The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Machine Learning.
Multi-armed bandit algorithms are evaluated by regret, yet comparable regret can coexist with different allocations across independent runs. We study the trade-off between worst-case regret $\mathcal{R}_{K,T}$ and instability $\mathcal S_{K,T}$, defined as the largest standard deviation of a terminal pull count, for $K$ arms and $T$ rounds.
In bandit problems, standard regret-minimizing algorithms treat exploration as an amortized cost, which can expose early participants to unfair ex-ante losses in settings such as clinical trials. Recent work addresses this by evaluating the sequence of per-round expected rewards through the generalized $p$-mean, interpolating between utilitarian welfare ($p=1$), Nash welfare ($p\to0$), and Rawlsian fairness ($p\to-\infty$).
arXiv:2605.20854v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We provide the first regret analysis of ReMax in stochastic multi-armed bandits. Originally introduced for reinforcement learning, ReMax is motivat...
The paper presents the first high‑probability regret bounds for both cumulative and current‑step variants of Feel‑Good Thompson Sampling (FGTS) in contextual bandits with general realizable function approximation. The bounds rely on decoupling coefficients and prior mass near the true reward function, and in the linear setting they achieve ≠d√T log(2T)+√T log(1/δ) regret with probability at least 1‑δ. This matches the dimension and horizon dependence of upper‑confidence‑bound algorithms up to logarithmic factors, while the high‑probability cost adds only linear dependence on log(1/δ).
The paper studies the trade‑off between maximizing rewards and accurately estimating current treatment effects in nonstationary multi‑armed bandits. For $K$‑armed bandits with H"older‑smooth mean rewards, the authors derive minimax bounds on expected dynamic regret under a high‑probability simultaneous coverage requirement for all current effects. They propose the TRACE algorithm, which achieves a regret–precision trade‑off that separates reward‑learning regret from the unavoidable cost of refreshing current‑effect estimates, and extend the method with an empirical‑Bernstein e‑process to adapt exploration while preserving worst‑case guarantees.
arXiv:2607. 13402v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In bandit problems, standard regret-minimizing algorithms treat exploration as an amortized cost, which can expose early participants to unfair ex-ante losses in settings such as clinical trials.