mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Gains and Losses are Fundamentally Different in Regret Minimization: The Sparse Case

arXiv 1511.08405 ↗First posted 26 Nov 2015cs.LG stat.MLcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

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 √Tlog 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 √Tslog(d)/d, which is decreasing in d. Eventually, we also study the bandit setting, and obtain an upper bound of order √Tslog (d/s) when outcomes are losses. This bound is proven to be optimal up to the logarithmic factor √log(d/s).

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 26 Nov 2015.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 3; 2025: 1; 2026: 3.

9 papers.