MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393277218 · doi:10.3126/harvest.v3i1.64191

Customers’ Preference of Palpali Dhaka Garments in Kathmandu Valley Ordered Logistic Model

2024· article· en· W4393277218 on OpenAlexaff
Yogesh Ghimire, Udaya Raj Paudel, Devid Kumar Basyal, Purnima Lawaju, Anil Bhandari

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Harvest · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Trade and Competitiveness
Canadian institutionsQuest University Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClothingPreferenceLogistic regressionGeographyBusinessStatisticsMathematicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dhaka is a handcrafted cloth with a specific meaning in Nepal. Despite its indigenous value, Producer & Supplier are not aware in promotional activity of the Palpali Dhaka garment is not sufficient. So, there is lack in preference of Palpali Dhaka garment. Therefore, the aim of this study is to analyze the determinant of customer preference of Palpali Dhaka garment in Kathmandu valley. Following exploratory research design was adopted and data was collected using structured questionnaire. Where ordered logistic model was used for inferential analysis, both descriptive and inferential analysis was used. Respondent were sampled from Kathmandu valley. Simple random sampling technique was used for 196 respondents. KOBO toolbox was used for data collection. The study found that the promotion of Palpali Dhaka garment is affected by major determinants. The factors which are significant to customer preference of Palpali Dhaka garment are Brand, Quality, Knowledge source, Family type, Advertising, Reducing Challenges which shape customer preference. Based on the findings of the study, the study concluded that for the better promotion of Palpali Dhaka garment the producer and supplier should improve promotional activity, improve Brand and Quality of Palpali Dhaka.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe HarvestSame topicGlobal Trade and CompetitivenessFrench-language works237,207