Paper detail

Modelling Grocery Retail Topic Distributions: Evaluation, Interpretability and Stability

Understanding the shopping motivations behind market baskets has high commercial value in the grocery retail industry. Analyzing shopping transactions demands techniques that can cope with the volume and dimensionality of grocery transactional data while keeping interpretable outcomes. Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) provides a suitable framework to process grocery transactions and to discover a broad representation of customers' shopping motivations. However, summarizing the posterior distribution of an LDA model is challenging, while individual LDA draws may not be coherent and cannot capture topic uncertainty. Moreover, the evaluation of LDA models is dominated by model-fit measures which may not adequately capture the qualitative aspects such as interpretability and stability of topics. In this paper, we introduce clustering methodology that post-processes posterior LDA draws to summarise the entire posterior distribution and identify semantic modes represented as recurrent topics. Our approach is an alternative to standard label-switching techniques and provides a single posterior summary set of topics, as well as associated measures of uncertainty. Furthermore, we establish a more holistic definition for model evaluation, which assesses topic models based not only on their likelihood but also on their coherence, distinctiveness and stability. By means of a survey, we set thresholds for the interpretation of topic coherence and topic similarity in the domain of grocery retail data. We demonstrate that the selection of recurrent topics through our clustering methodology not only improves model likelihood but also outperforms the qualitative aspects of LDA such as interpretability and stability. We illustrate our methods on an example from a large UK supermarket chain.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.