MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914624293 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2019.1.005

Problems faced by online customers – A Garret Ranking Approach

2019· article· en· W2914624293 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S. Ramesh

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRanking (information retrieval)MarketingBusinessProcess managementEnvironmental economicsInformation retrievalEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development in internet technologies provides various innovative business opportunities and creates competitiveness among the electronic marketers in online marketing.The satisfaction of customers in e-purchase depends on various problems and facilities which are prevailing in the online market.The study was conducted with the aim of analyzing and ranking the problems of customers in online purchase.The study also examined the relationship between the demographic variables and problems faced by online customers.The data was collected from 512 online customers who are living in Bengaluru city, Karnataka through questionnaires during the month of August 2018.Garret ranking was used to find out the ranking distribution pattern of customers in online purchase.The problems 'product variation' and 'faulty products' have been quoted as the major problems faced by the online customers irrespective of the demographic their profile.The ranking pattern of the third major problem 'delay in delivery' differs with respect to education and customers' income.The ranking pattern for the problem 'fake website' was significantly different with respect to gender, age and education of customers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicConsumer Market Behavior and PricingFrench-language works237,207