mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Timing-Aware Repurchase Prediction for Web-Scale E-Commerce: Survival Models for Multi-Surface Grocery Recommendation

arXiv 2608.28393 ↗First posted 28 Aug 2026cs.AI cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Repurchase recommenders in e-commerce are commonly framed as a binary question asking "will this customer buy this item within W days", a formulation that requires a separately trained model for every horizon of interest. We replace this stack with survival models that predict time-to-repurchase directly, and evaluate them on millions of customers from a major grocery e-commerce platform across more than thirty ablation configurations. Our study makes three contributions. First, an empirical hazard analysis reveals a slightly decreasing marginal hazard (k ~ 0.9), differing from the common intuition that grocery items become more likely to be repurchased the longer since the last purchase (increasing hazard, k > 1). Log-Normal achieves the best marginal fit (R^2 = 0.998) and the best ranking, despite Weibull providing the best conditional residual fit, revealing an apparent discrepancy we analyze in detail. Second, a single Accelerated Failure Time (AFT) model replaces three per-horizon binary classifiers, matching or exceeding each at its own horizon while using roughly 3x fewer total trees. Feature importance reshuffles under the survival objective: channel-cadence and recency signals rise while aggregate frequency counts fall. Third, a 4-parameter parametric calibration maps raw survival CDFs to per-horizon probabilities with zero cross-horizon monotonicity violations. Calibration quality varies by an order of magnitude across the AFT family: Exponential AFT (Weibull k=1) achieves expected calibration error (ECE) ~1e-4, roughly 10x lower than Log-Normal, while ranking metrics agree within 0.3% relative. We adopt Exponential AFT for probability-consuming surfaces and Log-Normal for pure ranking, exposing a principled calibration-ranking trade-off within a single AFT family.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Aug 2026.

Builds on

9 of 30 references.

References · 9

  1. 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
  2. 2019BERT4Rec: Sequential Recommendation with Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformercited by 964
  3. 2015Session-based Recommendations with Recurrent Neural Networkscited by 695
  4. 2020Neural Collaborative Filtering vs. Matrix Factorization Revisitedcited by 123
  5. 2018RepeatNet: A Repeat Aware Neural Recommendation Machine for Session-based Recommendationcited by 51
  6. 2020Modeling Personalized Item Frequency Information for Next-basket Recommendationcited by 24
  7. 2020Predicting Temporal Sets with Deep Neural Networkscited by 16
  8. 2021A Next Basket Recommendation Reality Checkcited by 15
  9. 2026CASE: Cadence-Aware Set Encoding for Large-Scale Next Basket Repurchase Recommendationcited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.