MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968787508 · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2015.02.018

Intelligent customer complaint handling utilising principal component and data envelopment analysis (PDA)

2015· article· en· W1968787508 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Soft Computing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData envelopment analysisPrincipal component analysisPairwise comparisonCustomer satisfactionOrder (exchange)ViewpointsData miningRelevance (law)Operations researchAsset managementArtificial intelligenceMarketingBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we consider customer to be a company's crucial asset. In order to have a fast, efficient decision-making process, it is vital that a customer relationship management (CRM) decision-maker condenses and abstracts the existing information. A questionnaire survey was conducted among respondents in order to obtain the required data. The questionnaire contains nine categories of satisfaction variables. To perform the analysis, we used principal component analysis (PCA) and data envelopment analysis (DEA). PDA has been utilised as an abbreviation for the integration of these two methods. To effectively analyse the procedure, PCA was utilised to assign a number to each category of questions related to each satisfaction variable. To achieve optimal precision, DEA was applied to the three categories of customers (‘most important’, ‘important’ and ‘ordinary’ customers) in order to determine the strengths and weaknesses of customer services from these customers’ perspectives. Customers were clustered and then DEA was used to determine their viewpoints. Using DEA, we have optimised our recognition of customers’ complaints and then provided recommendations and remedial actions to resolve the current issues in logistics and transport industry in general, and at Fremantle port in particular. The current study integrates soft computing and optimisation technique in order to build the CRM recommender system. It demonstrates the hybrid soft computing strengthens in area of CRM as the relevance solution. The significance of the proposed algorithm is three fold. First, it integrates soft computing and optimisation technique in order to build the CRM recommender system. Second, it utilises the most standard CRM variables in its decision making process. Third, it is an optimising algorithm because it integrates DEA with PCA technique.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.207 · 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