MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294219301 · doi:10.5539/ijms.v14n2p83

Research on the Evaluation of E-Commerce Cold Chain Food Consumption Based on Big Data

2022· article· en· W4294219301 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Guo Chen, Yi Qin Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marketing Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatent Dirichlet allocationComputer sciencePython (programming language)E-commerceMarketingSentiment analysisCold chainMainstreamConsumer behaviourAdvertisingTopic modelBusinessInformation retrievalArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In response to the problems of low efficiency and high cost of offline questionnaires, lack of keyword-consumer attitude correlation in online comment analysis, and little help for optimization solutions, an opinion analysis and improvement evaluation model based on sentiment analysis and Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) document topic generation model is proposed. Using cold-chain food as the research object, a custom Python program was used to crawl the online consumer reviews about cold-chain food from Jingdong, a mainstream Chinese e-commerce company. A total of 70,134 reviews were obtained, including 65,535 valid reviews, which were analyzed by the LDA topic model and SnowNLP sentiment analysis to obtain the influencing factors and specific scores that affect consumer satisfaction. Then the importance ranking of the influencing factors was obtained by combining the word frequency and scores. Finally, based on the rankings and the reasons generated, suggestions are made for developing products and services for cold chain food. From theory and practice, it provides a reference basis for developing cold chain technology and consumer behavior research.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.538
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.027 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marketing StudiesSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207