IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/indpam/v47y2016i2d10.1007_s13226-016-0186-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mechanisms with learning for stochastic multi-armed bandit problems

Author

Listed:
  • Shweta Jain

    (Indian Institute of Science)

  • Satyanath Bhat

    (Indian Institute of Science)

  • Ganesh Ghalme

    (Indian Institute of Science)

  • Divya Padmanabhan

    (Indian Institute of Science)

  • Y. Narahari

    (Indian Institute of Science)

Abstract

The multi-armed bandit (MAB) problem is a widely studied problem in machine learning literature in the context of online learning. In this article, our focus is on a specific class of problems namely stochastic MAB problems where the rewards are stochastic. In particular, we emphasize stochastic MAB problems with strategic agents. Dealing with strategic agents warrants the use of mechanism design principles in conjunction with online learning, and leads to non-trivial technical challenges. In this paper, we first provide three motivating problems arising from Internet advertising, crowdsourcing, and smart grids. Next, we provide an overview of stochastic MAB problems and key associated learning algorithms including upper confidence bound (UCB) based algorithms. We provide proofs of important results related to regret analysis of the above learning algorithms. Following this, we present mechanism design for stochastic MAB problems. With the classic example of sponsored search auctions as a backdrop, we bring out key insights in important issues such as regret lower bounds, exploration separated mechanisms, designing truthful mechanisms, UCB based mechanisms, and extension to multiple pull MAB problems. Finally we provide a bird’s eye view of recent results in the area and present a few issues that require immediate future attention.

Suggested Citation

  • Shweta Jain & Satyanath Bhat & Ganesh Ghalme & Divya Padmanabhan & Y. Narahari, 2016. "Mechanisms with learning for stochastic multi-armed bandit problems," Indian Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 229-272, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:indpam:v:47:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s13226-016-0186-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s13226-016-0186-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13226-016-0186-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13226-016-0186-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hamid Nazerzadeh & Amin Saberi & Rakesh Vohra, 2013. "Dynamic Pay-Per-Action Mechanisms and Applications to Online Advertising," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(1), pages 98-111, February.
    2. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sham M. Kakade & Ilan Lobel & Hamid Nazerzadeh, 2013. "Optimal Dynamic Mechanism Design and the Virtual-Pivot Mechanism," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(4), pages 837-854, August.
    2. Krishnamurthy Iyer & Ramesh Johari & Mukund Sundararajan, 2014. "Mean Field Equilibria of Dynamic Auctions with Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 2949-2970, December.
    3. Santiago R. Balseiro & Omar Besbes & Gabriel Y. Weintraub, 2019. "Dynamic Mechanism Design with Budget-Constrained Buyers Under Limited Commitment," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 711-730, May.
    4. Tao Zhang & Quanyan Zhu, 2019. "On Incentive Compatibility in Dynamic Mechanism Design With Exit Option in a Markovian Environment," Papers 1909.13720, arXiv.org, revised May 2021.
    5. Santiago Balseiro & Omar Besbes & Francisco Castro, 2021. "Mechanism Design under Approximate Incentive Compatibility," Papers 2103.03403, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2022.
    6. Ensthaler, Ludwig & Giebe, Thomas, 2014. "Bayesian optimal knapsack procurement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 234(3), pages 774-779.
    7. Tao Zhang & Quanyan Zhu, 2022. "On Incentive Compatibility in Dynamic Mechanism Design With Exit Option in a Markovian Environment," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 701-745, June.
    8. Arve, Malin & Zwart, Gijsbert, 2023. "Optimal procurement and investment in new technologies under uncertainty," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    9. Johannes Hörner & Larry Samuelson, 2011. "Managing Strategic Buyers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(3), pages 379-425.
    10. Yuya Wakabayashi & Ryosuke Sakai & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2022. "A Characterization of the Minimum Price Walrasian Rule with Reserve Prices for an Arbitrary Number of Agents and Objects," ISER Discussion Paper 1161, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    11. Schmitz, Patrick W., 2007. "Optimal selling strategies when buyers may have hard information," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(4), pages 859-870, May.
    12. Zhang, Hanzhe, 2021. "The optimal sequence of prices and auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    13. Josheski Dushko & Karamazova Elena, 2021. "Auction theory and a note on game mechanisms," Croatian Review of Economic, Business and Social Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 7(1), pages 43-59, May.
    14. Nicolas Gruyer, 2009. "Optimal Auctions When A Seller Is Bound To Sell To Collusive Bidders," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 835-850, December.
    15. Yeon-Koo Che & Ian Gale, 1994. "Auctions with budget-constrained buyers: a nonequivalence result," Working Papers (Old Series) 9402, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    16. Scott Fay & Robert Zeithammer, 2017. "Bidding for Bidders? How the Format for Soliciting Supplier Participation in NYOP Auctions Impacts Channel Profit," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(12), pages 4324-4344, December.
    17. Hanming Fang & Peter Norman, 2014. "Toward an efficiency rationale for the public provision of private goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 375-408, June.
    18. Taneli Mäkinen & Francesco Palazzo, 2017. "The double bind of asymmetric information in over-the-counter markets," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1128, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    19. Jeremy Bulow & Paul Klemperer, 1994. "Auctions vs. Negotiations," NBER Working Papers 4608, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Bogetoft, Peter & Nielsen, Kurt, 2003. "Yardstick Based Procurement Design In Natural Resource Management," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25910, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:indpam:v:47:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s13226-016-0186-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.