Dynamic Assortment Personalization in High Dimensions

References

• Agrawal S, Avadhanula V, Goyal V, Zeevi A (2019) Mnl-bandit: A dynamic learning approach to assortment selection. Oper Res. 67(5):1453–1485.Google Scholar
• Bastani H, Bayati M (2019) Online decision-making with high-dimensional covariates. Oper. Res. 68(1):276–294.Google Scholar
• Bernstein F, Kök AG, Xie L (2015) Dynamic assortment customization with limited inventories. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 17(4):427–619.Link, Google Scholar
• Bernstein F, Modaresi S, Sauré D (2019) A dynamic clustering approach to data-driven assortment personalization. Management Sci. 65(5):1949–2443.Google Scholar
• Bertsimas D, Kallus N (2020) From predictive to prescriptive analytics. Management Sci. 66(3):1025–1044.Google Scholar
• Bhojanapalli S, Kyrillidis A, Sanghavi S (2016) Dropping convexity for faster semi-definite optimization. Preprint, submitted April 16, https://arxiv.org/abs/1509.03917.Google Scholar
• Blanchet J, Gallego G, Goyal V (2016) A Markov chain approximation to choice modeling. Oper. Res. 64(4):886–905.Google Scholar
• Bubeck S, Cesa-Bianchi N (2012) Regret analysis of stochastic and nonstochastic multi-armed bandit problems. Machine Learning 5(1):1–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cai JF, Candès EJ, Shen Z (2010) A singular value thresholding algorithm for matrix completion. SIAM J. Optim. 20(4):1956–1982.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Candès E, Plan Y (2010) Matrix completion with noise. Proc. IEEE 98(6):925–936.Google Scholar
• Candès E, Recht B (2009) Exact matrix completion via convex optimization. Foundations Comput. Math. 9(6):717–772.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Candès E, Tao T (2010) The power of convex relaxation: Near-optimal matrix completion. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 56(5):2053–2080.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caro F, Gallien J (2007) Dynamic assortment with demand learning for seasonal consumer goods. Management Sci. 53(2):276–292.Link, Google Scholar
• Davenport M, Plan Y, van den Berg E, Wootters M (2014) 1-bit matrix completion. Inform. Inference 3(3):189–223.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis JM, Gallego G, Topaloglu H (2014) Assortment optimization under variants of the nested logit model. Oper. Res. 62(2):250–273.Link, Google Scholar
• DeShazo J, Fermo G (2002) Designing choice sets for stated preference methods: The effects of complexity on choice consistency. J. Environ. Econom. Management 44(1):123–143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Désir A, Goyal V, Zhang J (2014) Near-optimal algorithms for capacity constrained assortment optimization. Preprint, submitted December 29, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2543309.Google Scholar
• Farias VF, Jagabathula S, Shah D (2013) A nonparametric approach to modeling choice with limited data. Management Sci. 59(2):305–322.Link, Google Scholar
• Funk S (2006) Netflix update: Try this at home. Accessed October 18, 2016, http://sifter.org/~simon/journal/20061211.html.Google Scholar
• Goldenshluger A, Zeevi A (2013) A linear response bandit problem. Stochastic Systems 3(1):230–261.Link, Google Scholar
• Golrezaei N, Nazerzadeh H, Rusmevichientong P (2014) Real-time optimization of personalized assortments. Management Sci. 60(6):1532–1551.Link, Google Scholar
• Gunasekar S, Ravikumar P, Ghosh J (2014) Exponential family matrix completion under structural constraints. Xing EP, Jebara T, eds. Proc. 31st Internat. Conf. Machine Learn. 32(June):1917–1925.Google Scholar
• Hazan E (2008) Sparse approximate solutions to semidefinite programs. Laber ES, Bornstein C, Faria LT, eds. LATIN 2008: Theoretical Informatics (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg), 306–316.Google Scholar
• Hotelling H (1933) Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into principal components. J. Ed. Psych. 24(6):417–441.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jagabathula S, Subramanian L, Venkataraman A (2017) A model-based projection technique for segmenting customers. Preprint, submitted January 25, https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.07483.Google Scholar
• Jain P, Netrapalli P, Sanghavi S (2013) Low-rank matrix completion using alternating minimization. Proc. 45th Annual ACM Sympos. Theory Comput. (ACM, New York), 665–674.Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kallus N, Udell M (2016) Revealed preference at scale: Learning personalized preferences from assortment choices. Proc. 2016 ACM Conf. Econom. Comput. (ACM, New York), 821–837.Google Scholar
• Keshavan R, Montanari A, Oh S (2009) Matrix completion from noisy entries. Bengio y, Schuurmans d, Lafferty JD, Williams CKI, Culotta A, eds. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 22 (Curran Associates, Red Hook, NY), 952–960.Google Scholar
