Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Best-of-Both-Worlds Multi-Dueling Bandits: Unified Algorithms for Stochastic and Adversarial Preferences under Condorcet and Borda Objectives

S. Akash, Pratik Gajane, Jawar Singh

Abstract

Multi-dueling bandits, where a learner selects $m \geq 2$ arms per round and observes only the winner, arise naturally in many applications including ranking and recommendation systems, yet a fundamental question has remained open: can a single algorithm perform optimally in both stochastic and adversarial environments, without knowing which regime it faces? We answer this affirmatively, providing the first best-of-both-worlds algorithms for multi-dueling bandits under both Condorcet and Borda objectives. For the Condorcet setting, we propose \texttt{MetaDueling}, a black-box reduction that converts any dueling bandit algorithm into a multi-dueling bandit algorithm by transforming multi-way winner feedback into an unbiased pairwise signal. Instantiating our reduction with \texttt{Versatile-DB} yields the first best-of-both-worlds algorithm for multi-dueling bandits: it achieves $O(\sqrt{KT})$ pseudo-regret against adversarial preferences and the instance-optimal $O\!\left(\sum_{i \neq a^\star} \frac{\log T}{Δ_i}\right)$ pseudo-regret under stochastic preferences, both simultaneously and without prior knowledge of the regime. For the Borda setting, we propose \AlgBorda, a stochastic-and-adversarial algorithm that achieves $O\left(K^2 \log KT + K \log^2 T + \sum_{i: Δ_i^{\mathrm{B}} > 0} \frac{K\log KT}{(Δ_i^{\mathrm{B}})^2}\right)$ regret in stochastic environments and $O\left(K \sqrt{T \log KT} + K^{1/3} T^{2/3} (\log K)^{1/3}\right)$ regret against adversaries, again without prior knowledge of the regime. We complement our upper bounds with matching lower bounds for the Condorcet setting. For the Borda setting, our upper bounds are near-optimal with respect to the lower bounds (within a factor of $K$) and match the best-known results in the literature.

Best-of-Both-Worlds Multi-Dueling Bandits: Unified Algorithms for Stochastic and Adversarial Preferences under Condorcet and Borda Objectives

Abstract

Multi-dueling bandits, where a learner selects arms per round and observes only the winner, arise naturally in many applications including ranking and recommendation systems, yet a fundamental question has remained open: can a single algorithm perform optimally in both stochastic and adversarial environments, without knowing which regime it faces? We answer this affirmatively, providing the first best-of-both-worlds algorithms for multi-dueling bandits under both Condorcet and Borda objectives. For the Condorcet setting, we propose \texttt{MetaDueling}, a black-box reduction that converts any dueling bandit algorithm into a multi-dueling bandit algorithm by transforming multi-way winner feedback into an unbiased pairwise signal. Instantiating our reduction with \texttt{Versatile-DB} yields the first best-of-both-worlds algorithm for multi-dueling bandits: it achieves pseudo-regret against adversarial preferences and the instance-optimal pseudo-regret under stochastic preferences, both simultaneously and without prior knowledge of the regime. For the Borda setting, we propose \AlgBorda, a stochastic-and-adversarial algorithm that achieves regret in stochastic environments and regret against adversaries, again without prior knowledge of the regime. We complement our upper bounds with matching lower bounds for the Condorcet setting. For the Borda setting, our upper bounds are near-optimal with respect to the lower bounds (within a factor of ) and match the best-known results in the literature.
Paper Structure (52 sections, 26 theorems, 114 equations, 2 algorithms)

This paper contains 52 sections, 26 theorems, 114 equations, 2 algorithms.

Key Result

Lemma 3.3

Under Algorithm alg:meta_dueling, the observed outcome satisfies:

Theorems & Definitions (64)

  • Definition 3.1: Rescaling Constants
  • Definition 3.2: Rescaled Preference Matrix
  • Lemma 3.3: Unbiased Feedback
  • proof
  • Remark 3.4: Implicit Rescaling
  • Lemma 3.5: Gap Rescaling
  • Lemma 3.6: Bound on Rescaling Factor
  • Lemma 3.7: Regret Equivalence
  • Remark 3.8: Black-Box Nature of the Reduction
  • Remark 3.9: Special Case: $m = 2$
  • ...and 54 more