The True Sample Complexity of Identifying Good Arms
  We consider two multi-armed bandit problems with $n$ arms: (i) given an
$\epsilon > 0$, identify an arm with mean that is within $\epsilon$ of the
largest mean and (ii) given a threshold $\mu_0$ and integer $k$, identify $k$
arms with means larger than $\mu_0$. Existing lower bounds and algorithms for
the PAC framework suggest that both of these problems require $\Omega(n)$
samples. However, we argue that these definitions not only conflict with how
these algorithms are used in practice, but also that these results disagree
with intuition that says (i) requires only $\Theta(\frac{n}{m})$ samples where
$m = |\{ i : \mu_i > \max_{i \in [n]} \mu_i - \epsilon\}|$ and (ii) requires
$\Theta(\frac{n}{m}k)$ samples where $m = |\{ i : \mu_i > \mu_0 \}|$. We
provide definitions that formalize these intuitions, obtain lower bounds that
match the above sample complexities, and develop explicit, practical algorithms
that achieve nearly matching upper bounds.
