The Use of Binary Choice Forests to Model and Estimate Discrete Choices

Ningyuan Chen, Guillermo Gallego, Zhuodong Tang

arXiv 3 Aug 2019 · Machine Learning · 6 citations (OpenAlex)

arXiv:1908.01109 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text

Abstract

Problem definition. In retailing, discrete choice models (DCMs) are commonly used to capture the choice behavior of customers when offered an assortment of products. When estimating DCMs using transaction data, flexible models (such as machine learning models or nonparametric models) are typically not interpretable and hard to estimate, while tractable models (such as the multinomial logit model) tend to misspecify the complex behavior represeted in the data. Methodology/results. In this study, we use a forest of binary decision trees to represent DCMs. This approach is based on random forests, a popular machine learning algorithm. The resulting model is interpretable: the decision trees can explain the decision-making process of customers during the purchase. We show that our approach can predict the choice probability of any DCM consistently and thus never suffers from misspecification. Moreover, our algorithm predicts assortments unseen in the training data. The mechanism and errors can be theoretically analyzed. We also prove that the random forest can recover preference rankings of customers thanks to the splitting criterion such as the Gini index and information gain ratio. Managerial implications. The framework has unique practical advantages. It can capture customers' behavioral patterns such as irrationality or sequential searches when purchasing a product. It handles nonstandard formats of training data that result from aggregation. It can measure product importance based on how frequently a random customer would make decisions depending on the presence of the product. It can also incorporate price information and customer features. Our numerical experiments using synthetic and real data show that using random forests to estimate customer choices can outperform existing methods.

Citation extraction

appendix boundary found by appendix_command · 55% of the source is main text. Read the extracted text to check this.

Most heavily cited references

The works this paper leans on most, across its whole bibliography — not restricted to papers in our corpus. Ranked by composite intensity, which combines how often a work is mentioned, how many sections mention it, and how much of that falls in the main text rather than the appendix.

Showing the top 10 of 48 scored citations.

Cited by, within the corpus

arXiv econ.EM papers that cite this one, ranked by how heavily they lean on it.