On the Peril of (Even a Little) Nonstationarity in Satisficing Regret Minimization

Yixuan Zhang, Ruihao Zhu, Qiaomin Xie
3/19/2026
stat.MLcs.LG

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Motivated by the principle of satisficing in decision-making, we study satisficing regret guarantees for nonstationary $K$-armed bandits. We show that in the general realizable, piecewise-stationary setting with $L$ stationary segments, the optimal regret is $Θ(L\log T)$ as long as $L\geq 2$. This stands in sharp contrast to the case of $L=1$ (i.e., the stationary setting), where a $T$-independent $Θ(1)$ satisficing regret is achievable under realizability. In other words, the optimal regret has to scale with $T$ even if just a little nonstationarity presents. A key ingredient in our analysis is a novel Fano-based framework tailored to nonstationary bandits via a \emph{post-interaction reference} construction. This framework strictly extends the classical Fano method for passive estimation as well as recent interactive Fano techniques for stationary bandits. As a complement, we also discuss a special regime in which constant satisficing regret is again possible.

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. Any repos shown below are weak matches — 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{zhang2026peril,
  title  = {On the Peril of (Even a Little) Nonstationarity in Satisficing Regret Minimization},
  author = {Yixuan Zhang and Ruihao Zhu and Qiaomin Xie},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2603.18514},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.18514v1}
}

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/2603.18514.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2603.18514)

Discussion