Semantic and Arabic-aware search
Matching intent rather than exact words, and handling Arabic, transliteration and misspellings as customers actually type them.
Most catalogues are too big to browse and searched with a box that only matches words. A customer who types a description rather than a product name finds nothing, the recommendations are the same best-sellers for everyone, and the merchandising team has no way to influence any of it without a developer. The result is a store where the products that sell are the ones on the first page.
Matching intent rather than exact words, and handling Arabic, transliteration and misspellings as customers actually type them.
Related, complementary and next-purchase suggestions from behaviour, with rules the merchandising team controls.
RFM and behavioural segments driving campaigns, reactivation and retention rather than one message for everyone.
Boosting, pinning and suppressing products by campaign, margin or stock — without a code change.
Products embedded by description, attributes and imagery, so similarity is by meaning rather than by shared keywords.
Behaviour built into a profile that updates within the session, because intent today is not intent last month.
Query understanding that handles Arabic, transliteration and misspelling, with results ranked by relevance and availability.
The model proposes, the merchandising rules dispose — stock, margin and campaign constraints are applied last.
A control group that sees no personalisation, so the uplift is measured rather than assumed.
Attribute quality decides how good search and recommendation can be. Enrichment is usually the first real task.
It is the highest-intent surface in any store and the fastest to show a measurable difference.
Added once search is stable, with the holdout in place before anything is claimed.
Handing the levers to the team who owns the outcome, which is what stops this becoming a black box.
Search over a well-attributed catalogue is quick and usually the first measurable win. Recommendation needs enough behavioural history to be better than a best-seller list — with a small catalogue or thin traffic, popularity is genuinely hard to beat, and we will say so rather than ship a model that underperforms a sort order.
Published projects where we did this.
Recommendation needs behaviour to learn from. Below a certain catalogue size or traffic level, a well-ordered best-seller list is genuinely competitive, and we would rather tell you that than sell a model. Personalisation also cannot fix a catalogue with poor attributes or images — enrichment comes first, and it is unglamorous work that determines everything downstream.
No. Search and recommendation are integrated as services into what you already run. Replacing a storefront to gain better search is a very expensive way to get better search.
A holdout group that never sees personalisation, running from the start. Without it, any uplift claim is unfalsifiable — including ours.
This page describes capability and method. It does not publish accuracy figures, throughput numbers or delivery dates, because those depend on your data, your systems and your scope — and a number published here would be wrong for most readers. You get them, in writing and against your own data, at scoping.
A first call is a technical conversation, not a pitch: what you have, what you need, and whether this is the right approach at all.
Every InsAI product runs on the same four-stage backbone.
ERP · IoT · BIM · CRM
Forecasting, detection, optimization
Acting on predictions, end to end
From the floor to the boardroom
Personalized shopping + recommendations.
Security Features
Verification successful
Secure · Private · Verified