A Preference-Aware Interactive System for Online Shopping
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preference Elicitation is very important for online shopping interactive applications. The potential buyers usually have interest in some of the attributes of the product they want to purchase. While the current online shopping systems allow the users to provide some keywords and other information in order to ?lter and get only what they need, these latter feel that what they get does not necessarily meet their satisfaction. In this paper, we propose a new shopping system that enables the customers to express their needs when buying a product online. More precisely, the users are given the ability to provide their requirements and desires in a friendly and interactive way. The system will then provide a list of suggestions meeting the users’ requirements and maximizing their desires. Requirements and desires are managed, in a unique model, respectively as a set of hard constraints and preferences where these latter can be quantitative (numerical), qualitative (ordinal) or both. These constraints and preferences represent a constraint optimization problem where optimal solutions (best outcomes) are those satisfying the hard constraints and maximizing the user’s preferences. The branch and bound method is applied in order to provide the user with a list of best outcomes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it