Analyzing the customer purchase data of an online shopping store by data mining: A real case study in Iran
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, online shopping plays a vital role in providing services and delivering goods to customers in the context of business intelligence and e-commerce. This research analyzes the customer purchase data of an Iranian online shopping company in Tehran. Among the available datasets provided by the company, 200 thousand records of one week of transactions have been selected for the present study. Several classification methods (i.e., Random Forest, gradient-boosted trees, K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Naïve Bayes, Kernel Naïve Bayes, and Neural Networks) and clustering approaches have been applied to discover the knowledge and patterns. The results show that before balancing the dataset, the KNN algorithm with K=5 is the best classification method among the existing methods. However, after balancing, gradient-boosted trees outperform the other classification methods. For clustering methods, the results show that the K-Means algorithm with K=3 is more efficient regarding the average within centroid distance for each cluster. Finally, concluding remarks and suggestions for future studies are stated.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it