Correlated Offline Beliefs under a Finite-Time Decision Deadline
Abstract
Borrowing through correlated beliefs can make offline evidence useful across contexts, while finite-time analysis asks what a budget resolves. The comparison should target contexts whose apparent precision comes mainly from borrowing. It preserves the observation assumptions of the finite-time result and uses direct checks to investigate whether the consequential contextual choice remains reliable. This focused synthesis develops an empirical comparison that preserves the terminal action, observation process, and total verification cost. Its proposed tests are prospective; no new simulation run, model-training result, or intervention effect is reported.
References
F. Zhang, S. Gao, and Jie Song, “Offline Contextual Learning with Correlated Bayesian Beliefs,” Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering, pp. 2496–2500, 2024.
Y. Li and S. Gao, “On the Finite-Time Performance of the Knowledge Gradient Algorithm,” Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 12741–12764, 2022.
Zhou, Yongxi, Lai Yun Choi, Jiaxi Wen, Wenbo Ye, and Junwei Yao. “How Much Can Repeated Running Buy? A Measured Variance Ceiling for LLM Code Evaluation.” arXiv, 2026, arXiv:2606.00920. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.00920.
Chick, Stephen E., and Koichiro Inoue. “New Two-Stage and Sequential Procedures for Selecting the Best Simulated System.” Operations Research, vol. 49, no. 5, 2001, pp. 732–743. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.49.5.732.10615.
Frazier, Peter I., Warren B. Powell, and Savas Dayanik. “A Knowledge-Gradient Policy for Sequential Information Collection.” SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, vol. 47, no. 5, 2008, pp. 2410–2439. https://doi.org/10.1137/070693424.
Rasmussen, Carl Edward, and Christopher K. I. Williams. Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning. MIT Press, 2006. https://gaussianprocess.org/gpml/.
Sacks, Jerome, William J. Welch, Toby J. Mitchell, and Henry P. Wynn. “Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments.” Statistical Science, vol. 4, no. 4, 1989, pp. 409–423. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177012413.
Bertsimas, Dimitris, and Melvyn Sim. “The Price of Robustness.” Operations Research, vol. 52, no. 1, 2004, pp. 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1030.0065.
Campi, Marco C., and Simone Garatti. “The Exact Feasibility of Randomized Solutions of Uncertain Convex Programs.” SIAM Journal on Optimization, vol. 19, no. 3, 2008, pp. 1211–1230. https://doi.org/10.1137/07069821X.
Glasserman, Paul. Monte Carlo Methods in Financial Engineering. Springer, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-21617-1.
Ankenman, Bruce, Barry L. Nelson, and Jeremy Staum. “Stochastic Kriging for Simulation Metamodeling.” Operations Research, vol. 58, no. 2, 2010, pp. 371–382. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1090.0754.
Published
Versions
- 2026-10-15 (2)
- 2025-12-23 (1)