← All projects

PROJECT 004 / 102 · Commerce

Market basket associations.

Which frequently purchased product pairs co-occur more than their individual popularity suggests?

Focused analytical studyRetailExecuted notebook

THE RESULT

What the data shows

The largest computed metric is 7.994 for 20728 + 22384; the smallest is 0.7298 for 85099B + POST. Metric: lift (Lift).

Product search is restricted to 30 popular codes; require at least 50 co-purchase invoices. The denominator includes all positive-sales invoices.

Market basket associations — chart from the computed study output
Computed study output. Full values and units are available in the results download.
Computed results · 12 of 417 rows. Values rounded for display; source units and raw column names are retained in the download.
pairco invoicesall sale invoicessupportconfidence a to blift
20728 + 2238450219,9600.025150.43657.994
20727 + 2238454419,9600.027250.42737.825
21931 + 2241152419,9600.026250.44267.518
23203 + 2320950419,9600.025250.40947.443
20728 + 2238353919,9600.0270.46877.286
20728 + 2238248319,9600.02420.427.246
22960 + 2296147219,9600.023650.4177.162
22382 + 2238353319,9600.02670.46077.161
20727 + 2238358419,9600.029260.45887.131
21931 + 2238651519,9600.02580.4357.128
20727 + 2072852219,9600.026150.41017.117
20725 + 2238460619,9600.030360.38727.091
Download the complete result table ↓

THE METHOD

From source to answer

Invoice presence matrix and pair support, confidence and lift among the 30 most frequent codes.

The Python source exposes this study’s transformations. The complete project download includes shared preparation and evaluation routines.

THE NEXT DECISION

What follows from the finding

Use a small merchandising experiment to test a selected pair; co-purchase alone does not establish an uplift.

Where the conclusion stops

Historical invoice lines; credits are not reliably matched to original sales. Gross purchases are not profit. Unidentified customers cannot support customer-level conclusions. Exact repeated lines remain unless the study explicitly compares removal.

Related studies may reuse observations or holdouts. These are historical analyses; associations and backtests do not demonstrate commercial impact. Further model tuning needs new, untouched evaluation data.