MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406308377 · doi:10.1177/10591478251313780

Bridging Adversarial and Nonstationary Multi-Armed Bandit

2025· article· en· W4406308377 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

VenueProduction and Operations Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)Adversarial systemComputer scienceOperations researchMathematical optimizationOperations managementBusinessComputer securityEconomicsArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the multi-armed bandit framework, there are two formulations that are commonly employed to handle time-varying reward distributions: adversarial bandit and nonstationary bandit. Although their oracles, algorithms, and regret analysis differ significantly, we provide a unified formulation in this article that smoothly bridges the two as special cases. The formulation uses an oracle that takes the best action sequences within a switch budget. Depending on the switch budget, it turns into the oracle in hindsight in the adversarial bandit and the dynamic oracle in the nonstationary bandit. We provide algorithms that attain the optimal regret with the matching lower bound. The optimal regret displays distinct behavior in two regimes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.788
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.257 · 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