Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This research addresses a critical bottleneck in online learning systems where feedback tracking capacity is limited, proposing new algorithms to minimize regret under hard constraints. By decoupling rate adaptation from perturbation filtration, the study demonstrates how temporal geometry significantly impacts performance when aggregate delay metrics are identical but timing distributions differ. These findings offer essential theoretical bounds for deploying machine learning models in bandwidth-constrained or high-latency environments where data loss is permanent.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Beyond Peak Backlog: Conditional Energy and Temporal Geometry in Capacity-Constrained Delayed Bandit Optimization

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2608.16216v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: What is the right delay complexity when a learner can track only $C$ pending feedback items and discarded feedback is permanently lost? Existing one-point bandit convex optimization guarantees in this model pay $\sqrt{T\sigma_{\max}}$, where $\sigma_{\max}$ is the peak backlog, although unlimited tracking admits the sharper $\sqrt{d_{\mathrm{tot}}}$ dependence on total delay. We introduce a scheduler-side conditional-energy interface that separates rate adaptation from the one-point perturbation filtration and handles the dependent importance weights created by randomized admission. Under the same semi-clairvoyant oracle and pathwise hard-capacity contract, this yields an untuned learner whose delay term scales as $O(\sqrt{E_C d_{\mathrm{tot}}})$, with only an explicit restart factor $E_C$; a public constant-factor peak bound removes this factor while $d_{\mathrm{tot}}$ remains unknown. Under strong convexity, the same interface yields the temporal cost $H_A(d)=\sum_t \sigma_t/(A+t)$. Two delay vectors with identical delay multisets, $d_{\mathrm{tot}}$, $\sigma_{\max}$, and capacity can nevertheless have polynomially different minimax regret, showing that timing matters under curvature even when aggregate delay summaries agree. Finally, a continuous hard family converts tracking capacity into a zeroth-order query budget and gives a complementary capacity-starvation lower endpoint. The upper bounds require $C\ge \ln T+1$ and do not constitute a complete capacity minimax characterization.

Abstract:What is the right delay complexity when a learner can track only $C$ pending feedback items and discarded feedback is permanently lost? Existing one-point bandit convex optimization guarantees in this model pay $\sqrt{T\sigma_{\max}}$, where $\sigma_{\max}$ is the peak backlog, although unlimited tracking admits the sharper $\sqrt{d_{\mathrm{tot}}}$ dependence on total delay. We introduce a scheduler-side conditional-energy interface that separates rate adaptation from the one-point perturbation filtration and handles the dependent importance weights created by randomized admission. Under the same semi-clairvoyant oracle and pathwise hard-capacity contract, this yields an untuned learner whose delay term scales as $O(\sqrt{E_C d_{\mathrm{tot}}})$, with only an explicit restart factor $E_C$; a public constant-factor peak bound removes this factor while $d_{\mathrm{tot}}$ remains unknown. Under strong convexity, the same interface yields the temporal cost $H_A(d)=\sum_t \sigma_t/(A+t)$. Two delay vectors with identical delay multisets, $d_{\mathrm{tot}}$, $\sigma_{\max}$, and capacity can nevertheless have polynomially different minimax regret, showing that timing matters under curvature even when aggregate delay summaries agree. Finally, a continuous hard family converts tracking capacity into a zeroth-order query budget and gives a complementary capacity-starvation lower endpoint. The upper bounds require $C\ge \ln T+1$ and do not constitute a complete capacity minimax characterization.

Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2608.16216 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2608.16216v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.16216 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 287 words

Related coverage