Preference-based Pure Exploration

A. Shukla, Debabrota Basu
2/3/2026

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 1 possible match can be shown below.

Abstract

We study the preference-based pure exploration problem for bandits with vector-valued rewards. The rewards are ordered using a (given) preference cone $\mathcal{C}$ and our goal is to identify the set of Pareto optimal arms. First, to quantify the impact of preferences, we derive a novel lower bound on sample complexity for identifying the most preferred policy with a confidence level $1-\delta$. Our lower bound elicits the role played by the geometry of the preference cone and punctuates the difference in hardness compared to existing best-arm identification variants of the problem. We further explicate this geometry when the rewards follow Gaussian distributions. We then provide a convex relaxation of the lower bound and leverage it to design the Preference-based Track and Stop (PreTS) algorithm that identifies the most preferred policy. Finally, we show that the sample complexity of PreTS is asymptotically tight by deriving a new concentration inequality for vector-valued rewards.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 1 weaker match is hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{shukla2026preferencebased,
  title  = {Preference-based Pure Exploration},
  author = {A. Shukla and Debabrota Basu},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2412.02988},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  doi    = {10.48550/arXiv.2412.02988},
  url    = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.02988},
  journal = {NEURIPS 2024 2024}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2412.02988.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2412.02988)

Discussion