MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014694269 · doi:10.1002/for.2689

Predictive modeling of consumer color preference: Using retail data and merchandise images

2020· article· en· W3014694269 on OpenAlexaff
Songtao Li, Ruoran Chen, Lijian Yang, Ding-Long Huang, Simin Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forecasting · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMultinomial logistic regressionPopularitySample (material)PreferenceConsumer behaviourProduct (mathematics)Computer scienceOrder (exchange)Function (biology)AdvertisingEconometricsBusinessEconomicsMathematicsMachine learningMicroeconomicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The popularity of a fashion item depends on its color, shape, texture, and price. For different items (with all attributes identical except color) of a specific product, fashion retailers need to learn consumer color preference and decide their order quantities accordingly to match their products to consumer demand. This study aims to predict consumer color preference using the knowledge learned from merchandise images, historical retail data, and fashion trends. In our work, merchandise images are analyzed to extract color features, and the retail data of a sportswear retailer are used to reveal consumer choices among items with various colors. Choice behavior is described by a multinomial logit model, whose utility function captures the relationship between color features and popularity. Both linear functions and neural networks are applied to represent the utility function, and their out‐of‐sample prediction performances are compared. According to the out‐of‐sample performance test, our model shows reasonable predictive power and can outperform order decisions made by fashion buyers.

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)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.492
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.115 · 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

Citations25
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ForecastingSame topicColor perception and designFrench-language works237,207