Bandits with Probing: Optimal Regret and the Limits of Winner Feedback
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
A learner probes at most k of n arms each round, receives the maximum of their rewards in [0,1], and competes with the best fixed arm. When does the probing advantage pay for learning? We determine two minimax laws. Under independent stochastic rewards with winner feedback (the maximum and a winning label), or on arbitrary fixed sequences given a single signed contrast between block maxima, the minimax regret has order Phin,k(T)=minfracn-knT,fracn-kk, 2≤ k<n. Under winner feedback, both arbitrary joint i.i.d. rewards and fixed sequences have minimax regret of order Rn,k(T)=fracn-knminT,fracn+Tk,√fracnTk. Both laws have universal constants and anytime upper bounds. The first reduces regret to a pure coverage cost: same-round contrasts absorb the stability cost, and independence permits exact resampling whose gains fund sample advancement. The second adds a learning cost that becomes comparable to coverage at horizon n; beyond nk, numerical maxima improve over labels alone. The lower bound allows every adaptive action size.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 14 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Sep 2026.
Builds on
4 of 14 references.
References · 4
- 2017Dueling Bandits With Weak Regretcited by 15
- 2022Online Learning and Bandits with Queried Hintscited by 6
- 2024Can Probabilistic Feedback Drive User Impacts in Online Platforms?cited by 5
- 2026Multi-Armed Bandits With Best-Action Queriescited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.