arXiv subjects

Samuel Robertson

Publications and source records attributed to Samuel Robertson.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Eluder dimension: localise it!

We establish a lower bound on the eluder dimension of generalised linear model classes, showing that standard eluder dimension-based analysis cannot lead to first-order regret bounds. To address this, we introduce a localisation method for the eluder dimension; our analysis immediately recovers and improves on classic results for Bernoulli bandits, and allows for the first genuine first-order bounds for finite-horizon reinforcement learning tasks with bounded cumulative returns.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Does Weighting Improve Matrix Factorization for Recommender Systems?

Matrix factorization is a widely used approach for top-N recommendation and collaborative filtering. When implemented on implicit feedback data (such as clicks), a common heuristic is to upweight the observed interactions. This strategy has been shown to improve performance for certain algorithms. In this paper, we conduct a systematic study of various weighting schemes and matrix factorization algorithms. Somewhat surprisingly, we find that training with unweighted data can perform comparably to, and sometimes outperform, training with weighted data, especially for large models. This observation challenges the conventional wisdom. Nevertheless, we identify cases where weighting can be beneficial, particularly for models with lower capacity and specific regularization schemes. We also derive efficient algorithms for exactly minimizing several weighted objectives that were previously considered computationally intractable. Our work provides a comprehensive analysis of the interplay between weighting, regularization, and model capacity in matrix factorization for recommender systems.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Switching the Loss Reduces the Cost in Batch (Offline) Reinforcement Learning

We propose training fitted Q-iteration with log-loss (FQI-log) for batch reinforcement learning (RL). We show that the number of samples needed to learn a near-optimal policy with FQI-log scales with the accumulated cost of the optimal policy, which is zero in problems where acting optimally achieves the goal and incurs no cost. In doing so, we provide a general framework for proving small-cost bounds, i.e. bounds that scale with the optimal achievable cost, in batch RL. Moreover, we empirically verify that FQI-log uses fewer samples than FQI trained with squared loss on problems where the optimal policy reliably achieves the goal.

cs.LG↗