弥合差距:隆起建模和异质治疗效果方法的系统基准

IF 6.8 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Interactive Marketing Pub Date : 2022-08-11 DOI:10.1177/10949968221111083
J. Rößler, D. Schoder
{"title":"弥合差距:隆起建模和异质治疗效果方法的系统基准","authors":"J. Rößler, D. Schoder","doi":"10.1177/10949968221111083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Choosing the correct method to predict the incremental effect of a treatment on customer response is critical to optimize targeting policies in many important applications such as churn management and patient care. Two research streams, uplift modeling and heterogeneous treatment effects (HTE), have emerged that scrutinize the incremental effect of a treatment on customer response. So far, these research streams mostly remain independent, with few studies comparing methods across these communities. However, if the goal is to estimate the incremental effect in the best possible way or to make a new contribution in the context of targeting policies, ignoring either uplift modeling or HTE methods is a serious omission. To fill this research gap, the authors benchmark 15 methods from both literatures on synthetic and real-world data sets. They perform benchmarking to contrast the performance of different methods from both research streams and to highlight the importance of evaluating methods from uplift modeling and HTE. The results show that although most methods suffer from volatility, some methods perform better and are more robust than others. In addition, the authors demonstrate that using the incremental effect can substantially improve a targeting policy, but only if academics and practitioners evaluate various methods from both uplift modeling and HTE.","PeriodicalId":48260,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Marketing","volume":"57 1","pages":"629 - 650"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bridging the Gap: A Systematic Benchmarking of Uplift Modeling and Heterogeneous Treatment Effects Methods\",\"authors\":\"J. Rößler, D. Schoder\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10949968221111083\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Choosing the correct method to predict the incremental effect of a treatment on customer response is critical to optimize targeting policies in many important applications such as churn management and patient care. Two research streams, uplift modeling and heterogeneous treatment effects (HTE), have emerged that scrutinize the incremental effect of a treatment on customer response. So far, these research streams mostly remain independent, with few studies comparing methods across these communities. However, if the goal is to estimate the incremental effect in the best possible way or to make a new contribution in the context of targeting policies, ignoring either uplift modeling or HTE methods is a serious omission. To fill this research gap, the authors benchmark 15 methods from both literatures on synthetic and real-world data sets. They perform benchmarking to contrast the performance of different methods from both research streams and to highlight the importance of evaluating methods from uplift modeling and HTE. The results show that although most methods suffer from volatility, some methods perform better and are more robust than others. In addition, the authors demonstrate that using the incremental effect can substantially improve a targeting policy, but only if academics and practitioners evaluate various methods from both uplift modeling and HTE.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48260,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Interactive Marketing\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"629 - 650\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Interactive Marketing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10949968221111083\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interactive Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10949968221111083","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在许多重要应用程序(如流失管理和患者护理)中,选择正确的方法来预测治疗对客户反应的增量影响对于优化目标策略至关重要。已经出现了两种研究流,即提升建模和异质治疗效果(HTE),它们仔细研究了治疗对客户反应的增量影响。到目前为止,这些研究流大多保持独立,很少有研究比较这些社区的方法。然而,如果目标是以尽可能好的方式估计增量效应,或者在目标政策的背景下做出新的贡献,那么忽略提升建模或HTE方法是一个严重的遗漏。为了填补这一研究空白,作者在合成数据集和真实世界数据集上对文献中的15种方法进行了基准测试。他们进行基准测试,以对比两个研究流中不同方法的性能,并强调隆起建模和HTE评估方法的重要性。结果表明,尽管大多数方法都存在波动性,但有些方法比其他方法性能更好、更稳健。此外,作者证明,使用增量效应可以显著改善目标政策,但前提是学者和从业者评估提升建模和HTE的各种方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bridging the Gap: A Systematic Benchmarking of Uplift Modeling and Heterogeneous Treatment Effects Methods
Choosing the correct method to predict the incremental effect of a treatment on customer response is critical to optimize targeting policies in many important applications such as churn management and patient care. Two research streams, uplift modeling and heterogeneous treatment effects (HTE), have emerged that scrutinize the incremental effect of a treatment on customer response. So far, these research streams mostly remain independent, with few studies comparing methods across these communities. However, if the goal is to estimate the incremental effect in the best possible way or to make a new contribution in the context of targeting policies, ignoring either uplift modeling or HTE methods is a serious omission. To fill this research gap, the authors benchmark 15 methods from both literatures on synthetic and real-world data sets. They perform benchmarking to contrast the performance of different methods from both research streams and to highlight the importance of evaluating methods from uplift modeling and HTE. The results show that although most methods suffer from volatility, some methods perform better and are more robust than others. In addition, the authors demonstrate that using the incremental effect can substantially improve a targeting policy, but only if academics and practitioners evaluate various methods from both uplift modeling and HTE.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
20.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interactive Marketing aims to explore and discuss issues in the dynamic field of interactive marketing, encompassing both online and offline topics related to analyzing, targeting, and serving individual customers. The journal seeks to publish innovative, high-quality research that presents original results, methodologies, theories, and applications in interactive marketing. Manuscripts should address current or emerging managerial challenges and have the potential to influence both practice and theory in the field. The journal welcomes conceptually rigorous approaches of any type and does not favor or exclude specific methodologies.
期刊最新文献
When Post Hoc Explanation Knocks: Consumer Responses to Explainable AI Recommendations The Effects of Comparative Reviews on Product Sales Examining the Impact of Sponsored Search Results on Choice: An Anchoring Perspective The Power of AI-Generated Voices: How Digital Vocal Tract Length Shapes Product Congruency and Ad Performance Acknowledgments
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1