MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7042990620

Relationship between product based loyalty and clustering based on supermarket visit and spending patterns

2011· article· en· W7042990620 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueSaint Mary's University Institutional Repository (Saint Mary's University) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer churn and segmentation
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoyaltyLoyalty business modelProduct (mathematics)Variety (cybernetics)Consumer behaviourCustomer relationship managementData collectionCluster analysisProduct category
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Loyalty of customers to a supermarket can be measured in a variety of ways. If a customer
\ntends to buy from certain categories of products, it is likely that the customer is loyal to the
\nsupermarket. Another indication of loyalty is based on the tendency of customers to visit the
\nsupermarket over a number of weeks. Regular visitors and spenders are more likely to be loyal
\nto the supermarket. Neither one of these two criteria can provide a complete picture of
\ncustomers’ loyalty. The decision regarding the loyalty of a customer will have to take into
\naccount the visiting pattern as well as the categories of products purchased. This paper
\ndescribes results of experiments that attempted to identify customer loyalty using thes e two
\nsets of criteria separately. The experiments were based on transactional data obtained from a
\nsupermarket data collection program. Comparisons of results from these parallel sets of
\nexperiments were useful in fine tuning both the schemes of estimating the degree of loyalty of
\na customer. The project also provides useful insights for the development of more sophisticated
\nmeasures for studying customer loyalty. It is hoped that the understanding of loyal customers
\nwill be helpful in identifying better marketing strategies.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.164 · 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.

Study designObservational
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSaint Mary's University Institutional Repository (Saint Mary's University)Same topicCustomer churn and segmentationFrench-language works237,207