PAC Learning with Bandit Feedback: Sharp Sample Complexity in the Realizable Setting

While the optimal sample complexity of binary classification in terms of the VC dimension is well-established, determining the optimal sample complexity of multiclass classification has remained open. The appropriate complexity parameter for multiclass classification is the DS dimension, and despite significant efforts, a gap of $\sqrt{\text{DS}}$ has persisted between the upper and lower bounds on sample complexity. Recent work by Hanneke et al. (2026) shows a novel algebraic characterization of multiclass hypothesis classes in terms of their DS dimension. Building up on this, we show that the maximum hypergraph density of any multiclass hypothesis class is upper-bounded by its DS dimension. This proves a longstanding conjecture of Daniely and Shalev-Shwartz (2014). As a consequence, we determine the optimal dependence of the sample complexity on the DS dimension for multiclass as well as list learning.

Worst-case multiclass bounds do not become smaller when the best classifier is already nearly correct: what is missing is an optimistic rate, a guarantee whose fluctuation scales with the oracle risk itself. For a class of Natarajan dimension $d_N$ and Daniely-Shalev-Shwartz dimension $d_{DS}$, the optimal excess risk is known at the two endpoints ($d_{DS}/n$ realizable, $\sqrt{d_N/n}+d_{DS}/n$ agnostic [HMZ24, CEH+26, Pab26]) and open in between. We close the gap: at every fixed oracle risk $L^\star$, the optimal excess risk is $\widetildeΘ(\sqrt{L^\star d_N/n}+d_{DS}/n)$, uniformly in the alphabet size, attained by a learner that knows neither $L^\star$ nor the confidence level. The upper bound composes the cover-menu-compression architecture of [CEH+26], at the realizable rate of [Pab26], with a new comparator-facing relative compression theorem: a size-$k$ compression rule that empirically dominates a comparator $h$ has population risk at most $L(h)+O(\sqrt{L(h)Γ}+Γ)$ with $Γ=(k\log n+\log(1/δ))/n$, without stability; this transfers the comparison principle of the sharp binary theory [MQZ26] while discarding its Boolean-cube geometry, which does not lift to multiclass labels. The lower bound forces both terms using one class and one distribution at every fixed $L^\star$, by a pair-Assouad scheme calibrated to $L^\star$ and a fiber argument on the pseudo-cubes underlying the Natarajan-versus-DS separation of [BCD+22]. Both theorems extend to list learning: against the best $r$-tuple of hypotheses, the same architecture and the same two engines yield an optimistic rate and a lower bound of the same shape, forcing the fluctuation term that [Pab26] expected to be necessary against list comparators, and removing the factor $r$ from the known realizable list lower bound.

We study the problem of \emph{adversarially robust} PAC learning. In this framework, the learner observes independent samples from an unknown distribution over $\mathcal{X} \times \{0,1\}$, as in classical PAC learning. However, given a perturbation map $\mathcal{U} : \mathcal{X} \to 2^{\mathcal{X}}$ known to the learner, the goal is to output, with high probability, a predictor that correctly classifies \emph{every} perturbation $z \in \mathcal{U}(x)$ of most future examples $(x,y)$ drawn from the same underlying distribution. We determine the \emph{optimal} $\mathcal{U}$-independent sample complexity of this problem in both the realizable and agnostic settings. More specifically, for every concept class $\mathcal{H}$ of $\operatorname{VC}$ dimension $d$, we prove upper bounds of $\mathcal{O} \big( d/ε+ \log(1/δ)/ε\big)$ in the realizable setting and $\mathcal{O} \big( d/ε^2 + \log(1/δ)/ε^2 \big)$ in the agnostic setting, together with an optimal first-order refinement of the latter. These bounds match the corresponding lower bounds for classical PAC learning. Consequently, and perhaps surprisingly, adversarial robustness incurs \emph{no additional} distribution-free statistical cost, uniformly over all perturbation maps. Our bounds improve exponentially on those of [Montasser, Hanneke, and Srebro; COLT '19]. On the technical side, we present short and elementary proofs based on a new algorithmic principle that we call \emph{binomial-bagging}. We believe that binomial-bagging and its analysis may be of independent interest.