MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751548166 · doi:10.5539/mas.v11n9p151

Unsupervised Learning Framework for Customer Requisition and Behavioral Pattern Classification

2017· article· en· W2751548166 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer churn and segmentation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTertiary Education Trust Fund
KeywordsComputer sciencePurchasingUnsupervised learningDatabase transactionBehavioral patternMarket segmentationPartition (number theory)Data miningArtificial intelligenceKnowledge managementBusinessMarketingDatabaseMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maintaining healthy organization-customers relationship has positive influence on customers’ behavioral tendencies as regards preference to products and services, buying behavior, loyalty, satisfaction, and so on. To achieve this, an in-depth analysis of customers’ characteristics and purchasing behavioral trend is required. This paper proposes a hybrid unsupervised learning framework consisting of k-means algorithm and self-organizing maps (SOMs) for customer segmentation and behavior analysis. K-means algorithm was used to partition the entire input space of customers’ transaction dataset into 3 and 4 disjoint segments based on customers’ frequency (F) and monetary value (MV). SOM provided visualization of the underlying clusters and discovered customers’ relationships in the dataset. Interaction of F and MV clusters resulted in 12 sub-clusters. An in-depth analysis of each sub-cluster was also performed and appropriate customer relationship management (CRM) strategies established for each sub-cluster. Discovered knowledge will guide effective allocation of resources to each customer cluster and other organizational decision support functions much required by CRM systems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
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 score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.251 · 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