The Exponomial Choice Model for Assortment Optimization: An Alternative to the MNL Model?

References

• Alptekinoglu A, Semple JH (2016) The exponomial choice model: A new alternative for assortment and price optimization. Oper. Res. 64(1):79–93.Link, Google Scholar
• Alptekinoğlu A, Semple JH (2021) Heteroscedastic exponomial choice. Oper. Res. 69(3):841–858.Link, Google Scholar
• Aouad A, Levi R, Segev D (2018a) Greedy-like algorithms for dynamic assortment planning under multinomial logit preferences. Oper. Res. 66(5):1321–1345.Link, Google Scholar
• Aouad A, Farias V, Levi R, Segev D (2018b) The approximability of assortment optimization under ranking preferences. Oper. Res. 66(6):1661–1669.Link, Google Scholar
• Berbeglia G, Garassino A, Vulcano G (2021) A comparative empirical study of discrete choice models in retail operations. Management Sci. 68(6):4005–4023.Link, Google Scholar
• Blanchet J, Gallego G, Goyal V (2016) A Markov chain approximation to choice modeling. Oper. Res. 64(4):886–905.Link, Google Scholar
• Bront J, Diaz IM, Vulcano G (2009) A column generation algorithm for choice-based network revenue management. Oper. Res. 57(3):769–784.Link, Google Scholar
• Daganzo C (1979) Multinomial Probit: The Theory and Its Application to Demand Forecasting (Academic Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Davis J, Gallego G, Topaloglu H (2014) Assortment optimization under variants of the nested logit model. Oper. Res. 62(2):250–273.Link, Google Scholar
• Désir A, Goyal V, Zhang J (2022) Technical note—Capacitated assortment optimization: Hardness and approximation. Oper. Res. 70(2):893–904.Link, Google Scholar
• Feldman J, Topaloglu H (2015a) Bounding optimal expected revenues for assortment optimization under mixtures of multinomial logits. Production Oper. Management 24(10):1598–1620.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Feldman J, Topaloglu H (2015b) Capacity constraints across nests in assortment optimization under the nested logit model. Oper. Res. 63(4):812–822.Link, Google Scholar
• Ford LR Jr (1957) Solution of a ranking problem from binary comparisons. Amer. Math. Monthly 64(8):28–33.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gallego G, Iyengar G, Phillips R, Dubey A (2004) Managing flexible products on a network. Technical Report TR-2004-01, Computational Optimization Research Center, Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar
• Gallego G, Li A, Truong V, Wang X (2016) Online bipartite matching with customer choice. Working paper, Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar
• Golrezaei N, Nazerzadeh H, Rusmevichientong P (2014) Real-time optimization of personalized assortments. Management Sci. 60(6):1532–1551.Link, Google Scholar
• Håstad J (1996) Clique is hard to approximate within n1−ϵ. Proc. 37th Annual Sympos. Foundations Comput. Sci., 627–636.Google Scholar
• Jagabathula S, Subramanian L, Venkataraman A (2020) A conditional gradient approach for nonparametric estimation of mixing distributions. Management Sci. 66(8):3635–3656.Link, Google Scholar
• Kallus N, Udell M (2020) Dynamic assortment personalization in high dimensions. Oper. Res. 68(4):1020–1037.Link, Google Scholar
• Kamishima T (2003) Collaborative filtering: Recommendation based on order responses. Proc. Ninth ACM SIGKDD Internat. Conf. Knowledge Discovery Data Mining, 583–588.Google Scholar
• Kök AG, Fisher ML, Vaidyanathan R (2015) Assortment planning: Review of literature and industry practice. Agrawal N, Smith SA, eds. Retail Supply Chain Management: Quantitative Models and Empirical Studies (Springer US, Boston), 175–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luce RD (1959) Individual choice behavior: A theoretical analysis. Frontiers in Econometrics 2:105–142.Google Scholar
• Mahajan S, van Ryzin G (2001) Stocking retail assortment under dynamic consumer substitution. Oper. Res. 49(3):334–351.Link, Google Scholar
• McFadden D (1974) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Frontiers in Econometrics 2:105–142.Google Scholar
• Rusmevichientong P, Shen ZJM, Shmoys DB (2010) Dynamic assortment optimization with a multinomial logit choice model and capacity constraint. Oper. Res. 58(6):1666–1680.Link, Google Scholar
• Rusmevichientong P, Sumida M, Topaloglu H (2020) Dynamic assortment optimization for reusable products with random usage durations. Management Sci. 66(7):2820–2844.Link, Google Scholar
• Rusmevichientong P, Shmoys D, Tong C, Topaloglu H (2014) Assortment optimization under the multinomial logit model with random choice parameters. Production Oper. Management 23(11):2023–2039.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schrijver A (1998) Theory of Linear and Integer Programming (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• Shi P (2015) Guiding school-choice reform through novel applications of operations research. Interfaces 45(2):117–132.Link, Google Scholar
• Şimşek AS, Topaloglu H (2018) An expectation-maximization algorithm to estimate the parameters of the Markov chain choice model. Oper. Res. 66(3):748–760.Link, Google Scholar
• Sumida M, Gallego G, Rusmevichientong P, Topaloglu H, Davis J (2021) Revenue-utility tradeoff in assortment optimization under the multinomial logit model with totally unimodular constraints. Management Sci. 67(5):2845–2869.Link, Google Scholar
• Talluri K, van Ryzin G (2004) Revenue management under a general discrete choice model of consumer behavior. Management Sci. 50(24):15–33.Link, Google Scholar
• Thurston L (1927) A law of comparative judgement. Psych. Rev. 34(4):273–286.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Train K (2009) Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ursu RM (2018) The power of rankings: Quantifying the effect of rankings on online consumer search and purchase decisions. Marketing Sci. 37(4):530–552.Link, Google Scholar
• Vulcano G, van Ryzin G, Ratliff R (2012) Estimating primary demand for substitutable products from sales transaction data. Oper. Res. 60(2):313–334.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhang H, Rusmevichientong P, Topaloglu H (2020) Assortment optimization under the paired combinatorial logit model. Oper. Res. 68(3):741–761.Link, Google Scholar