MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588202084 · doi:10.1109/ssci.2016.7849921

Customer shopping pattern prediction: A recurrent neural network approach

2016· article· en· W2588202084 on OpenAlexaff
Hojjat Salehinejad, Shahryar Rahnamayan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer churn and segmentation
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLoyaltyArtificial neural networkLoyalty business modelRecurrent neural networkCustomer relationship managementRecommender systemCustomer intelligenceCustomer retentionService (business)Artificial intelligenceService qualityMachine learningMarketingBusinessDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Customer relationship management is a popular and strategic topic in marketing and quality of service. The availability of big transactions data as well as computing systems have provided a great opportunity to model and predict customer behaviour. However, there is a lack of modern modelling and analytical methods to perform analysis on such data. Deep learning techniques can assist marketing decision makers to provide more reliable and practical marketing strategic plans. In this paper, we propose a customer behaviour prediction model using recurrent neural networks (RNNs) based on the client loyalty number (CLN), recency, frequency, and monetary (RFM) variables. The experiment results show that RNNs can predict RFM values of customers efficiently. This model can be later used in recommender systems for exclusive promotional offers and loyalty programs management.

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)0.002
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations35
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCustomer churn and segmentationFrench-language works237,207