CASE: Cadence-Aware Set Encoding for Large-Scale Next Basket Repurchase Recommendation

Next-basket repurchase recommendation is commonly formulated as a ranking task: given a customer's purchase history, the system ranks previously purchased items that may be needed again. In production settings, however, ranking accuracy is only one component of recommendation quality. Customers may also benefit from concise evidence about why an item is recommended now. Large language models (LLMs) offer a potential way to surface such evidence through feature-based, human-readable rationales grounded in interpretable behavioral signals. We construct repurchase features spanning cadence, frequency, recency, user behavior, and item popularity, and evaluate LLMs on two public grocery datasets and one proprietary retail dataset. We investigate (1) whether off-the-shelf LLMs can use these features as next-basket scorers relative to heuristic and supervised rankers, and (2) whether LLM-cited features carry outcome-grounded ranking signal. For the latter, we compare LLM-cited features with model-specific attribution methods under a cross-model feature-masking protocol that measures ranking degradation after masking selected features. Our results show that LLM scores are not competitive with supervised rankers, suggesting that off-the-shelf LLMs should not be used as standalone repurchase recommenders. However, changes in prompt and evidence representation can improve outcome-grounded feature-masking results in some settings even when ranking performance does not improve; the effect is dataset-dependent and does not consistently match attribution baselines. These findings suggest a practical role for LLMs as validated explanation components rather than primary rankers, with rationale quality evaluated separately from ranking accuracy.

Sequential recommendation models typically predict a user's next action from recent session interactions, which limits personalization when short-term signals are weak or ambiguous. Rather than assuming that incorporating longer-term history and community signals is universally beneficial, we study when it actually helps. We propose BehaveRec, a three-signal framework combining a causal session transformer, a bidirectional User History Encoder over a 90-day window, and a GraphSAGE module over a user-user graph built from behavioral embedding similarity rather than item co-occurrence; a learned gate blends the three signals per user. On an industrial dataset of 137M sequences from 12.6M users, BehaveRec improves R@5 by +3.2% over SASRec, with a larger-capacity SASRec baseline (more parameters than BehaveRec) still trailing by +2.5%, ruling out capacity as the explanation. More importantly, a user-level stratification by history length reveals a clear dose-response relationship: BehaveRec's advantage is negligible below roughly 10 interactions and grows monotonically with history richness, reaching +0.017 R@5 for users with 101+ events. This pattern is corroborated across one industrial and three public datasets spanning history-rich to history-sparse regimes, where session-only models remain preferable. These headline results, and the resulting deployment threshold, are established for category-level intent prediction; a preliminary, single-run check on the full item-level vocabulary yields a directionally mixed result and is scoped as an open question rather than a claim. We use these results to derive a practical deployment rule -- roughly 20 interactions per user -- for when long-term history and behavioral-graph signals are worth their added complexity. Despite this added complexity, BehaveRec remains lightweight: it uses 5.67M parameters and trains on a single GPU in under two days.

Candidate-dependent routing lets a sequential recommender weight a user's past behaviors differently for each item it scores. We test whether this flexibility helps by adding a small residual routing module to a self-attentive baseline, in two versions that differ only in what sets the routing weights: the user's history representation or the candidate item's embedding. Across five paired seeds on the REES46 cosmetics-shop dataset, with matched training for all three models, candidate-dependent routing leaves the primary metric, normalized discounted cumulative gain at cutoff ten (NDCG@10), essentially unchanged (mean relative change +0.003%). Secondary and exploratory analyses show that this flat average hides two effects that cancel. The candidate-dependent model places more relevant items in its top ten (recall +1.81%) but ranks the first one lower (mean reciprocal rank -1.09%), and most of its new hits land at positions six to ten. Its gains come from queries with at least one target among the user's last 50 events, while queries whose targets all lie outside that window get worse. In this form, candidate-dependent routing trades accuracy at the top of the list for recall further down.