Paper detail

Memory Bounds for the Experts Problem

Online learning with expert advice is a fundamental problem of sequential prediction. In this problem, the algorithm has access to a set of $n$ "experts" who make predictions on each day. The goal on each day is to process these predictions, and make a prediction with the minimum cost. After making a prediction, the algorithm sees the actual outcome on that day, updates its state, and then moves on to the next day. An algorithm is judged by how well it does compared to the best expert in the set. The classical algorithm for this problem is the multiplicative weights algorithm. However, every application, to our knowledge, relies on storing weights for every expert, and uses $Ω(n)$ memory. There is little work on understanding the memory required to solve the online learning with expert advice problem, or run standard sequential prediction algorithms, in natural streaming models, which is especially important when the number of experts, as well as the number of days on which the experts make predictions, is large. We initiate the study of the learning with expert advice problem in the streaming setting, and show lower and upper bounds. Our lower bound for i.i.d., random order, and adversarial order streams uses a reduction to a custom-built problem using a novel masking technique, to show a smooth trade-off for regret versus memory. Our upper bounds show novel ways to run standard sequential prediction algorithms in rounds on small "pools" of experts, thus reducing the necessary memory. For random-order streams, we show that our upper bound is tight up to low order terms. We hope that these results and techniques will have broad applications in online learning, and can inspire algorithms based on standard sequential prediction techniques, like multiplicative weights, for a wide range of other problems in the memory-constrained setting.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.