Data Mining for Inventory Item Selection with Cross-Selling Considerations
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
Association rule mining, studied for over ten years in the literature of data mining, aims to help enterprises with sophisticated decision making, but the resulting rules typically cannot be directly applied and require further processing. In this paper, we propose a method for actionable recommendations from itemset analysis and investigate an application of the concepts of association rules—maximal-profit item selection with cross-selling effect (MPIS). This problem is about choosing a subset of items which can give the maximal profit with the consideration of cross-selling effect. A simple approach to this problem is shown to be NP-hard. A new approach is proposed with consideration of the loss rule—a rule similar to the association rule—to model the cross-selling effect. We show that MPIS can be approximated by a quadratic programming problem. We also propose a greedy approach and a genetic algorithm to deal with this problem. Experiments are conducted, which show that our proposed approaches are highly effective and efficient.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it