Research on Try-before-you-buy Strategy Under Product Fit Uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the rapid development of online retail, the drawback of product fit uncertainty in online markets are becoming more and more prominent. In order to alleviate the impact of the product fit uncertainty, online retailers continue to introduce new service strategies. Based on the uncertainty of product matching, this paper constructs and solves the model of direct sales and try-before-you-buy(TBYB) strategy by online retailers under the premise of whether to allow returns. And explore the optimal strategy for the e-retailer in different aiming. The results show that: When the product fit is low, the optimal strategy choice for online retailers is TBYB strategy. When the product fit is high, if products are allowed to be returned, sell the product directly is the optimal strategy choice; if not, both TBYB and direct sales are optimal strategies. When the product fit is moderate, for products that are allowed to be returned, sell products directly when aiming to maximize demand and adopt the TBYB strategy when maximize profits. For products that are not allowed to be returned, Online retailers should sell products directly when aiming to maximize demand.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".