2010
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-16108-7_22
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prediction with Expert Advice under Discounted Loss

Abstract: We study prediction with expert advice in the setting where the losses are accumulated with some discounting and the impact of old losses can gradually vanish. We generalize the Aggregating Algorithm and the Aggregating Algorithm for Regression, propose a new variant of exponentially weighted average algorithm, and prove bounds on the cumulative discounted loss

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…see [29]. By setting the initial weights to , and with the choice , one obtains for all (3) If, on the other hand, for some the function is concave for any fixed (such loss functions are called exp-concave) then, choosing and , one has for all (4) We note that the regret bounds in (2)-(4) do not require a fixed time horizon, that is, they hold simultaneously for all .…”
Section: A Prediction With Expert Advicementioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…see [29]. By setting the initial weights to , and with the choice , one obtains for all (3) If, on the other hand, for some the function is concave for any fixed (such loss functions are called exp-concave) then, choosing and , one has for all (4) We note that the regret bounds in (2)-(4) do not require a fixed time horizon, that is, they hold simultaneously for all .…”
Section: A Prediction With Expert Advicementioning
confidence: 98%
“…Let be defined by (27). If is convex in its first argument and takes values in the interval and for , then for all and any , the tracking regret satisfies (28) where the function is defined as Furthermore, for and , the adaptive regret of the algorithm satisfies (29) where the function is defined as…”
Section: Lemma 3: For Anymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a consequence of this result, the expected regret of mSD matches that of EWA, so the performance bound of EWA, mentioned in the previous section, holds for the mSD algorithm as well [14,Lemma 2]). That is, the following result can be obtained by a slight modification of the proof of [17,Lemma 1] for EWA (the same bound for the specific time-dependent choice of η t discussed after the lemma follows directly as a special case of [18,Theorem 2]).…”
Section: Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…A well-known solution to this problem (which is optimal under various conditions) is the EWA prediction method that, at time step t, chooses action i with probability proportional to e −ηtD t−1,i for some sequence of positive step size parameters {η t } T t=1 [2]- [4]. 2 It can be shown (using techniques developed in [17], [18]) that if η t+1 ≤ η t for all t then the average expected regret of this algorithm satisfies E…”
Section: The Shrinking Dartboard Algorithm Revisitedmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the prediction and outcome spaces are an interval Ω = Γ = [A, B] and the square loss function is 2 we have c(η) = 1 (see [1], [12]) and therefore the optimal value is η = 2 (B−A) 2 . For these values of η we can use a simple substitution function…”
Section: Aggregating Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%