MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146807381

PAC-Bayesian Analysis of Contextual Bandits

2011· article· la· W2146807381 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) · 2011
Typearticle
Languagela
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegretLogarithmUpper and lower boundsScalingBayesian probabilityComputer scienceTask (project management)CombinatoricsMathematicsAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We derive an instantaneous (per-round) data-dependent regret bound for stochastic multiarmed bandits with side information (also known as contextual bandits). pThe scaling of our regret bound with the number of states (contexts) N goes as √NI pt (S;A), where I pt (S;A) is the mutual information between states and actions (the side information) used by the algorithm at round t. If the algorithm uses all the side information, the regret bound scales as √N lnK, where K is the number of actions (arms). However, if the side information I pt (S;A) is not fully used, the regret bound is significantly tighter. In the extreme case, when I pt (S;A) = 0, the dependence on the number of states reduces from linear to logarithmic. Our analysis allows to provide the algorithm large amount of side information, let the algorithm to decide which side information is relevant for the task, and penalize the algorithm only for the side information that it is using de facto. We also present an algorithm for multiarmed bandits with side information with O(K) computational complexity per game round.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.133
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it