An Exact Method for (Constrained) Assortment Optimization Problems with Product Costs
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the problem of optimizing assortment decisions in the presence of product-specific costs when customers choose according to a multinomial logit model. This problem is NP-hard, and approximate solutions methods have been proposed in the literature to obtain both lower and upper bounds in a tractable manner. We propose the first exact solution method for this problem and show that provably optimal assortments of instances with up to 1,000 products can be found, on average, in about 2/10 of a second. In particular, we propose a bounding procedure to enhance an approximation method originally proposed by Feldman and Topaloglu and provide tight lower and upper bounds at a fraction of a second. We show how these bounds can be used to effectively identify an optimal assortment. We also describe how to adapt our approach to handle cardinality or space/resource capacity constraints on the assortment as well as assortment optimization under a mixed-multinomial logit model. In both cases, our solution method provides significant computational boosts compared with exact methods from the literature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it