New Algorithms for Multiplayer Bandits when Arm Means Vary Among Players
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study multiplayer stochastic multi-armed bandit problems in which the players cannot communicate, and if two or more players pull the same arm, a collision occurs and the involved players receive zero reward. Moreover, we assume each arm has a different mean for each player. Let $T$ denote the number of rounds. An algorithm with regret $O((\log T)^{2+\kappa})$ for any constant $\kappa$ was recently presented by Bistritz and Leshem (NeurIPS 2018), who left the existence of an algorithm with $O(\log T)$ regret as an open question. In this paper, we provide an affirmative answer to this question in the case when there is a unique optimal assignment of players to arms. For the general case we present an algorithm with expected regret $O((\log T)^{1+\kappa})$, for any $\kappa>0$.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it