An Exhaustive Meta-Analysis on Consumer Retention Forecasting Using Advanced Machine Learning Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this meta-analysis, we present a robust approach for consumer retention forecasting by integrating advanced machine learning algorithms. The method comprises three core algorithms: Consumer Behavior Neural Network (CBNN), Retention Decision Trees (RDT), and Long ShortTerm Memory for Retention (LSTM-R). Our objective is to model intricate relationships within consumer behaviors and accurately predict their retention probabilities. Consumer Behavior Neural Network (CBNN): CBNN, a key component, adeptly captures intricate patterns within consumer behavior data. It involves multiple hidden layers with activation functions, enabling accurate prediction of retention probabilities based on input features. Retention Decision Trees (RDT): This method utilizes decision tree algorithms to predict consumer retention decisions. By recursively splitting the dataset based on information gain, RDT efficiently models consumer behavior, as depicted in the flowchart. Information gain is maximized to create a robust predictive model. Long Short-Term Memory for Retention (LSTM-R): LSTM-R, tailored for temporal data in consumer retention prediction, leverages specialized LSTM architecture. It effectively processes sequential consumer interactions, crucial for accurate prediction of consumer retention probabilities. The proposed method integrates these algorithms, leveraging historical consumer data, and conducts a comprehensive meta-analysis to evaluate their predictive performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".