Research on Identifying Important Factors and Prediction of Online Service Satisfaction for Mobile Phone Users

Xiyuan Miao; Shi Zhang

doi:10.54691/fse.v3i5.5005

Authors

Xiyuan Miao
Shi Zhang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54691/fse.v3i5.5005

Keywords:

Online Service Satisfaction; Mutual Information; Decision Tree Model; Base Learner.

Abstract

Our lives cannot do without the internet. How to improve the network quality has always been an essential problem. The paper explores the important factors of online service satisfaction and the best predicting model. Based on the data offered by Beijing Mobile Company, we identify main factors affecting online service satisfaction by calculating their mutual information values. The factors include signal problem factors, scene factors and software usage factors. Additionally, based on decision tree model and models with decision tree as base learner, we predict the online service satisfaction. The result shows that random tree model with One Vs Rest mode has the greatest accuracy among the models which offers telecommunications companies insight.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

S. Rahi, M. A. Ghani, A. H. Ngah: Factors propelling the adoption of internet banking: the role of e-customer service, website design, brand image and customer satisfaction, International Journal of Business Information Systems, vol. 33 (2020), 549–569.

B.H. Su, P.C. Lin, J.M. Chen et al. HAPPINESS/SUFFERING factors recognition based on point-wise mutual information, 2015 International Conference on Orange Technologies (ICOT), Hong Kong, China, (2015), 14-17.

R. Munir , R. A. Rahman . Determining Dimensions of Job Satisfaction Using Factor Analysis, Procedia Economics and Finance, vol. 37 (2016), 488-496.

Tussyadiah, P. Iis. Factors of satisfaction and intention to use peer-to-peer accommodation, International Journal of Hospitality Management, vol. 55 (2016), 70-80.

L. Song, P. Langfelder, S. Horvath, Comparison of co-expression measures: mutual information, correlation, and model based indices, BMC Bioinformatics, vol. 13 (2012), 328.

C. Whitnall, E. Oswald, A Comprehensive Evaluation of Mutual Information Analysis Using a Fair Evaluation Framework, (Springer-Verlag, Germany 2011), p. 316–334.

A. Hakiri , A. Gokhale, P. Berthou et al. Software-Defined Networking: Challenges and research opportunities for Future Internet, Computer Networks, vol 75 (2014), 453-471.

C. Kingsford, S. Salzberg, What are decision trees?, Nature Biotechnology, vol 26 (2008) 1011–1013.

Z. Zeng, H. Zhang, Z. Rui, et al., A Hybrid Feature Selection Method Based on Rough Conditional Mutual Information and Naive Bayesian Classifier[J]. Isrn Applied Mathematics, vol 2014 (2014), 36-46.

J. R. Quinlan, Learning decision tree classifiers, ACM Computing Surveys, vol 28 (1996), 71-72.

J. Feng , Y. Yang, Z.H. Zhou, Multi-Layered Gradient Boosting Decision Trees, Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, (2018), 3555–3565.

T. Chen , H. Tong , M. Benesty, XGBoost: Extreme Gradient Boosting, Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, (2016), 785-794.

M. Qi, LightGBM: A Highly Efficient Gradient Boosting Decision Tree, Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, (2017), 3149–3157.

L. Breiman, Random Forest, Machine Learning, vol 45 (2001), 1-35.