MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392756544 · doi:10.1177/10591478241240744

Modeling Sales of Multigeneration Technology Products in the Presence of Frequent Repeat Purchases: A Fractional Calculus-Based Approach

2024· article· en· W4392756544 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Lotfi, Zhengrui Jiang, Joe Naoum‐Sawaya, Mehmet A. Begen

Bibliographic record

VenueProduction and Operations Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicInnovation Diffusion and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFractional calculusCalculus (dental)EconometricsEconomicsMathematicsApplied mathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frequently releasing a new product generation has become a common practice to sustain sales over time, thus accurately forecasting the sales trajectory of each product generation plays a vital role in the short-, medium-, and long-term planning of a firm. Classic multigeneration diffusion models do not incorporate within-generation repeat purchases, making them unusable for product lines with high rates of such purchases. Concentrating on technology products, we develop a multigeneration sales model to fill this void. We demonstrate that the new model can be used for predictive and prescriptive analytics. Our empirical results show that the new model estimates and forecasts sales more accurately than a state-of-the-art benchmark model that does not account for within-generation repeat purchases, underscoring the importance of incorporating repeat purchases. Furthermore, we use two different versions of our model to examine market entry timing under two main strategies, that is, (i) a phase-out transition strategy in which firms continue to sell the old generation after the release of the new generation, and (ii) a total transition strategy in which firms discontinue the old generation after the introduction of the new generation. Our results indicate that the repeat purchases rate determines whether it is optimal to expedite or delay the new product launch, underscoring the importance of incorporating repeat purchases in market entry strategies.

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)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProduction and Operations ManagementSame topicInnovation Diffusion and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207