Embeddings
Organizations: DoorDash Seattle, WA, USA · DoorDash San Francisco, CA, USA
Abstract
Local-commerce and food-delivery marketplaces run large ads businesses: across hundreds of thousands of stores, merchants pay to be surfaced on browse and search surfaces, and a ranker decides which ads each consumer sees. Ranking well demands strong per-consumer personalization, yet a consumer's raw interaction history is sparse and high-cardinality. Our production ranker had personalized only through hand-engineered signals: aggregate engagement counts, categorical embeddings, and order-agnostic pooled history, with no learned per-consumer sequence representation. We learn one by training a GPT-style generative model of the consumer's engagement sequence to predict their next few engagements, and read its last-token hidden state as the consumer embedding. That single frozen vector becomes one shared personalization input for every ad surface: a daily job refreshes it, and each ranker consumes it as an ordinary dense feature. Offline it is the largest single-feature gain in our ranking-AUC ladder, a relative Eval-AUC gain of +0.59% on a browse-driven feed and +0.57% on a query-driven search surface. Online, it shipped as one component of bundled ranker retrains on both surfaces: Discovery (revenue +0.79%, conversion rate +1.17%) and Search (revenue +0.94%, conversion rate +1.50%). Three design choices adapt the generative objective to a repurchase-heavy marketplace, and are the core of our contribution: an exploration-weighted loss that up-weights businesses new to the consumer over ones already engaged; a two-stage curriculum: a click pretrain that keeps the representation broad and exploratory, then a conversion fine-tune that sharpens purchase intent; and a designed negative set that pairs a fixed popular-business pool and businesses shown but not ordered with random and in-batch negatives.
Figures & tables
| Design choice | R@10 | R@30 | MRR | New R@10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hard negatives | +14.3% | +9.0% | +8.2% | – |
| Exploration weighting 3:1 | 7.0% | 3.5% | 5.7% | +18.4% |
| Exploration weighting 9:1 | 20.4% | 11.1% | 19.8% | +29.1% |
| Distinct sequence | 67.5% | 46.5% | 75.5% | – |
| Time-decay attn (replace pos.) | 5.0% | 3.7% | 5.4% | – |
| Time-decay attn ( pos.) | 3.7% | 3.1% | 3.4% | – |
| Component added | % impr. |
|---|---|
| Store emb. mean-pooled last- converted-store emb. | +0.33% |
| user embedding, uniform weighting | 0.00% |
| user embedding, 9:1 weighting, as (Eq. 2 ) | +0.59% |
| DIN attention over the raw history | +0.03% |
| Metric | Discovery | Search |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | +0.79% | +0.94% |
| CVR | +1.17% | +1.50% |
| CTR | 0.10% (n.s.) | +1.38% |
| eCPM | +0.66% | +1.56% |
| ROAS | +0.13% (n.s.) | 0.01% (n.s.) |
Recommender Systems
Recommender systems predict and rank items for people using interaction histories, content, context, and feedback.
See all 521 papers