A reinforcement learning based dynamic room pricing model for hotel industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we propose a novel model to design dynamic hotel room pricing strategies that consider the specific requirements associated with the tourism sector. Reinforcement learning (RL) is used to formulate the problem as a Markov decision process (MDP) and Q-learning is used to solve this problem with a new reward function for hotel room pricing which considers both the profit and demand. In the proposed model, the basic features of the hotels are digitized and expressed in a way that similar hotels get close values. In this way, price predictions for the hotels that are newly included in the system can be made through similar hotels and the cold start problem is solved. In order to observe the performance of the proposed model, we used a real-world dataset provided by a tourism agency in Turkey and the results show that the proposed model achieves less mean absolute percentage error on test data. In addition, we also observe the training phase and show that the proposed RL method has smooth reward transitions between timesteps and has a reward curve more similar to the desired exponential rise compared to recently recommended RL models with different reward functions in dynamic pricing.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".