arXiv preprint ·

Does LinUCB Need Valid Confidence Sets?

Ahmed Ben Yahmed, Marc Abeille, David Janz and Clément Calauzènes

Published
Source
arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
Original
Read it at arXiv
Topics
Machine LearningArtificial Intelligence

Abstract

We show that replacing LinUCB's usual confidence width $β$ by any fixed $α>0$ preserves sublinear regret when the action set is $M$-smooth and $m$-strongly convex. Our high-probability regret bound for this generalisation, $α$-LinUCB, establishes that valid confidence sets are not necessary for the success of LinUCB. We identify the mechanism behind this result: action-set curvature drives $α$-LinUCB to explore every direction, even when optimism is not guaranteed. To analyse this mechanism, we introduce a logarithmically capped spectral potential that, unlike the standard log-determinant potential, caps contributions from well-explored directions. This yields lower bounds on the smallest eigenvalue of the design matrix. At the standard confidence width $α=β\asymp\sqrt{d\log T}$, our $T$-round regret bound in $d$ dimensions is $O\bigl(\frac{M}{m}d\sqrt{T\log T}\bigr)$, up to iterated-logarithmic factors, improving the horizon dependence of the classical LinUCB guarantee by a factor of $\sqrt{\log T}$.

The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.

Read it on ReadSearch

Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.

Already a reader? Sign in

All new papers in Machine Learning

Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning every morning.

ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.

Papers belong to their authors and publishers; every page here links to the original. All research topics