Design of Computational Identification Model and Optimization Strategy for Consumer Demand Based on Multimodal Data Fusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper draws a framework for constructing user demand modal information, uses crawler technology to obtain online review text information, processes the text information, and mines relevant consumer demand information.The LDA topic model is used to extract the topics of consumer concern from the online comments, identify the topics of consumer demand and clarify the concern degree of each demand.The KANO model is proposed to establish a consumer demand classification method based on the KANO model by combining product characteristic attributes and consumer demand information.Examine the theme discrimination performance of the LDA model on the hotel category, footwear category, and food category datasets.Combine the preprocessed user demand data to statistically quantify user demand for quantitative Kano transformation.Classify user demands into Kano categories and calculate the priority order of user demands to get the product optimization strategy.The weighted order of consumers' demands for automobiles is footrest, cigarette lighter, antenna, window, low beam, key, etc. in order.It can be found that automobile consumers pay more attention to the needs of antenna, cigarette lighter, pedals, and enhancement of accessory functions.As a result, automobile manufacturers should increase the seat comfort, improve power, enhance the flexibility of shifting such aspects of the whole vehicle handling experience, in addition to improving the lights, keys and other car quality related needs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".