• Keshavan RH, Montanari A, Oh S (2010) Matrix completion from a few entries. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 56(6):2980–2998.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lai TL, Robbins H (1985) Asymptotically efficient adaptive allocation rules. Adv. Appl Math. 6(1):4–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li G, Rusmevichientong P, Topaloglu H (2015) The d-level nested logit model: Assortment and price optimization problems. Oper. Res. 63(2):325–342.Link, Google Scholar
• Lu Y, Negahban SN (2014) Individualized rank aggregation using nuclear norm regularization. Allerton Conf. Comm. Control Comput., Urbana, IL, 1473–1479.Google Scholar
• Luce DR (1959) Individual Choice Behavior: A Theoretical Analysis. (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Maillard OA, Mannor S (2014) Latent bandits. Internat. Conf. Machine Learning, 136–144.Google Scholar
• McFadden D (1973) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Zarembka P, ed. Frontiers in Economics (Academic Press, New York), 105–142.Google Scholar
• McFadden D (1980) Econometric models for probabilistic choice among products. J. Bus. 53(3):S13–S29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McFadden D, Train K (2000) Mixed mnl models for discrete response. J. Appl. Econometrics 15(5):447–470.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Megiddo N (1979) Combinatorial optimization with rational objective functions. Math. Oper. Res. 4(4):414–424.Link, Google Scholar
• Negahban S, Wainwright MJ (2011) Estimation of (near) low-rank matrices with noise and high-dimensional scaling. Ann. Statist. 39(2):1069–1097.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Negahban SN, Ravikumar P, Wainwright MJ, Yu B (2012) A unified framework for high-dimensional analysis of M-estimators with decomposable regularizers. Statist. Sci. 27(4):538–557.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oh S, Thekumparampil KK, Xu J (2015) Collaboratively learning preferences from ordinal data. Cortes C, Lawrence ND, Lee DD, Sugiyama M, Garnett R, eds. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 28 (Curran Associates, Red Hook, NY), 1909–1917.Google Scholar
• Orabona F, Argyriou A, Srebro N (2012) Prisma: Proximal iterative smoothing algorithm. Preprint, submitted June 11, https://arxiv.org/abs/1206.2372.Google Scholar
• Parikh N, Boyd S (2014) Proximal algorithms. Foundations Trends Optim. 1(3):127–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Perchet V, Rigollet P (2013) The multi-armed bandit problem with covariates. Ann. Statist. 41(2):693–721.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Recht B, Fazel M, Parrilo P (2010) Guaranteed minimum-rank solutions of linear matrix equations via nuclear norm minimization. SIAM Rev. 52(3):471–501.Google Scholar
• Recht B, Re C, Wright S, Niu F (2011) Hogwild: A lock-free approach to parallelizing stochastic gradient descent. Shawe-Taylor J, Zemel RS, Bartlett PL, Pereira F, Weinberger KQ, eds. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 22 (Curran Associates, Red Hook, NY), 693–701.Google Scholar
• Rigollet P, Zeevi A (2010) Nonparametric bandits with covariates. Preprint, submitted March 8, https://arxiv.org/abs/1003.1630.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, 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
• Sauré D, Zeevi A (2013) Optimal dynamic assortment planning with demand learning. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 15(3):387–404.Link, Google Scholar
• Schuler A, Liu V, Wan J, Callahan A, Udell M, Stark D, Shah N (2016) Discovering patient phenotypes using generalized low rank models. Pacific Sympos. Biocomput. 2016, Big Island, Hawaii, 144–155.Google Scholar
• Slivkins A (2014) Contextual bandits with similarity information. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 15(1):2533–2568.Google Scholar
• Spearman C (1904) “General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. Amer. J. Psych. 15(2):201–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Talluri KT, Van Ryzin GJ (2006) The Theory and Practice of Revenue Management, International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol. 68 (Springer Science & Business Media, New York).Google Scholar
• Tropp JA (2012) User-friendly tail bounds for sums of random matrices. Foundations Comput. Math. 12(4):389–434.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Udell M, Horn C, Zadeh R, Boyd S (2016) Generalized low rank models. Foundations Trends Machine Learn. 9(1):1–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Udell M, Townsend A (2017) Nice latent variable models have log-rank. Preprint, submitted May 21, https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.07474v1.Google Scholar
• van Ryzin G, Vulcano G (2014) A market discovery algorithm to estimate a general class of nonparametric choice models. Management Sci. 61(2):281–300.Link, Google Scholar
• Williams HC (1977) On the formation of travel demand models and economic evaluation measures of user benefit. Environ. Planning A 9(3):285–344.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Witten D, Tibshirani R, Hastie T (2009) A penalized matrix decomposition, with applications to sparse principal components and canonical correlation analysis. Biostatistics 10(3):515–534.Crossref, Google Scholar