pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2501.19277 · v4 · submitted 2025-01-31 · 📊 stat.ML · cs.LG

On Pareto Optimality for Parametric Choice Bandits

classification 📊 stat.ML cs.LG
keywords alphaotilderegretchoiceinferenceunderboundconditions
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

We study online assortment optimization under stochastic choice when a decision maker simultaneously values cumulative revenue performance and the quality of post-hoc inference on revenue contrasts. We analyze a forced-exploration optimism-in-the-face-of-uncertainty (OFU) scheme that combines two regularized maximum-likelihood estimators: one based on all observations for sequential decision making, and one based only on exploration rounds for inference. Our general theory is developed under predictable score proxies and per-round action-dependent curvature domination. Under these conditions we establish a self-normalized concentration inequality, a likelihood-based ellipsoidal confidence-set theorem, and a regret bound for approximate optimistic actions that explicitly accounts for optimization error. For the multinomial logit (MNL) model we derive explicit score and curvature proxies and show that a balanced spaced singleton-exploration schedule yields realized coordinate coverage, implying regret $\Otilde(n_T + T/\sqrt{n_T})$ and revenue-contrast error $\Otilde(1/\sqrt{n_T})$ up to fixed problem-dependent factors. A hard two-assortment subclass yields a matching lower bound at the product level. Consequently, within the polynomial exploration family $n_T \asymp T^\alpha$, the regret and inference rates become $\Otilde(T^{\max\{\alpha,1-\alpha/2\}})$ and $\Otilde(T^{-\alpha/2})$, respectively; hence $\alpha\in[2/3,1)$ is the rate-wise Pareto-undominated interval and $\alpha=2/3$ is the unique balancing point that minimizes the regret exponent. Finally, for the Exponomial Choice and Nested Logit models we state verifiable sufficient conditions that would instantiate the general framework.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.