mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Survival Bandit Problem

arXiv 2206.03019 ↗First posted 7 Jun 2022cs.LG stat.MLcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We introduce and study a new variant of the multi-armed bandit problem (MAB), called the survival bandit problem (S-MAB). While in both problems, the objective is to maximize the so-called cumulative reward, in this new variant, the procedure is interrupted if the cumulative reward falls below a preset threshold. This simple yet unexplored extension of the MAB follows from many practical applications. For example, when testing two medicines against each other on voluntary patients, people's health are at stake, and it is necessary to be able to interrupt experiments if serious side effects occur or if the disease syndromes are not dissipated by the treatment. From a theoretical perspective, the S-MAB is the first variant of the MAB where the procedure may or may not be interrupted. We start by formalizing the S-MAB and we define its objective as the minimization of the so-called survival regret, which naturally generalizes the regret of the MAB. Then, we show that the objective of the S-MAB is considerably more difficult than the MAB, in the sense that contrary to the MAB, no policy can achieve a reasonably small (i.e., sublinear) survival regret. Instead, we minimize the survival regret in the sense of Pareto, i.e., we seek a policy whose cumulative reward cannot be improved for some problem instance without being sacrificed for another one. For that purpose, we identify two key components in the survival regret: the regret given no ruin (which corresponds to the regret in the MAB), and the probability that the procedure is interrupted, called the probability of ruin. We derive a lower bound on the probability of ruin, as well as policies whose probability of ruin matches the lower bound. Finally, based on a doubling trick on those policies, we derive a policy which minimizes the survival regret in the sense of Pareto, giving an answer to an open problem by Perotto et al. (COLT 2019).

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jun 2022.

Builds on

11 of 37 references.

References · 11

  1. 2013Bandits with Knapsackscited by 163
  2. 2015Multi-armed Bandit Models for the Optimal Design of Clinical Trials: Benefits and Challengescited by 113
  3. 2018Adversarial Bandits with Knapsackscited by 73
  4. 2019On Multi-Armed Bandit Designs for Dose-Finding Clinical Trialscited by 32
  5. 2020Thompson Sampling Algorithms for Mean-Variance Banditscited by 27
  6. 2014Exploration vs Exploitation vs Safety: Risk-averse Multi-Armed Banditscited by 26
  7. 2016Risk-Averse Multi-Armed Bandit Problems under Mean-Variance Measurecited by 20
  8. 2021The Symmetry between Arms and Knapsacks: A Primal-Dual Approach for Bandits with Knapsackscited by 16
  9. 2017Budget-Constrained Multi-Armed Bandits with Multiple Playscited by 13
  10. 2014Generalized Risk-Aversion in Stochastic Multi-Armed Banditscited by 11
  11. 2020Multi-armed Bandits with Cost Subsidycited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year

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

4 papers.