arXiv:2606. 08410v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Personalized decision-making in multi-objective bandits requires learning user-specific trade-offs among competing objectives.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2607. 09015v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We study contextual bandit problems with correlated arms and access to surrogate reward signals produced by a machine learning model, motivated by applications such as large language model (LLM) routing.
arXiv:2602. 02061v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Explosive demands for LLMs often cause user queries to accumulate in server queues, requiring efficient routing (query-LLM matching) and scheduling (query prioritization) mechanisms.
arXiv:2606. 06178v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) present a trade-off between performance and cost, where more powerful models incur greater expense.
arXiv:2606. 01382v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Preference alignment is central to improving large language models, but standard reward-based formulations can be restrictive when human preferences are cyclic, non-transitive, or otherwise not representable by a scalar reward.
The paper investigates preference-based bandits where a learner selects pairs of arms and receives binary preference feedback modeled by Bradley–Terry. It introduces the locally sensitive eluder dimension, a new complexity measure for logistic preference feedback, and proposes the GINOP algorithm that uses log-loss confidence sets to balance optimism and exploration. The authors prove a first-order regret bound showing that learning with preference feedback can be as statistically efficient as learning from direct rewards, and they validate their theory with empirical experiments.
arXiv:2605. 04267v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Interactive multi-objective optimization systems face a budget allocation dilemma: one can spend resources on expensive objective evaluations or on eliciting decision-maker preferences that identify the relevant region of the Pareto set.