Gains and Losses are Fundamentally Different in Regret Minimization: The Sparse Case
pith:GHOIQRXR Add to your LaTeX paper
What is a Pith Number?\usepackage{pith}
\pithnumber{GHOIQRXR}
Prints a linked pith:GHOIQRXR badge after your title and writes the identifier into PDF metadata. Compiles on arXiv with no extra files. Learn more
read the original abstract
We demonstrate that, in the classical non-stochastic regret minimization problem with $d$ decisions, gains and losses to be respectively maximized or minimized are fundamentally different. Indeed, by considering the additional sparsity assumption (at each stage, at most $s$ decisions incur a nonzero outcome), we derive optimal regret bounds of different orders. Specifically, with gains, we obtain an optimal regret guarantee after $T$ stages of order $\sqrt{T\log s}$, so the classical dependency in the dimension is replaced by the sparsity size. With losses, we provide matching upper and lower bounds of order $\sqrt{Ts\log(d)/d}$, which is decreasing in $d$. Eventually, we also study the bandit setting, and obtain an upper bound of order $\sqrt{Ts\log (d/s)}$ when outcomes are losses. This bound is proven to be optimal up to the logarithmic factor $\sqrt{\log(d/s)}$.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Covariance-adapting algorithm for semi-bandits with application to sparse rewards
A covariance-adapting algorithm for semi-bandits achieves asymptotically tight regret bounds under a new sub-exponential distribution family, with direct application to sparse rewards.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.