Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Beyond $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$ Constraint Violation for Online Convex Optimization with Adversarial Constraints

Abhishek Sinha, Rahul Vaze

TL;DR

This work studies COCO, where an online learner must minimize both regret and cumulative constraint violation under adversarial constraints. By introducing a tunable parameter $\beta$ and leveraging adaptive small-loss regret bounds with Lyapunov surrogate costs, the authors achieve a trade-off: sublinear regret $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{dT}+T^{\beta})$ and CCV $\tilde{O}(dT^{1-\beta})$ in the convex setting, with sharper first-order guarantees under smoothness. The core strategy decomposes COCO into a Constrained Expert problem via a $\delta$-cover and applies an adaptive Hedge algorithm on surrogate losses, plus an online gradient-descent-based policy for the smooth case. These results imply substantial CCV reductions in safety-critical online optimization while maintaining sublinear regret, with practical implications for safety-critical systems and budget-constrained decision-making.

Abstract

We study Online Convex Optimization with adversarial constraints (COCO). At each round a learner selects an action from a convex decision set and then an adversary reveals a convex cost and a convex constraint function. The goal of the learner is to select a sequence of actions to minimize both regret and the cumulative constraint violation (CCV) over a horizon of length $T$. The best-known policy for this problem achieves $O(\sqrt{T})$ regret and $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$ CCV. In this paper, we improve this by trading off regret to achieve substantially smaller CCV. This trade-off is especially important in safety-critical applications, where satisfying the safety constraints is non-negotiable. Specifically, for any bounded convex cost and constraint functions, we propose an online policy that achieves $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{dT}+ T^β)$ regret and $\tilde{O}(dT^{1-β})$ CCV, where $d$ is the dimension of the decision set and $β\in [0,1]$ is a tunable parameter. We begin with a special case, called the $\textsf{Constrained Expert}$ problem, where the decision set is a probability simplex and the cost and constraint functions are linear. Leveraging a new adaptive small-loss regret bound, we propose a computationally efficient policy for the $\textsf{Constrained Expert}$ problem, that attains $O(\sqrt{T\ln N}+T^β)$ regret and $\tilde{O}(T^{1-β} \ln N)$ CCV for $N$ number of experts. The original problem is then reduced to the $\textsf{Constrained Expert}$ problem via a covering argument. Finally, with an additional $M$-smoothness assumption, we propose a computationally efficient first-order policy attaining $O(\sqrt{MT}+T^β)$ regret and $\tilde{O}(MT^{1-β})$ CCV.

Beyond $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$ Constraint Violation for Online Convex Optimization with Adversarial Constraints

TL;DR

This work studies COCO, where an online learner must minimize both regret and cumulative constraint violation under adversarial constraints. By introducing a tunable parameter and leveraging adaptive small-loss regret bounds with Lyapunov surrogate costs, the authors achieve a trade-off: sublinear regret and CCV in the convex setting, with sharper first-order guarantees under smoothness. The core strategy decomposes COCO into a Constrained Expert problem via a -cover and applies an adaptive Hedge algorithm on surrogate losses, plus an online gradient-descent-based policy for the smooth case. These results imply substantial CCV reductions in safety-critical online optimization while maintaining sublinear regret, with practical implications for safety-critical systems and budget-constrained decision-making.

Abstract

We study Online Convex Optimization with adversarial constraints (COCO). At each round a learner selects an action from a convex decision set and then an adversary reveals a convex cost and a convex constraint function. The goal of the learner is to select a sequence of actions to minimize both regret and the cumulative constraint violation (CCV) over a horizon of length . The best-known policy for this problem achieves regret and CCV. In this paper, we improve this by trading off regret to achieve substantially smaller CCV. This trade-off is especially important in safety-critical applications, where satisfying the safety constraints is non-negotiable. Specifically, for any bounded convex cost and constraint functions, we propose an online policy that achieves regret and CCV, where is the dimension of the decision set and is a tunable parameter. We begin with a special case, called the problem, where the decision set is a probability simplex and the cost and constraint functions are linear. Leveraging a new adaptive small-loss regret bound, we propose a computationally efficient policy for the problem, that attains regret and CCV for number of experts. The original problem is then reduced to the problem via a covering argument. Finally, with an additional -smoothness assumption, we propose a computationally efficient first-order policy attaining regret and CCV.
Paper Structure (33 sections, 8 theorems, 62 equations, 3 figures, 2 tables, 4 algorithms)

This paper contains 33 sections, 8 theorems, 62 equations, 3 figures, 2 tables, 4 algorithms.

Key Result

Theorem 1

Consider the Expert problem with $N$ experts. Let the vector $l_t$ denote the losses of the experts at round $t \geq 1,$ where $l_t(i)\geq 0, \forall i,t.$ The losses need not be uniformly bounded above for all rounds. Let $G_t$ be an upper bound to $||l_t||_\infty$ satisfying the following conditio Then the following adaptive Hedge algorithm, which selects the $i$th expert with probability $p_t(i

Figures (3)

  • Figure 1: Schematic depicting the greedy construction of a minimal $\delta$-cover of the decision set $\mathcal{X}$. If a point $x \in \mathcal{X}$ is not covered yet, we construct a ball of radius $\delta$ centred at $x$ and include the point $x$ in the $\delta$-cover. The process continues till the entire set $\mathcal{X}$ is covered.
  • Figure 2: Comparison of the proposed adaptive Hedge-based policy (Algorithm \ref{['coco_alg']}) with $\beta = 0.75$ and the OGD-based policy from sinha2024optimal. (A) Regret vs. time. (B) Cumulative Constraint Violation (CCV) vs. time. (C) Selection frequency of experts under our adaptive Hedge-based policy. (D) Selection frequency of experts under the OGD-based policy. The proposed policy quickly identifies and sticks to the best feasible expert, leading to significantly lower CCV, whereas the OGD-based policy initially selects infeasible experts and takes longer to converge.
  • Figure 3: Performance comparison for different values of $\beta$

Theorems & Definitions (11)

  • Theorem 1
  • Theorem 2
  • Definition 1: Covering number
  • Theorem 3
  • Theorem 4: orabona2019modern, Theorem 4.25
  • Theorem 5
  • Lemma 1: A quadratic inequality
  • proof
  • Lemma 2: Bounding $\gamma$
  • proof
  • ...and 1 more