Basic bounds on the minimax regret #
This file proves Proposition 1 (Basic bounds) of the paper, following its proof in Section S1.2,
Remark 1, the claim of Section 5 that an upper bound on η_T may replace η_T, and the claim of
Section 1 that two e-processes with regrets differing by o(t) have the same limit of
t^{-1}E_Q(log E_t).
Setting.isEProcess_indicator: Proposition 1(i);Setting.isEProcess_weighted,Setting.regret_weighted_le,Setting.minimaxRegret_le_log: Proposition 1(ii);Setting.one_le_eta,Setting.isEProcess_stopped_div,Setting.regret_div_const,Setting.minimaxRegret_le_log_eta: Proposition 1(iii), for every finiteb ≥ η_Tin place ofη_T;Setting.minimaxRegret_eq_zero: Remark 1;prop_basic_proof,rem_zero_proof,sec5_upper_bound_proof, andintro_growth_rate_proof.
Proposition 1(i) #
Proposition 1(i): the process E_i = E*_t 1(i ≥ t) is an e-process, since
E_P(E_τ) = E_P{E*_t 1(τ ≥ t)} ≤ E_P(E*_t) ≤ 1.
Proposition 1(ii) #
Proposition 1(ii): for ξ ∈ Δ_T, the process (∑_{i=0}^{t∧T} ξ_i E*_i)_{t≥0} is an
e-process, since E_P(E_τ) ≤ ∑_{i=0}^T ξ_i E_P(E*_i) ≤ 1.
Proposition 1(ii): since E_t ≥ ξ_t E*_t, the regret satisfies R_t(E_t) ≤ log(1/ξ_t).
Proposition 1(ii): the uniform ξ gives Γ_T ≤ log(T + 1).
Proposition 1(iii) and Section 5 #
Since E*_0 = 1, taking τ = 0 in eq. (4) gives η_T ≥ 1.
Proposition 1(iii), for every b ≥ η_T in place of η_T: the process
(E*_{t∧T}/b)_{t≥0} is an e-process, since E_τ = E*_{τ∧T}/b, also on the event {τ = ∞}, and
E_P(E*_{τ∧T}) ≤ η_T ≤ b.
Proposition 1(iii), for every b in place of η_T: since 0 < E*_t < ∞ Q-almost surely,
E*_t/(E*_t/b) = b Q-almost surely, and the regret of E*_t/b is log b.
Remark 1: if E*_0, …, E*_T have versions such that (E*_{t∧T})_{t≥0} is an e-process, then
Γ_T = 0, since these versions have regret zero and Γ_T ≥ 0.
Proposition 1(iii): Γ_T ≤ log η_T, trivially if η_T = ∞.
Proposition 1, Remark 1, and the claims of Sections 1 and 5 #
For an e-process with finite regrets, E_Q(log E_t) = E_Q(log E*_t) − R_t(E_t) in ℝ, by
Lemma S1.