In this paper, we consider several finite-horizon Bayesian multi-armed bandit problems with side constraints which are computationally intractable (NP-Hard) and for which no optimal (or near optimal) algorithms are known to exist with sub-exponential running time. All of these problems violate the standard exchange property, which assumes that the reward from the play of an arm is not contingent upon when the arm is played. Not only are index policies suboptimal in these contexts, there has been little analysis of such policies in these problem settings. We show that if we consider near-optimal policies, in the sense of approximation algorithms, then there exists (near) index policies. Conceptually, if we can find policies that satisfy an approximate version of the exchange property, namely, that the reward from the play of an arm depends on when the arm is played to within a constant factor, then we have an avenue towards solving these problems. However such an approximate version of the idling bandit property does not hold on a per-play basis and are shown to hold in a global sense. Clearly, such a property is not necessarily true of arbitrary single arm policies and finding such single arm policies is nontrivial. We show that by restricting the state spaces of arms we can find single arm policies and that these single arm policies can be combined into global (near) index policies where the approximate version of the exchange property is true in expectation. The number of different bandit problems that can be addressed by this technique already demonstrate its wide applicability.
Multi-armed bandit problems have been extensively studied since their introduction by Robbins in @cite_6 . From that starting point the literature has diverged into a number of (often incomparable) directions, based on the objective and the information available. In context of theoretical results, one typical goal @cite_28 @cite_59 @cite_64 @cite_41 @cite_15 @cite_62 @cite_33 @cite_36 has been to assume that the agent has absolutely no knowledge of @math (model free assumption) and then the task has been to minimize the regret'' or the lost reward, that is comparing the performance to an omniscient policy that plays the best arm from the start. However, these results both require the reward rate to be large and large time horizon @math compared the number of arms (that is, vanishing @math ). In the application scenarios mentioned above, it will typically be the case that the number of arms is very large and comparable to the optimization horizon and the reward rates are low.
@cite_64 @cite_62 @cite_33 @cite_28 @cite_41 @cite_36 @cite_6 @cite_59 @cite_15
1570963478 1979675141 2169401877 2121671791 2952840318 1998498767 2168405694 159910205
1. Introduction 2. Prediction with expert advice 3. Tight bounds for specific losses 4. Randomized prediction 5. Efficient forecasters for large classes of experts 6. Prediction with limited feedback 7. Prediction and playing games 8. Absolute loss 9. Logarithmic loss 10. Sequential investment 11. Linear pattern recognition 12. Linear classification 13. Appendix. We analyze algorithms that predict a binary value by combining the predictions of several prediction strategies, called experts . Our analysis is for worst-case situations, i.e., we make no assumptions about the way the sequence of bits to be predicted is generated. We measure the performance of the algorithm by the difference between the expected number of mistakes it makes on the bit sequence and the expected number of mistakes made by the best expert on this sequence, where the expectation is taken with respect to the randomization in the predictins. We show that the minimum achievable difference is on the order of the square root of the number of mistakes of the best expert, and we give efficient algorithms that achieve this. Our upper and lower bounds have matching leading constants in most cases. We then show how this leads to certain kinds of pattern recognition learning algorithms with performance bounds that improve on the best results currently know in this context. We also compare our analysis to the case in which log loss is used instead of the expected number of mistakes. In an online decision problem, one makes a sequence of decisions without knowledge of the future. Each period, one pays a cost based on the decision and observed state. We give a simple approach for doing nearly as well as the best single decision, where the best is chosen with the benefit of hindsight. A natural idea is to follow the leader, i.e. each period choose the decision which has done best so far. We show that by slightly perturbing the totals and then choosing the best decision, the expected performance is nearly as good as the best decision in hindsight. Our approach, which is very much like Hannan's original game-theoretic approach from the 1950s, yields guarantees competitive with the more modern exponential weighting algorithms like Weighted Majority. More importantly, these follow-the-leader style algorithms extend naturally to a large class of structured online problems for which the exponential algorithms are inefficient. We present an algorithm for solving a broad class of online resource allocation problems. Our online algorithm can be applied in environments where abstract jobs arrive one at a time, and one can complete the jobs by investing time in a number of abstract activities, according to some schedule. We assume that the fraction of jobs completed by a schedule is a monotone, submodular function of a set of pairs (v, τ), where τ is the time invested in activity v. Under this assumption, our online algorithm performs near-optimally according to two natural metrics: (i) the fraction of jobs completed within time T, for some fixed deadline T > 0, and (ii) the average time required to complete each job. We evaluate our algorithm experimentally by using it to learn, online, a schedule for allocating CPU time among solvers entered in the 2007 SAT solver competition. We consider a the general online convex optimization framework introduced by Zinkevich. In this setting, there is a sequence of convex functions. Each period, we must choose a signle point (from some feasible set) and pay a cost equal to the value of the next function on our chosen point. Zinkevich shows that, if the each function is revealed after the choice is made, then one can achieve vanishingly small regret relative the best single decision chosen in hindsight. We extend this to the bandit setting where we do not find out the entire functions but rather just their value at our chosen point. We show how to get vanishingly small regret in this setting. Our approach uses a simple approximation of the gradient that is computed from evaluating a function at a single (random) point. We show that this estimate is sufficient to mimic Zinkevich's gradient descent online analysis, with access to the gradient (only being able to evaluate the function at a single point). Until recently, statistical theory has been restricted to the design and analysis of sampling experiments in which the size and composition of the samples are completely determined before the experimentation begins. The reasons for this are partly historical, dating back to the time when the statistician was consulted, if at all, only after the experiment was over, and partly intrinsic in the mathematical difficulty of working with anything but a fixed number of independent random variables. A major advance now appears to be in the making with the creation of a theory of the sequential design of experiments, in which the size and composition of the samples are not fixed in advance but are functions of the observations themselves. Reinforcement learning policies face the exploration versus exploitation dilemma, i.e. the search for a balance between exploring the environment to find profitable actions while taking the empirically best action as often as possible. A popular measure of a policy's success in addressing this dilemma is the regret, that is the loss due to the fact that the globally optimal policy is not followed all the times. One of the simplest examples of the exploration exploitation dilemma is the multi-armed bandit problem. Lai and Robbins were the first ones to show that the regret for this problem has to grow at least logarithmically in the number of plays. Since then, policies which asymptotically achieve this regret have been devised by Lai and Robbins and many others. In this work we show that the optimal logarithmic regret is also achievable uniformly over time, with simple and efficient policies, and for all reward distributions with bounded support. We present an asymptotically optimal algorithm for the max variant of the k-armed bandit problem. Given a set of k slot machines, each yielding payoff from a fixed (but unknown) distribution, we wish to allocate trials to the machines so as to maximize the expected maximum payoff received over a series of n trials. Subject to certain distributional assumptions, we show that O(k ln(k δ) ln(n)2 e2) trials are sufficient to identify, with probability at least 1 - δ, a machine whose expected maximum payoff is within e of optimal. This result leads to a strategy for solving the problem that is asymptotically optimal in the following sense: the gap between the expected maximum payoff obtained by using our strategy for n trials and that obtained by pulling the single best arm for all n trials approaches zero as n → ∞.