Efficient Low-Rank Matrix Estimation, Experimental Design, and Arm-Set-Dependent Low-Rank Bandits
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 low-rank matrix trace regression and the related problem of low-rank matrix bandits. Assuming access to the distribution of the covariates, we propose a novel low-rank matrix estimation method called LowPopArt and provide its recovery guarantee that depends on a novel quantity denoted by B(Q) that characterizes the hardness of the problem, where Q is the covariance matrix of the measurement distribution. We show that our method can provide tighter recovery guarantees than classical nuclear norm penalized least squares (Koltchinskii et al., 2011) in several problems. To perform efficient estimation with a limited number of measurements from an arbitrarily given measurement set A, we also propose a novel experimental design criterion that minimizes B(Q) with computational efficiency. We leverage our novel estimator and design of experiments to derive two low-rank linear bandit algorithms for general arm sets that enjoy improved regret upper bounds. This improves over previous works on low-rank bandits, which make somewhat restrictive assumptions that the arm set is the unit ball or that an efficient exploration distribution is given. To our knowledge, our experimental design criterion is the first one tailored to low-rank matrix estimation beyond the naive reduction to linear regression, which can be of independent interest.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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