atlas

Research map / Bandits and online learning / Contextual bandits and Thompson sampling

Thompson Sampling For Combinatorial Bandits: Polynomial Regret and Mismatched Sampling Paradox

NeurIPS 2024 · Bandits and online learning › Contextual bandits and Thompson sampling · approach: Thompson sampling analysis · 1 citations (OpenAlex)

Read the paperCheck your idea against 108,967 papers

AI-extracted summary. Written by AI from the paper's full text. Numbers and claims can be wrong or missing context, so check the paper before you cite or build on it.

Proposes BG-CTS, a boosted-variance Gaussian Thompson Sampling for linear combinatorial semi-bandits with polynomial finite-time regret, and shows a mismatched-sampling paradox where a Gaussian-likelihood TS beats a Bernoulli-matched Beta TS exponentially.

Problem

Thompson Sampling for linear combinatorial semi-bandits with subgaussian rewards has known regret bounds that scale exponentially with the action size m in finite time, making TS look worse than UCB-type methods in the moderate-horizon, large-m regime.

Approach

Use a Gaussian posterior with an improper uniform prior and a time-varying variance boost g(t) ~ (1+lambda) (log-scale), so that the Thompson samples explore enough to yield polynomial finite-time regret; this mismatched Gaussian likelihood can beat the correctly specified Beta/Bernoulli TS exponentially.

Key results

Measured effects reported in the paper

What was changedWhereMeasuredEffect
add a time-varying exploration boost to Gaussian CTS (BG-CTS)G-CTS on linear combinatorial semi-bandits · Two-action Bernoulli exampleregretHelped
use Gaussian likelihood and an improper uniform prior instead of the natural Bernoulli likelihood and Beta priorThompson Sampling on Bernoulli combinatorial bandits · Two disjoint actions of size m=d/2regretHelped
use Beta-based Thompson sampling rather than BG-CTSThompson Sampling · Two-action Bernoulli example, m=50regretHurt
increase decision size mBeta-based Thompson sampling · Two-action Bernoulli example, m in {5,25,45,65}final regretHurt
increase decision size mBG-CTS and ESCB · Two-action Bernoulli example, m in {5,25,45,65}final regretNo clear effect
use Jeffreys prior rather than the uniform priorBeta-CTS · Two-action Bernoulli exampleexplorationHelped

Surprising findings

Limitations

Experimental setup

Benchmarks: two-action Bernoulli combinatorial bandit (m=d/2)

Metrics: cumulative regret final regret vs m

Baselines: Beta-CTS (uniform prior) Beta-CTS (Jeffreys prior) ESCB G-CTS

Builds on: Thompson Sampling CUCB ESCB Wang and Chen 2018 combinatorial TS analysis

Closest papers by meaning

Writing a paper in this area? scime draft is a free LaTeX editor with AI included, real-time co-authors and a check of your references and venue rules before you submit. It also imports OpenAI Prism projects.

Open scime draft

Get the next scime Dispatch and a monthly field update

Free. We send a confirmation link first; every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Privacy