In this paper we consider the following question: can we optimize objective functions from the training data we use to learn them? We formalize this question through a novel framework we call optimization from samples (OPS). In OPS, we are given sampled values of a function drawn from some distribution and the objective is to optimize the function under some constraint. While there are interesting classes of functions that can be optimized from samples, our main result is an impossibility. We show that there are classes of functions which are statistically learnable and optimizable, but for which no reasonable approximation for optimization from samples is achievable. In particular, our main result shows that there is no constant factor approximation for maximizing coverage functions under a cardinality constraint using polynomially-many samples drawn from any distribution. We also show tight approximation guarantees for maximization under a cardinality constraint of several interesting classes of functions including unit-demand, additive, and general monotone submodular functions, as well as a constant factor approximation for monotone submodular functions with bounded curvature.
Another line of work which combines decision-making and learning is online learning (see survey @cite_46 ). In online learning, a player iteratively makes decisions. For each decision, the player incurs a cost and the cost function for the current iteration is immediately revealed. The objective is to minimize regret, which is the difference between the sum of the costs of the decisions of the player and the sum of the costs of the best fixed decision. The fundamental differences with our framework are that decisions are made online after each observation, instead of offline given a collection of observations. The benchmarks, regret in one case and the optimal solution in the other, are not comparable.
@cite_46
2120745256 50486269 2152898676 1842374776
In the online linear optimization problem, a learner must choose, in each round, a decision from a set D ⊂ ℝn in order to minimize an (unknown and changing) linear cost function. We present sharp rates of convergence (with respect to additive regret) for both the full information setting (where the cost function is revealed at the end of each round) and the bandit setting (where only the scalar cost incurred is revealed). In particular, this paper is concerned with the price of bandit information, by which we mean the ratio of the best achievable regret in the bandit setting to that in the full-information setting. For the full information case, the upper bound on the regret is O*( √nT), where n is the ambient dimension and T is the time horizon. For the bandit case, we present an algorithm which achieves O*(n3 2 √T) regret — all previous (nontrivial) bounds here were O(poly(n)T2 3) or worse. It is striking that the convergence rate for the bandit setting is only a factor of n worse than in the full information case — in stark contrast to the K-arm bandit setting, where the gap in the dependence on K is exponential (√TK vs. √T log K). We also present lower bounds showing that this gap is at least √n, which we conjecture to be the correct order. The bandit algorithm we present can be implemented efficiently in special cases of particular interest, such as path planning and Markov Decision Problems. In the classical stochastic k-armed bandit problem, in each of a sequence of T rounds, a decision maker chooses one of k arms and incurs a cost chosen from an unknown distribution associated with that arm. The goal is to minimize regret, defined as the difference between the cost incurred by the algorithm and the optimal cost. In the linear optimization version of this problem (first considered by Auer [2002]), we view the arms as vectors in R, and require that the costs be linear functions of the chosen vector. As before, it is assumed that the cost functions are sampled independently from an unknown distribution. In this setting, the goal is to find algorithms whose running time and regret behave well as functions of the number of rounds T and the dimensionality n (rather than the number of arms, k, which may be exponential in n or even infinite). We give a nearly complete characterization of this problem in terms of both upper and lower bounds for the regret. In certain special cases (such as when the decision region is a polytope), the regret is polylog(T ). In general though, the optimal regret is Θ∗( √ T ) — our lower bounds rule out the possibility of obtaining polylog(T ) rates in general. We present two variants of an algorithm based on the idea of “upper confidence bounds.” The first, due to Auer [2002], but not fully analyzed, obtains regret whose dependence on n and T are both essentially optimal, but which may be computationally intractable when the decision set is a polytope. The second version can be efficiently implemented when the decision set is a polytope (given as an intersection of half-spaces), but gives up a factor of √ n in the regret bound. Our results also extend to the setting where the set of allowed decisions may change over time. ∗Department of Computer Science, University of Chicago, varsha@cs.uchicago.edu †Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago, hayest,sham @tti-c.org We address online linear optimization problems when the possible actions of the decision maker are represented by binary vectors. The regret of the decision maker is the difference between her realized loss and the minimal loss she would have achieved by picking, in hindsight, the best possible action. Our goal is to understand the magnitude of the best possible minimax regret. We study the problem under three different assumptions for the feedback the decision maker receives: full information, and the partial information models of the so-called “semi-bandit” and “bandit” problems. In the full information case we show that the standard exponentially weighted average forecaster is a provably suboptimal strategy. For the semi-bandit model, by combining the Mirror Descent algorithm and the INF Implicitely Normalized Forecaster strategy, we are able to prove the first optimal bounds. Finally, in the bandit case we discuss existing results in light of a new lower bound, and suggest a conjecture on the optimal regret in that case. We present and study a partial-information model of online learning, where a decision maker repeatedly chooses from a finite set of actions, and observes some subset of the associated losses. This naturally models several situations where the losses of different actions are related, and knowing the loss of one action provides information on the loss of other actions. Moreover, it generalizes and interpolates between the well studied full-information setting (where all losses are revealed) and the bandit setting (where only the loss of the action chosen by the player is revealed). We provide several algorithms addressing different variants of our setting, and provide tight regret bounds depending on combinatorial properties of the information feedback structure.