PreprintCited by 600Advanced Bandit Algorithms ResearchReinforcement Learning in RoboticsMachine Learning and Algorithms

Thompson Sampling for Contextual Bandits with Linear Payoffs

Open access
Agrawal, Shipra, Goyal, Navin·2012·arXiv

Abstract

Thompson Sampling is one of the oldest heuristics for multi-armed bandit problems. It is a randomized algorithm based on Bayesian ideas, and has recently generated significant interest after several studies demonstrated it to have better empirical performance compared to the state-of-the-art methods. However, many questions regarding its theoretical performance remained open. In this paper, we design and analyze a generalization of Thompson Sampling algorithm for the stochastic contextual multi-armed bandit problem with linear payoff functions, when the contexts are provided by an adaptive adversary. This is among the most important and widely studied versions of the contextual bandits problem. We provide the first theoretical guarantees for the contextual version of Thompson Sampling. We prove a high probability regret bound of $\tilde{O}(d^{3/2}\sqrt{T})$ (or $\tilde{O}(d\sqrt{T \log(N)})$), which is the best regret bound achieved by any computationally efficient algorithm available for this problem in the current literature, and is within a factor of $\sqrt{d}$ (or $\sqrt{\log(N)}$) of the information-theoretic lower bound for this problem.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1209.3352

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Thompson sampling remains computationally efficient as long as the argmax over layouts can be solved efficiently.

    “This property ensures that Thompson Sampling remains computationally efficient as long as we can efficiently solve arдmax A B ⊤ A,X W [2].”
  • With an efficient oracle, there is an efficient algorithm with regret bound Õ(M^{3/2}√T), the best achieved by a computationally efficient algorithm.

    “With an oracle which efficiently solves equation 2, then both [11] and [2] give an efficient algorithm with a regret bound of Õ(M 3/2 √ T ), the best achieved by a computationally efficient algorithm.”
  • Bandit methods have shown impressive empirical performance and can easily incorporate context.

    “Bandit methods have shown impressive empirical performance [8] and can easily incorporate context [2,14].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Abbasi-Yadkori, Yasin, P´ al, D´ avid, and Szepesv´ ari, Csaba. Improved Algorithms for Linear Stochastic Bandits. In NIPS , pp. 2312-2320, 2011.
  2. Agrawal, Shipra and Goyal, Navin. Analysis of Thompson Sampling for the Multi-armed Bandit Problem. In COLT , 2012.
  3. Agrawal, Shipra and Goyal, Navin. Thompson Sampling for Contextual Bandits with Linear Payoffs. ICML , 2013a.
  4. Agrawal, Shipra and Goyal, Navin. Further Optimal Regret Bounds for Thompson Sampling. AISTATS , 2013b.
  5. Auer, Peter. Using Confidence Bounds for Exploitation-Exploration Trade-offs. Journal of Machine Learning Research , 3:397-422, 2002.
  6. Auer, Peter, Cesa-Bianchi, Nicol` o, Freund, Yoav, and Schapire, Robert E. The Nonstochastic Multiarmed Bandit Problem. SIAM J. Comput. , 32(1):48-77, 2002.
  7. Bubeck, S´ ebastien, Cesa-Bianchi, Nicol` o, and Kakade, Sham M. Towards minimax policies for online linear optimization with bandit feedback. Proceedings of the 25th Conference on Learning Theory (COLT) , pp. 1-14, 2012.
  8. Chapelle, Olivier and Li, Lihong. An Empirical Evaluation of Thompson Sampling. In NIPS , pp. 2249-2257, 2011.
  9. Chapelle, Olivier and Li, Lihong. Open Problem: Regret Bounds for Thompson Sampling. In COLT , 2012.
  10. Chu, Wei, Li, Lihong, Reyzin, Lev, and Schapire, Robert E. Contextual Bandits with Linear Payoff Functions. Journal of Machine Learning Research Proceedings Track , 15:208-214, 2011.
  11. Dani, Varsha, Hayes, Thomas P., and Kakade, Sham M. Stochastic Linear Optimization under Bandit Feedback. In COLT , pp. 355-366, 2008.
  12. Filippi, Sarah, Capp´ e, Olivier, Garivier, Aur´ elien, and Szepesv´ ari, Csaba. Parametric Bandits: The Generalized Linear Case. In NIPS , pp. 586-594, 2010.
  13. Graepel, Thore, Candela, Joaquin Qui˜ nonero, Borchert, Thomas, and Herbrich, Ralf. Web-Scale Bayesian Click-Through rate Prediction for Sponsored Search Advertising in Microsoft's Bing Search Engine. In ICML , pp. 13-20, 2010.
  14. Granmo, O.-C. Solving Two-Armed Bernoulli Bandit Problems Using a Bayesian Learning Automaton. International Journal of Intelligent Computing and Cybernetics (IJICC) , 3(2):207-234, 2010.
  15. Kaelbling, Leslie Pack. Associative Reinforcement Learning: Functions in kDNF. Machine Learning , 15(3):279-298, 1994.
  16. Langford, John and Zhang, Tong. The Epoch-Greedy Algorithm for Multiarmed Bandits with Side Information. In NIPS , 2007.
  17. Ortega, Pedro A. and Braun, Daniel A. Linearly Parametrized Bandits. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research , 38:475-511, 2010.
  18. Sarkar, Jyotirmoy. One-armed badit problem with covariates. The Annals of Statistics , 19(4):1978-2002, 1991.
  19. Strehl, Alexander L., Mesterharm, Chris, Littman, Michael L., and Hirsh, Haym. Experience-efficient learning in associative bandit problems. In ICML , pp. 889-896, 2006.
  20. Strens, Malcolm J. A. A Bayesian Framework for Reinforcement Learning. In ICML , pp. 943-950, 2000.
  21. Thompson, William R. On the likelihood that one unknown probability exceeds another in view of the evidence of two samples. Biometrika , 25(3-4):285-294, 1933.
  22. Woodroofe, Michael. A one-armed bandit problem with a concomitant variable. Journal of the American Statistics Association , 74(368):799-806, 1979.
  23. Wyatt, Jeremy. Exploration and Inference in Learning from Reinforcement . PhD thesis, Department of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh, 1997.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Agrawal, S., & Goyal, N.
Affiliations
Microsoft Research (India) (IN)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2012
Pages
127-135
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2166253248
Cited by
600
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 130 · 2020: 90 · 2019: 79 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • International Conference on Machine Learning
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Advanced Bandit Algorithms Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Algorithms
Keywords
Thompson sampling, contextual bandits, regret bounds, adaptive adversaries, Bayesian reinforcement learning, multi-armed bandits, information-theoretic lower bounds, online learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review