mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Fast A/B/n Testing: Exact Multi-Policy Comparison via Tree-Coupled Feedback Sharing

arXiv 2608.12831 ↗First posted 13 Aug 2026cs.LG cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Reinforcement learning for LLM agents

Abstract (arXiv)

Online platforms increasingly compare many adaptive decision policies---ranking systems, recommendation algorithms, pricing rules, and language-model agents---while each reward-bearing interaction can be costly or risky. A direct A/B/n design gives each of J≥ 2 policies its own horizon-T trajectory and therefore uses JT outcomes. We introduce Tree-Coupled A/B Testing (TCAB), an exact feedback-sharing design for arbitrary history-dependent contextual-bandit policies. At each round, a predictable tree connects the current policy histories; every parent--child context--action law is maximally coupled, and one reward is shared within each component of matched tree edges. Every policy retains exactly its standalone finite-horizon trajectory law, even though the policies are deliberately dependent. If De,t records a mismatch on tree edge e at round t, the number of reward queries satisfies the pathwise identity N(T)=T+sumt,eDe,t and hence equals T plus cumulative tree-edge total variation in expectation. This cost is conditionally optimal among exact edge-local designs on the selected tree, and a current-round minimum-spanning tree is myopically optimal among tree designs. For fixed J, sublinear pseudo-regret of every policy and almost-sure uniqueness of the oracle action imply mathbbE[N(T)]=T+o(T), versus JT for independent runs. We also obtain finite-sample variance bounds for pairwise policy contrasts. Experiments on reward-model evaluation, multiple-choice language-model evaluation, and adaptive search policies demonstrate substantial improvements in the cost--precision frontier.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reinforcement learning for LLM agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 27 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Aug 2026.

Builds on

27 of 56 references.

References · 27

  1. 2024MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmarkcited by 1,848
  2. 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,184
  3. 2024RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models for Language Modelingcited by 499
  4. 2014Taming the Monster: A Fast and Simple Algorithm for Contextual Banditscited by 201
  5. 2013Introducing LETOR 4.0 Datasetscited by 121
  6. 2016Optimal and Adaptive Off-policy Evaluation in Contextual Banditscited by 111
  7. 2019Confidence Intervals for Policy Evaluation in Adaptive Experimentscited by 95
  8. 2019Doubly robust off-policy evaluation with shrinkagecited by 87
  9. 2017Mostly Exploration-Free Algorithms for Contextual Banditscited by 85
  10. 2014Multi-marginal optimal transport: theory and applicationscited by 41
  11. 2021Off-Policy Evaluation via Adaptive Weighting with Data from Contextual Banditscited by 40
  12. 2015Online learning in repeated auctionscited by 39
15 more
  1. 2020Confident Off-Policy Evaluation and Selection through Self-Normalized Importance Weightingcited by 38
  2. 2020Offline Policy Selection under Uncertaintycited by 31
  3. 2022Contexts can be Cheap: Solving Stochastic Contextual Bandits with Linear Bandit Algorithmscited by 19
  4. 2020Stochastic Linear Contextual Bandits with Diverse Contextscited by 16
  5. 2022Safe Exploration for Efficient Policy Evaluation and Comparisoncited by 15
  6. 2022Artificial Replay: A Meta-Algorithm for Harnessing Historical Data in Banditscited by 13
  7. 2023Reducing Symbiosis Bias Through Better A/B Tests of Recommendation Algorithmscited by 8
  8. 2025Joint Value Estimation and Bidding in Repeated First-Price Auctionscited by 6
  9. 2022Breaking the √T Barrier: Instance-Independent Logarithmic Regret in Stochastic Contextual Linear Banditscited by 5
  10. 2025Choosing the Better Bandit Algorithm under Data Sharing: When Do A/B Experiments Work?cited by 4
  11. 2025Optimal Arm Elimination Algorithms for Combinatorial Banditscited by 3
  12. 2022The Coupled Rejection Samplercited by 2
  13. 2026The (Marginal) Value of a Search Ad: An Online Causal Framework for Repeated Second-price Auctionscited by 2
  14. 2026Design Experiments to Compare Multi-armed Bandit Algorithmscited by 1
  15. 2026Learning to Bid with Unknown Private Values in Budget-Constrained First-Price Auctionscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026OPTS-TTPO: Enhancing Finite-Sample Policy-Gradient Learning with Tree Search
  2. 2026Provable and Practical In-Context Policy Optimization for Self-Improvement
  3. 2026Near-Optimal Last-Iterate Convergence for Zero-Sum Games with Bandit Feedback and Opponent Actions
  4. 2026StepOPSD: Step-Aware Online Preference Self-Distillation for Agent Reinforcement Learning
  5. 2026Dynamic Regret for Non-Stationary Linear Bandits via Misspecification Reductions
  6. 2025Policy Gradient with Tree Search: Avoiding Local Optimas through Lookahead
  7. 2026StarOR: Synergizing Tree Search and Test-Time Reinforcement Learning for Optimization Modeling
  8. 2025Regret Analysis of Average-Reward Unichain MDPs via an Actor-Critic Approach