MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Product selection in Internet business: a fuzzy approach

2009· article· en· W2129889618 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

VenueInternational Transactions in Operational Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuzzy logicProduct (mathematics)Computer scienceThe InternetSelection (genetic algorithm)PreferenceMeasure (data warehouse)Voice of the customerFuzzy numberFuzzy setData miningOperations researchMathematicsMarketingBusinessArtificial intelligenceStatisticsCustomer retentionWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, we propose a methodology which helps customers buy products through the Internet. This procedure takes into account the customer's level of desire in the product attributes, which are normally fuzzy, or in linguistically defined terms. The concept of fuzzy number will be used to measure the degree of similarities of the available products to that of the customer's requirements. The degrees of similarities so obtained over all the attributes give rise to the fuzzy probabilities and hence the fuzzy expected values of availing a product on the Internet as per the customer's requirement. Attribute‐wise the fuzzy expected values are compared with those of the available products on the Internet and the product that is closest to the customer's preference is selected as the best product. The multi‐attribute weighted average method is used here to evaluate and hence to select the best product.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.358
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.172 · 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