Debangshu Banerjee

LG
6papers
22citations
Novelty57%
AI Score43

6 Papers

14.1LGJul 23, 2022
Exploration in Linear Bandits with Rich Action Sets and its Implications for Inference

Debangshu Banerjee, Avishek Ghosh, Sayak Ray Chowdhury et al.

We present a non-asymptotic lower bound on the eigenspectrum of the design matrix generated by any linear bandit algorithm with sub-linear regret when the action set has well-behaved curvature. Specifically, we show that the minimum eigenvalue of the expected design matrix grows as $Ω(\sqrt{n})$ whenever the expected cumulative regret of the algorithm is $O(\sqrt{n})$, where $n$ is the learning horizon, and the action-space has a constant Hessian around the optimal arm. This shows that such action-spaces force a polynomial lower bound rather than a logarithmic lower bound, as shown by \cite{lattimore2017end}, in discrete (i.e., well-separated) action spaces. Furthermore, while the previous result is shown to hold only in the asymptotic regime (as $n \to \infty$), our result for these "locally rich" action spaces is any-time. Additionally, under a mild technical assumption, we obtain a similar lower bound on the minimum eigen value holding with high probability. We apply our result to two practical scenarios -- \emph{model selection} and \emph{clustering} in linear bandits. For model selection, we show that an epoch-based linear bandit algorithm adapts to the true model complexity at a rate exponential in the number of epochs, by virtue of our novel spectral bound. For clustering, we consider a multi agent framework where we show, by leveraging the spectral result, that no forced exploration is necessary -- the agents can run a linear bandit algorithm and estimate their underlying parameters at once, and hence incur a low regret.

3.8LGJan 9, 2023
On the Minimax Regret for Linear Bandits in a wide variety of Action Spaces

Debangshu Banerjee, Aditya Gopalan

As noted in the works of \cite{lattimore2020bandit}, it has been mentioned that it is an open problem to characterize the minimax regret of linear bandits in a wide variety of action spaces. In this article we present an optimal regret lower bound for a wide class of convex action spaces.

10.7AIOct 31, 2024Code
Towards Reliable Alignment: Uncertainty-aware RLHF

Debangshu Banerjee, Aditya Gopalan

Recent advances in aligning Large Language Models with human preferences have benefited from larger reward models and better preference data. However, most of these methodologies rely on the accuracy of the reward model. The reward models used in Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF) are typically learned from small datasets using stochastic optimization algorithms, making them prone to high variability. We illustrate the inconsistencies between reward models empirically on numerous open-source datasets. We theoretically show that the fluctuation of the reward models can be detrimental to the alignment problem because the derived policies are more overfitted to the reward model and, hence, are riskier if the reward model itself is uncertain. We use concentration of measure to motivate an uncertainty-aware, conservative algorithm for policy optimization. We show that such policies are more risk-averse in the sense that they are more cautious of uncertain rewards. We theoretically prove that our proposed methodology has less risk than the vanilla method. We corroborate our theoretical results with experiments based on designing an ensemble of reward models. We use this ensemble of reward models to align a language model using our methodology and observe that our empirical findings match our theoretical predictions.

2.0LGOct 13, 2023
Bad Values but Good Behavior: Learning Highly Misspecified Bandits and MDPs

Debangshu Banerjee, Aditya Gopalan

Parametric, feature-based reward models are employed by a variety of algorithms in decision-making settings such as bandits and Markov decision processes (MDPs). The typical assumption under which the algorithms are analysed is realizability, i.e., that the true values of actions are perfectly explained by some parametric model in the class. We are, however, interested in the situation where the true values are (significantly) misspecified with respect to the model class. For parameterized bandits, contextual bandits and MDPs, we identify structural conditions, depending on the problem instance and model class, under which basic algorithms such as $ε$-greedy, LinUCB and fitted Q-learning provably learn optimal policies under even highly misspecified models. This is in contrast to existing worst-case results for, say misspecified bandits, which show regret bounds that scale linearly with time, and shows that there can be a nontrivially large set of bandit instances that are robust to misspecification.

4.1LGJul 21, 2025Code
Towards Reliable, Uncertainty-Aware Alignment

Debangshu Banerjee, Kintan Saha, Aditya Gopalan

Alignment of large language models (LLMs) typically involves training a reward model on preference data, followed by policy optimization with respect to the reward model. However, optimizing policies with respect to a single reward model estimate can render it vulnerable to inaccuracies in the reward model. We empirically study the variability of reward model training on open-source benchmarks. We observe that independently trained reward models on the same preference dataset can exhibit substantial disagreement, highlighting the instability of current alignment strategies. Employing a theoretical model, we demonstrate that variability in reward model estimation can cause overfitting, leading to the risk of performance degradation. To mitigate this risk, we propose a variance-aware policy optimization framework for preference-based alignment. The key ingredient of the framework is a new policy regularizer that incorporates reward model variance estimates. We show that variance-aware policy optimization provably reduces the risk of outputting a worse policy than the default. Experiments across diverse LLM and reward model configurations confirm that our approach yields more stable and robust alignment than the standard (variance-unaware) pipeline.

15.7LGOct 23, 2025
Why DPO is a Misspecified Estimator and How to Fix It

Aditya Gopalan, Sayak Ray Chowdhury, Debangshu Banerjee

Direct alignment algorithms such as Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) fine-tune models based on preference data, using only supervised learning instead of two-stage reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF). We show that DPO encodes a statistical estimation problem over reward functions induced by a parametric policy class. When the true reward function that generates preferences cannot be realized via the policy class, DPO becomes misspecified, resulting in failure modes such as preference order reversal, worsening of policy reward, and high sensitivity to the input preference data distribution. On the other hand, we study the local behavior of two-stage RLHF for a parametric class and relate it to a natural gradient step in policy space. Our fine-grained geometric characterization allows us to propose AuxDPO, which introduces additional auxiliary variables in the DPO loss function to help move towards the RLHF solution in a principled manner and mitigate the misspecification in DPO. We empirically demonstrate the superior performance of AuxDPO on didactic bandit settings as well as LLM alignment tasks.