MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283836917 · doi:10.1287/msom.2022.1128

Online Personalized Assortment Optimization with High-Dimensional Customer Contextual Data

2022· article· en· W4283836917 on OpenAlexaff
Sentao Miao, Xiuli Chao

Bibliographic record

VenueManufacturing & Service Operations Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRegretScalabilitySet (abstract data type)Relevance (law)Optimization problemCurse of dimensionalityBenchmark (surveying)Mathematical optimizationData miningMachine learningAlgorithmDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Problem definition: Consider an online personalized assortment optimization problem in which customers arrive sequentially and make their decisions (e.g., click an ad, purchase a product) following the multinomial logit choice model with unknown parameters. Utilizing a customer’s personal information that is high-dimensional, the firm selects an assortment tailored for each individual customer’s preference. Academic/practical relevance: High dimensionality of a customer’s contextual information is prevalent in real applications, and it creates tremendous computational challenge in online personalized optimization. Methodology: In this paper, an efficient learning algorithm is developed to tackle the computational complexity issue while maintaining satisfactory performance. The algorithm first applies a random projection for dimension reduction and incorporates an online convex optimization procedure for parameter estimation, thus overcoming the issue of linearly increasing computational requirement as data accumulates. Then, it integrates the upper confidence bound method to balance the exploration and revenue exploitation. Results: The theoretical performance of the algorithm in terms of regret is derived under some plausible sparsity assumption on personal information that is observed in real data, and numerical experiments using both synthetic data and a real data set from Yahoo! show that the algorithm performs very well, having scalability and significant advantage in computational time compared with benchmark methods. Managerial implications: Our findings suggest that practitioners should process high-dimensional sparse customer data with an appropriate feature engineering technique, such as random projection (instead of abandoning the sparse portion) to maximize the effectiveness of online optimization algorithms.

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)0.007
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations22
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManufacturing & Service Operations ManagementSame topicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207