Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Improved Regret Bounds of (Multinomial) Logistic Bandits via Regret-to-Confidence-Set Conversion

Junghyun Lee, Se-Young Yun, Kwang-Sung Jun

TL;DR

This work improves the dependency on S via a novel approach called R2CS, which allows for a convex confidence set based on only the existence of an online learning algorithm with a regret guarantee, and applies this set to the regret analyses of logistic bandits with a new martingale concentration step that circumvents an additional factor of $S.

Abstract

Logistic bandit is a ubiquitous framework of modeling users' choices, e.g., click vs. no click for advertisement recommender system. We observe that the prior works overlook or neglect dependencies in $S \geq \lVert θ_\star \rVert_2$, where $θ_\star \in \mathbb{R}^d$ is the unknown parameter vector, which is particularly problematic when $S$ is large, e.g., $S \geq d$. In this work, we improve the dependency on $S$ via a novel approach called {\it regret-to-confidence set conversion (R2CS)}, which allows us to construct a convex confidence set based on only the \textit{existence} of an online learning algorithm with a regret guarantee. Using R2CS, we obtain a strict improvement in the regret bound w.r.t. $S$ in logistic bandits while retaining computational feasibility and the dependence on other factors such as $d$ and $T$. We apply our new confidence set to the regret analyses of logistic bandits with a new martingale concentration step that circumvents an additional factor of $S$. We then extend this analysis to multinomial logistic bandits and obtain similar improvements in the regret, showing the efficacy of R2CS. While we applied R2CS to the (multinomial) logistic model, R2CS is a generic approach for developing confidence sets that can be used for various models, which can be of independent interest.

Improved Regret Bounds of (Multinomial) Logistic Bandits via Regret-to-Confidence-Set Conversion

TL;DR

This work improves the dependency on S via a novel approach called R2CS, which allows for a convex confidence set based on only the existence of an online learning algorithm with a regret guarantee, and applies this set to the regret analyses of logistic bandits with a new martingale concentration step that circumvents an additional factor of $S.

Abstract

Logistic bandit is a ubiquitous framework of modeling users' choices, e.g., click vs. no click for advertisement recommender system. We observe that the prior works overlook or neglect dependencies in , where is the unknown parameter vector, which is particularly problematic when is large, e.g., . In this work, we improve the dependency on via a novel approach called {\it regret-to-confidence set conversion (R2CS)}, which allows us to construct a convex confidence set based on only the \textit{existence} of an online learning algorithm with a regret guarantee. Using R2CS, we obtain a strict improvement in the regret bound w.r.t. in logistic bandits while retaining computational feasibility and the dependence on other factors such as and . We apply our new confidence set to the regret analyses of logistic bandits with a new martingale concentration step that circumvents an additional factor of . We then extend this analysis to multinomial logistic bandits and obtain similar improvements in the regret, showing the efficacy of R2CS. While we applied R2CS to the (multinomial) logistic model, R2CS is a generic approach for developing confidence sets that can be used for various models, which can be of independent interest.
Paper Structure (66 sections, 41 theorems, 146 equations, 1 figure, 4 tables)

This paper contains 66 sections, 41 theorems, 146 equations, 1 figure, 4 tables.

Key Result

Theorem 1

We have where

Figures (1)

  • Figure 1: (a,b) Plot of $\mathrm{Reg}^B(T)$ for all considered algorithms (c,d) Confidence sets at $t = 4000$ from a single run: red is from OFULog+ and green is from OFULog-r.

Theorems & Definitions (67)

  • Remark 1
  • Theorem 1: Improved Confidence Set for Logistic Loss
  • Lemma 1
  • proof
  • Lemma 2
  • proof
  • Remark 2
  • Theorem 2: Theorem 3 of foster2018logistic
  • Remark 3
  • Lemma 3: Modification of Theorem 1 of beygelzimer2011contextual
  • ...and 57 more