Learning Preference from Observed Rankings
Abstract
Domain fit: Niche / domain-specific · No strong AI-core implementation/artifact signals were detected from current providers.
Estimating consumer preferences is central to many problems in economics and marketing. This paper develops a flexible framework for learning individual preferences from partial ranking information by interpreting observed rankings as collections of pairwise comparisons with logistic choice probabilities. We model latent utility as the sum of interpretable product attributes, item fixed effects, and a low-rank user-item factor structure, enabling both interpretability and information sharing across consumers and items. We further correct for selection in which comparisons are observed: a comparison is recorded only if both items enter the consumer's consideration set, inducing exposure bias toward frequently encountered items. We model pair observability as the product of item-level observability propensities and estimate these propensities with a logistic model for the marginal probability that an item is observable. Preference parameters are then estimated by maximizing an inverse-probability-weighted (IPW), ridge-regularized log-likelihood that reweights observed comparisons toward a target comparison population. To scale computation, we propose a stochastic gradient descent (SGD) algorithm based on inverse-probability resampling, which draws comparisons in proportion to their IPW weights. In an application to transaction data from an online wine retailer, the method improves out-of-sample recommendation performance relative to a popularity-based benchmark, with particularly strong gains in predicting purchases of previously unconsumed products.
Results and benchmarks
Estimating consumer preferences is central to many problems in economics and marketing.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 55/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- This is primarily a method paper. Reproduce it within a maintained framework baseline instead of chasing paper-specific repos.
- Start with framework-native implementations (e.g. PyTorch optimizer module, Optax, or Transformers training loops).
- Replicate the paper ablation settings first, then compare against modern baselines.
Time to first repro: a few hours
This is primarily a method paper. Reproduce it within a maintained framework baseline instead of chasing paper-specific repos.
- No maintained paper-verified implementation is currently available
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Validation caveat
Framework baselines
- PyTorch Adam optimizer docs
Reference implementation of Adam in PyTorch.
- Optax Adam optimizer docs
JAX/Flax baseline for Adam variants.
- Keras Adam optimizer docs
TensorFlow/Keras baseline for Adam.
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
None detected
Methods
Stochastic optimization
Domains
None detected
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.