This framework demonstrates improved optimization and market segment clustering using co-regularization and customer behavior analysis.
Solving competitive facility location problems can optimize market share or operational efficiency in environments where multiple firms compete for customer attention. In such contexts, facility attractiveness is shaped not only by geographic proximity but also by customer preference characteristics. This study presents a novel heuristic framework that integrates multi-view K-means clustering with customer behavior modeling reinforced by a co-regularization mechanism to align clustering results across heterogeneous data views. By jointly exploiting spatial and behavioral information, the framework clusters customers and facilities into meaningful market segments. Within each segment, a bilevel optimization model is applied to represent the sequential decision-making of competing entities—where a leader first selects facility locations, followed by a reactive follower. An empirical evaluation on a real-world dataset from San Francisco demonstrates that the proposed approach, using optimal co-regularization parameters, achieves a total runtime of approximately 4.00 s—representing a 99.34% reduction compared to the full CFLBP-CB model (608.58 s) and a 99.32% reduction compared to a genetic algorithm (585.20 s). Concurrently, it yields an overall profit of 16,104.17, which is an approximate 0.72% increase over the Direct CFLBP-CB profit of 15,988.27 and is only 0.21% lower than the genetic algorithm’s highest profit of 16,137.75. Moreover, comparative analysis reveals that the proposed multi-view clustering with co-regularization outperforms all single-view baselines, including K-means, spectral, and hierarchical methods. This superiority is evidenced by an approximate 5.21% increase in overall profit and a simultaneous reduction in optimization time, thereby demonstrating its effectiveness in capturing complementary spatial and behavioral structures for competitive facility location. Notably, the proposed two-stage approach achieves high-quality solutions with significantly shorter computation times, making it suitable for large-scale or time-sensitive competitive facility planning tasks.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Phoka et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: