Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 7, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
We show upper and lower bounds on the regret of $m$-set adversarial bandits for different utilities (winner reward or sum of rewards) and feedback models (winner index, winner reward, sum of rewards, and their combinations). By comparing to standard bounds for combinatorial and MNL bandits, our results reveal how subtle changes in the setting can have a dramatic impact on the learning rates. Our main technical contributions are the information-theoretic lower bounds on the regret. Experiments on synthetic data confirm our theoretical analyses.