Instance-Dependent Regret Bounds for Nonstochastic Linear Partial Monitoring
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In contrast to the classic formulation of partial monitoring, linear partial monitoring can model infinite outcome spaces, while imposing a linear structure on both the losses and the observations. This setting can be viewed as a generalization of linear bandits where loss and feedback are decoupled in a flexible manner. In this work, we address a nonstochastic (adversarial), finite-actions version of the problem through a simple instance of the exploration-by-optimization method that is amenable to efficient implementation. We derive regret bounds that depend on the game structure in a more transparent manner than previous theoretical guarantees for this paradigm. Our bounds feature instance-specific quantities that reflect the degree of alignment between observations and losses, and resemble known guarantees in the stochastic setting. Notably, they achieve the standard √T rate in easy (locally observable) games and T2/3 in hard (globally observable) games, where T is the time horizon. We instantiate these bounds in a selection of old and new partial information settings subsumed by this model, and illustrate that the achieved dependence on the game structure can be tight in interesting cases.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Oct 2025.
Builds on
24 of 58 references.
References · 24
- 2021The Statistical Complexity of Interactive Decision Makingcited by 212
- 2014Learning to Optimize via Information-Directed Samplingcited by 168
- 2015Online Learning with Feedback Graphs: Beyond Banditscited by 79
- 2014Nonstochastic Multi-Armed Bandits with Graph-Structured Feedbackcited by 61
- 2019An Information-Theoretic Approach to Minimax Regret in Partial Monitoringcited by 41
- 2020Information Directed Sampling for Linear Partial Monitoringcited by 39
- 2020Mirror Descent and the Information Ratiocited by 39
- 2022On the Complexity of Adversarial Decision Makingcited by 32
- 2019Exploration by Optimisation in Partial Monitoringcited by 20
- 2022Best-of-Both-Worlds Algorithms for Partial Monitoringcited by 19
- 2018Cleaning up the neighborhood: A full classification for adversarial partial monitoringcited by 16
- 2023Stability-penalty-adaptive follow-the-regularized-leader: Sparsity, game-dependency, and best-of-both-worldscited by 15
12 more
- 2022Minimax Regret for Partial Monitoring: Infinite Outcomes and Rustichini's Regretcited by 13
- 2023Linear Partial Monitoring for Sequential Decision-Making: Algorithms, Regret Bounds and Applicationscited by 11
- 2015Regret Lower Bound and Optimal Algorithm in Finite Stochastic Partial Monitoringcited by 10
- 2017Tight Bounds for Bandit Combinatorial Optimizationcited by 9
- 2020Analysis and Design of Thompson Sampling for Stochastic Partial Monitoringcited by 9
- 2015Cheap Banditscited by 6
- 2015Utility-based Dueling Bandits as a Partial Monitoring Gamecited by 4
- 2016Phased Exploration with Greedy Exploitation in Stochastic Combinatorial Partial Monitoring Gamescited by 4
- 2024Information Capacity Regret Bounds for Bandits with Mediator Feedbackcited by 4
- 2024Exploration by Optimization with Hybrid Regularizers: Logarithmic Regret with Adversarial Robustness in Partial Monitoringcited by 3
- 2024Randomized Confidence Bounds for Stochastic Partial Monitoringcited by 2
- 2024Neural Active Learning Meets the Partial Monitoring Frameworkcited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
- 2026Efficient Logistic Regression with Mixture of Sigmoidscited by 0
- 2026Efficient Logistic Regression with Mixture of Sigmoids3 Apr 2026