cs.LGMay 8, 2026

Regret-Oracle Complexity Tradeoffs in Agnostic Online Learning

Authors: Idan AttiasSteve HannekeArvind Ramaswami

Organizations: Institute for Data, Econometrics, Algorithms, and Learning (IDEAL), hosted by UIC and TTIC · Department of Computer Science, Purdue University

Abstract

Agnostic online learning is classically solved via a reduction to the realizable setting, utilizing Littlestone's Standard Optimal Algorithm (SOA) as a base learner. However, the SOA is computationally intractable to execute even for a single round. To overcome this barrier, recent work in oracle-efficient online learning replaces the SOA with a realizable base learner that accesses the concept class exclusively through an offline empirical risk minimization (ERM) oracle. While such agnostic learners achieve near-optimal expected regret, they suffer from a doubly-exponential oracle complexity of O(T2O(dLD))O\big(T^{2^{O(d_\mathrm{LD})}}\big), where dLDd_\mathrm{LD} is the Littlestone dimension and TT is the number of rounds. In this work, we significantly improve this oracle complexity while relying on an even weaker primitive: a weak-consistency oracle, which merely decides whether a given labeled dataset is realizable. At the core of our approach is an adaptive and dynamic agnostic-to-realizable reduction that actively prunes non-realizable label sequences on the fly. By using the VC dimension (dVCd_\mathrm{VC}) to bound the number of dynamically maintained active paths, our algorithm reduces the total query complexity down to O(TdVC+1)O(T^{d_\mathrm{VC}+1}) while perfectly preserving near-optimal expected regret. Crucially, this dynamic pruning also yields a memory reduction over the standard reduction. Furthermore, we formally quantify the regret--oracle complexity tradeoff, providing upper bounds that smoothly interpolate between restricted query budgets and attainable expected regret. We complement these with lower bounds proving that any learner restricted to Q=o(T)Q = o(\sqrt{T}) queries must suffer an expected regret of Ω(T/Q)Ω(T/Q).

Explore similar work

Sep 9, 2026cs.LG

An Exponential Deterministic--Randomized Gap in ERM-Oracle Complexity for Thresholds on an Unknown Order

Attias, Hanneke and Ramaswami (NeurIPS 2025) asked whether randomization provably reduces the oracle calls needed for online learning when the class is accessible only through an oracle. We study the instance they singled out: transductive online learning of thresholds on an unknown total order of T instances, with a consistency-type ERM oracle that returns a full concept consistent with a queried labeled set (or reports non-realizability). Our main result is a separation for a fixed natural oracle. When the oracle is the minimal-prefix rule (or the maximal-prefix rule), every deterministic learner makes M mistakes and Q calls with M+QTεM+Q\ge T-\varepsilon on some instance (ε{0,1}\varepsilon\in\{0,1\}, according to whether the empty prefix is a concept), and the constant is exact; hence O(logT)O(\log T) mistakes cost TεO(logT)T-\varepsilon-O(\log T) calls, whereas that paper's randomized learner achieves O(logT)O(\log T) expected calls and mistakes under the same rule. The randomized order is optimal: on an explicit hard distribution under the minimal-prefix rule, every learner has expected mistakes at least ((T+1ε)128E[Q]1)/2((T+1-\varepsilon)\,128^{-\mathbb{E}[Q]}-1)/2, so Ω(logT)Ω(\log T) expected calls are necessary for polylogarithmic mistakes. The separation is governed by the oracle's selection rule, not by the class alone: for a legal feasible-median ERM rule a deterministic learner achieves O(logT)O(\log T) calls and mistakes, while a global-median rule again forces linear total cost. The same linear bound holds when the oracle's answers are chosen adversarially and then frozen into a memoryless oracle. We add partial tradeoff results for fixed query budgets (the middle regime is open) and an interface contrast: with only a weak consistency oracle, returning a realizability bit, both deterministic and randomized learners need Θ(T)Θ(T) calls.
Xuan Li
Aug 6, 2026cs.LG

An Optimal Agnostic PAC Algorithm

Let H{1,+1}XH\subseteq\{-1,+1\}^X be a class of finite VC dimension d1d\ge1. Writing LL for the binary risk and L=minhHL(h)L^*=\min_{h\in H}L(h), we construct a learner achieving the statistically optimal risk bound: from an i.i.d.\ sample of size nn, for every 0<δ1/20<δ\le 1/2, with probability at least 1δ1-δ, L(h^)L+7108(L(d+log(1/δ))n+d+log(1/δ)n).L(\widehat h) \le L^*+ 7\cdot10^8\left( \sqrt{\frac{L^*(d+\log(1/δ))}{n}} +\frac{d+\log(1/δ)}{n} \right). This settles the sample complexity of agnostic PAC learning up to universal constants at every fixed LL^*, matching the lower bounds of Devroye, Györfi, and Lugosi [A Probabilistic Theory of Pattern Recognition, Springer, 1996].
Markus Engelund Mathiasen, Jian Qian, Nikita Zhivotovskiy
Aug 6, 2026stat.ML

Optimal Rates for Learning with Monotone Adversaries

A monotone adversary observes an i.i.d. labeled sample and appends a finite number of further examples of its choice, every one of them labeled correctly by the target hypothesis. The learner sees a uniform shuffle of the combined sample and is scored on the original distribution. Every example is correctly labeled, but the insertions depend on the clean sample, so the combined sample is not exchangeable. Larsen, Pabbaraju, and Shetty, who introduced this model, showed that empirical risk minimization attains expected error O((d/n)log(n/d))O((d/n)\log(n/d)) for classes of VC dimension dd, and that every known optimal learner can be pushed away from the Θ(d/n)Θ(d/n) rate, optimal for PAC learning. They asked whether the extra logarithm is an artifact of those particular algorithms or an inherent consequence of the lack of exchangeability. We show that this additional cost is inherent beyond VC dimension one. In the worst case over classes of VC dimension dd and over known finite insertion budgets, the minimax expected error is Θ(1/n)Θ(1/n) at d=1d=1 and Θ((d/n)log(n/d))Θ((d/n)\log(n/d)) for d2d\geq 2. The same rates hold with Littlestone dimension dLd_{\mathrm L} in place of dd, so the clean online-to-batch rate O(dL/n)O(d_{\mathrm L}/n) is unattainable as well. Thus, somewhat counterintuitively, adding correctly labeled examples can make learning harder by a logarithmic factor, even for classes that admit finite mistake bounds in online learning. The dimension-one upper bound is achieved by a simple improper learner whose analysis adapts the leave-one-out argument underlying the one-inclusion graph. All of our lower bounds are elementary and come from a single construction: an explicit class and prior on which two target hypothesis, which differ a point of nonnegligible mass, produce the same sample.
Anay Mehrotra