Skip to content

Latent Order Bandits

May 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2605.07304 · 0 citations · 41 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

A posterior-sampling algorithm is proposed and shown that both are competitive with full-prior latent bandits when same-state instances share reward parameters, and preferable to them when reward scales differ between instances with the same latent state.

Abstract

Bandit algorithms solve diverse sequential decision-making problems, but are often too sample-inefficient for from-scratch personalization. To substantially reduce exploration times, latent bandit algorithms exploit cross-instance structure implied by discrete latent states, provided that the posterior distribution of rewards and latent states is known and accurate. However, obtaining an accurate model of this structure is difficult, and a small number of latent states may be insufficient to characterize the reward distributions in all problem instances. We propose latent order bandits (LOB), relaxing the assumptions of latent bandits to require only prior knowledge of a \emph{partial order} of action preferences in each state. This allows instances of the same state to vary in reward distributions, as long as the partial order of actions is shared. For example, groups of users on a streaming service may agree on which movie genres are the best but rate experiences on different scales. We give an upper-confidence bound procedure for the LOB problem, applicable to both total and partial latent orders, and give an upper bound on its regret. To improve empirical performance, we propose a posterior-sampling algorithm and show, in a suite of experiments, that both are competitive with full-prior latent bandits when same-state instances share reward parameters, and preferable to them when reward scales differ between instances with the same latent state.

View source

Similar papers

Jul 2026

Stochastic Linear Bandits with Partially Observed Actions

This work proposes an algorithm, TOFU-POV, that estimates the latent action subspace using the masked actions, imputes current actions using an epoch-wise frozen representation, and runs OFUL in the resulting low-dimensional coordinates, and devise a rank-adaptive algorithm that does not require the knowledge of the in...

Gautam Dasarathy, V. Gattani, Lalit Jain · 0 citations
Open access Jul 2026

Multi-Armed Bandit Algorithms: Learning from Experience

This paper looks at three main ways to solve the multi-armed bandit problem: Explore-Then-Commit, Upper Confidence Bound, and Thompson Sampling, and shows where these methods are used in real life: online ads, where they improve click rates by about 11%; movie and music suggestions, where they help new users find conte...

Ziyue Zhou · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

On the Sparsity of Optimal Information Structures

This paper uncovers general properties of optimal information structures by exploiting a linear-programming formulation of information design. A critical observation is that an optimum can be found as ``sparse,''i.e., many coordinates of the action-state joint distribution are zero. This implies that, once part of an a...

Masaki Miyashita · 0 citations
Jul 2026

LatentFlow: A General Framework for Conditioning Stochastic Processes

LatentFlow is introduced, a single framework for conditioning stochastic processes, with no learned neural approximations and no training, that enables conditional sampling in seconds on a single desktop CPU across model classes that have never shared a scalable method.

Louis Sharrock, L. Astfalck, Henry B. Moss · 0 citations
Jul 2026

Parameter-Free Heavy-Tailed Bandits

This work resolves the assumption-free adaptation problem for heavy-tailed bandits and characterize the price in the regret of not knowing the tail parameters and introduces a scheduled-exploration algorithm that requires no knowledge of $u$ and matches the resulting adaptation frontier up to logarithmic factors.

Gianmarco Genalti, A. Metelli · 1 citation
Jul 2026

Thompson Sampling Is 2-Competitive for Mistakes

It is proved that Thompson sampling makes at most twice the expected number of mistakes (selections of a suboptimal arm) as any other policy, and this result holds under any nonincreasing sequence of round weights, including fixed horizon and geometric discounting.

Mark Sellke, Gregory Valiant · 0 citations

Related blog posts

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 12, 2026

Simulating student learning for better AI tutoring

StudentSim is a research system for evaluating and improving AI tutoring tools before they are tested with learners. It models how individuals may engage with tutors, giving feedback to improve tutor performance across subjects like chess, writing, and mathematics. The post Simulating student learning for better AI tutoring appeared first on Microsoft Research.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.