Preferent Compression Bounds Are Tight

Dario Paccagnan, Marius Tirlea
9/28/2026
cs.LGeess.SYmath.OC

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

The lack of rigorous safety and performance certificates remains a key bottleneck to the deployment of modern learning-based methods. Sample compression has recently emerged as a powerful tool for deriving such certificates, with particularly sharp bounds available for algorithms satisfying a so-called preference property -- also known as stability in the learning theory literature. These bounds find direct application across domains as different as the Scenario Approach, Pick-to-Learn, and Support Vector methods. However, whether they are tight has remained an open problem. In this paper we resolve this question affirmatively and show that the state-of-the-art bound for preferent compressions is provably tight. We establish this by exhibiting an explicit construction based on the uniform distribution and order statistics that attains the bound in the limit. Along the way, we also provide a considerably shorter and more accessible proof of this bound, requiring only elementary counting arguments and no infinite-dimensional duality.

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{paccagnan2026preferent,
  title  = {Preferent Compression Bounds Are Tight},
  author = {Dario Paccagnan and Marius Tirlea},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2609.36030},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.36030v1}
}

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/2609.36030.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2609.36030)

Discussion