Information-Theoretic Generalization Bounds for Sequential Decision Making

Many learning algorithms can be represented as Markov processes, and understanding their generalization error is a central topic in learning theory. For specific continuous-time noisy algorithms, a prominent analysis technique relies on information-theoretic tools and the so-called ``entropy flow'' method. This technique is compatible with a broad range of assumptions and leverages the convergence properties of learning dynamics to produce meaningful generalization bounds, which can also be informative or extend to discrete-time settings. Despite their success, existing entropy flow formulations are limited to specific noise and algorithm structures (\eg, Langevin dynamics). In this work, we exploit new technical tools to extend its applicability to all learning algorithms whose iterative dynamics is governed by a time-homogeneous Markov process. Our approach builds on a principled continuous-time approximation of Markov algorithms and introduces a new, exact entropy flow formula for such processes. Within this unified framework, we establish novel connections to a well-studied family of modified logarithmic Sobolev inequalities, which we use to connect the generalization error to the ergodic properties of Markov processes. Finally, we provide a detailed analysis of all the terms appearing in our theory and demonstrate its effectiveness by deriving new generalization bounds for several concrete algorithms.

We introduce Bellman-sufficient information complexity for minimax analysis of sequential decision problems. A Bellman-sufficient state retains enough of the history to close the controlled recursion, while an index $Y=χ(Ω)$ specifies the decision-relevant information being charged. The upper bound is a log-penalized Bellman program; the lower bound is a Bellman--Fano comparison along an algorithm-dependent reference trajectory. If the two values match at a common localization scale and the stated admissibility, calibration, and growth conditions hold, they form an information-risk sandwich. UCB, E2D, and AMS/EBO control or relax the upper Bellman bracket in different ways. For the main application, we give a negative answer to a widely studied form of the GP--UCB minimax-optimality question. For every $0<α<1/4$, we construct one bounded continuous kernel whose minimax regret is $Θ(T^{1-α})$ along an infinite sequence of horizons, while two globally calibrated GP--UCB rules incur linear regret under one fixed truth. An epochwise finite-marginal action-index AIR Bellman policy, implemented through robust AIR/AMS/EBO control, attains the minimax order. The construction separates realized information from the cost of uniform optimism: many low-value directions inflate the exploration multiplier and change the trajectory. Through the canonical RKHS feature map, it also yields a finite-horizon polynomial minimax separation for the specified maximal-information-calibrated LinUCB rule. A reproducible experiment illustrates the mechanism.

Information theory plays a central role in establishing fundamental limits on what any learning or estimation algorithm can -- and cannot -- achieve, regardless of computational power. In this chapter, we provide an introduction to these connections. End-of-chapter exercises makes the material suitable for both classroom use and self-study. We begin by introducing concentration inequalities along with the notions of covering and packing in metric spaces, and the associated concept of metric entropy. These tools are essential for our analysis. We then introduce the learning-theoretic framework and derive upper bounds on generalization error in terms of metric entropy, Rademacher complexity, and the VC dimension, as well as mutual information and relative entropy. Finally we discuss the minimax estimation framework and establish lower bounds on minimax risk using Fano's inequality, yielding bounds in terms of relative entropy and covering and packing numbers. This manuscript contains preprint of a chapter under consideration for inclusion in the forthcoming third edition of Cover and Thomas's Elements of Information Theory, posted with permission from Wiley. It would follow the chapter posted at arXiv:2605.02989 . The table of contents of the new edition can be found at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L-m4oQEJw1PJhoxBeMwrrBD8S_HmvzMEkPbYvS24980/edit?usp=sharing . For feedback, please contact abbas@ee.stanford.edu.