Robust Causal Bandits for Linear Models
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- The paper addresses the problem of optimizing a reward function in causal systems through sequential design of interventions in causal bandits (CBs)
- Existing literature assumes constant causal models over time, but this may not hold in complex systems with temporal model fluctuations
- Focuses on robustness of CBs to model fluctuations in linear structural equation models (SEMs)
- Both SEMs and pre/post-interventional statistical models are unknown
- Design criteria based on cumulative regret, measuring deviation between expected rewards obtained by an algorithm and those obtained by an oracle aware of the entire causal model and its fluctuations
- Objective is to design interventions that minimize cumulative regret
- Existing approaches fail to maintain sub-linear regret even with a few instances of model deviation
- Proposed robust CB algorithm is introduced and its regret is analyzed
- Upper and lower bounds on regret established for graphs with N nodes and maximum degree d under measure of model deviation denoted as C
- Cumulative regret upper bounded by $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(d^{L-\frac{1}{2}}(\sqrt{NT} + NC))$ and lower bounded by $\Omega(d^{\frac{L}{2}-2}\max\{\sqrt{T},d^2C\})$
- Proposed algorithm achieves nearly optimal $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(\sqrt{T})$ regret when C is $o(\sqrt{T})$, maintains sub-linear regret for broader range of C
- Contributes to sequential design of experiments in causal systems by addressing robustness of CBs to model fluctuations
- Proposed algorithm provides improved performance compared to existing approaches, especially in scenarios with temporal model deviations
Authors: Zirui Yan, Arpan Mukherjee, Burak Varıcı, Ali Tajer
Abstract: Sequential design of experiments for optimizing a reward function in causal systems can be effectively modeled by the sequential design of interventions in causal bandits (CBs). In the existing literature on CBs, a critical assumption is that the causal models remain constant over time. However, this assumption does not necessarily hold in complex systems, which constantly undergo temporal model fluctuations. This paper addresses the robustness of CBs to such model fluctuations. The focus is on causal systems with linear structural equation models (SEMs). The SEMs and the time-varying pre- and post-interventional statistical models are all unknown. Cumulative regret is adopted as the design criteria, based on which the objective is to design a sequence of interventions that incur the smallest cumulative regret with respect to an oracle aware of the entire causal model and its fluctuations. First, it is established that the existing approaches fail to maintain regret sub-linearity with even a few instances of model deviation. Specifically, when the number of instances with model deviation is as few as $T^\frac{1}{2L}$, where $T$ is the time horizon and $L$ is the longest causal path in the graph, the existing algorithms will have linear regret in $T$. Next, a robust CB algorithm is designed, and its regret is analyzed, where upper and information-theoretic lower bounds on the regret are established. Specifically, in a graph with $N$ nodes and maximum degree $d$, under a general measure of model deviation $C$, the cumulative regret is upper bounded by $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(d^{L-\frac{1}{2}}(\sqrt{NT} + NC))$ and lower bounded by $\Omega(d^{\frac{L}{2}-2}\max\{\sqrt{T},d^2C\})$. Comparing these bounds establishes that the proposed algorithm achieves nearly optimal $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(\sqrt{T})$ regret when $C$ is $o(\sqrt{T})$ and maintains sub-linear regret for a broader range of $C$.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.