MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1486184885 · doi:10.1109/eee.2005.119

Service Demand Analysis Using Customer-choice Behavior Modeling, with Consideration of Awareness and Perception

2005· article· en· W1486184885 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Takeshi Kurosawa, A. Inoue, Ken Nishimatsu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité Laval
KeywordsComputer scienceService (business)The InternetService providerTelecommunications serviceConsumer behaviourPerceptionMarketingTelecommunicationsBusinessWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a method of customer-choice behavior modeling for analyzing demand for telecommunication and Internet services. We have proposed a framework for analyzing service demand, which can be used to simulate scenarios under various assumed conditions. It consists of a customer behavior model, a service model, an environment model, and scenario simulation functions. A customer behavior model is constructed for each customer segment in order to improve the accuracy of the overall model. Customers are classified into several segments according to not only their preferences or attributes but also their knowledge of services, including existing services and their specifications. This paper examines customer-choice behavior modeling using awareness and perception of services. It shows service demand analysis for providers of various Internet access line services as an application example. It also demonstrates that the proposed method effectively improves the accuracy of modeling demand.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207