Collaborative Contextual Bayesian Optimization

We study Bayesian Optimisation (BO) in settings where the objective function is influenced by uncontrollable environmental contexts governed by an unknown probability distribution. In practice, the contextual distribution must be estimated from empirical data, a process that inherently introduces distributional mismatch, producing sub-optimal results. While Distributionally Robust Optimisation (DRO) provides a framework to mitigate these risks, existing robust BO methods frequently suffer from high computational complexity, rely on discretisation of continuous context spaces, or impose restrictive assumptions on the structure of the ambiguity set. To overcome these limitations, we propose Ensemble Distributionally Robust Bayesian Optimisation (EDRBO). Our framework leverages the expressive power of ensemble surrogate models to approximate the black-box function while simultaneously accounting for contextual uncertainty. By utilising Wasserstein ball as ambiguity sets, EDRBO provides a robustified acquisition function that remains computationally tractable and natively handles continuous context spaces. We establish a rigorous theoretical foundation for our approach by proving sublinear cumulative regret guarantees of order $\mathcal{O}(γ_T \sqrt{T})$, where $γ_T$ represents the maximum information gain within the ensemble. Finally, we provide extensive empirical evaluations that corroborate our theory and demonstrate the state-of-the-art performance of EDRBO.

We propose a collaborative meta-learning framework for distributed Bayesian optimization matching centralized performance without raw-data exchange. We show gradient sharing leaks client observations, with leakage worsening as the search converges and queries concentrate near the optimum. We evaluate a differentially private defense and characterize its privacy-utility trade-off.

Causal Bayesian Optimization (CBO) combines causal inference with Bayesian optimization to enable sample-efficient intervention selection in systems with causal structure. This survey provides a systematic review of CBO through a unified BO-loop perspective, showing how causal assumptions shape intervention search spaces, surrogate models, acquisition functions, and decision policies. We organize existing methods by graph and system-knowledge assumptions, environment, intervention representation, surrogate architecture, and decision rule, and connect CBO to causal bandits, Bayesian experimental design, safe optimization, policy search, and causal abstraction. We also introduce a reproducibility-oriented benchmark spanning hard- and soft-intervention settings, with standardized GAP and a new trajectory-aware Path-Aware GAP (PA-GAP), evaluating seven CBO methods and a non-causal BO baseline across thirteen datasets, three budgets, and two metrics. Results show that no method dominates uniformly: rankings depend on dataset, budget, metric, and how causal information is used, while strong non-causal baselines remain competitive in several settings. Controlled graph-misspecification and omitted-variable stress tests further show that rankings can change substantially when learner-side causal information is perturbed. We conclude by identifying key open challenges, including robustness to causal-assumption violations, scalable unknown-graph optimization, mixed intervention types, realistic cost models, stronger theoretical guarantees, and integration with modern representation learning and causal abstractions.